Browsing by Author "Solito, Sonia (57202677707)"

Background & Aims: A hybrid technique may be a reasonable compromise to make endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) more reliable for lesions ≥ 20 mm and a good way of approaching to endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of a novel hybrid EMR technique, triple-anchoring EMR (T-EMR) for colorectal lesions 20-30 mm. Methods: Fifteen patients have been prospectively enrolled to T-EMR from December 2019 to April 2020 in two Endoscopy Units: Policlinico A. Gemelli, Rome, and University Hospital of Udine, Italy. Patients eligible for the study were ≥18 years old with superficial colorectal lesions 20-30 mm, morphologically liable to endoscopic treatment based on chromoendoscopy. The primary endpoint was assessment of the “en bloc” and the free resection margins (R0) rates. The secondary endpoints were resected specimen size, procedure time, complication rate, and recurrence rate at 6 months. Results: Among the 15 patients enrolled, 12 were males (80%), mean age 68.73±11.04 years. The mean size of the lesions was 24.93±2.89 mm. Mean procedure time was 22.13±4.31 min. T-EMR was performed en bloc in 14/15 patients (93.3%) with R0 in 13/15 patients (86.7%). No major intra-/peri-procedural or delayed complications occurred. At histological analysis, 13/15 lesions (86.7%) were adenomas, while 2 were early colorectal cancer. At a 6-month follow-up colonoscopy, only one patient (6.7%) had a recurrence of adenoma. Conclusions: T-EMR seems to be an effective and safe option to treat colorectal lesions between 20 and 30 mm, with a short procedure time and low costs. © 2022, Romanian Society of Gastroenterology. All rights reserved.

Introduction and Aims: Patients treated with intragastric balloon (IGB) may benefit from treatment and follow-up by a multidisciplinary team, where the dietician is considered the only essential professional besides the endoscopist. The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of dietician support and behavioral therapy in terms of weight loss in patients concomitantly treated with IGB while the device is in situ. Methods: Patients with IGB in situ, in period 2005–2018, were invited to undergo a dietician check-up (DC) every 1.5 months, accompanied by cognitive behavioral therapy. Considering their attendance at the dietician check-ups (DCs), patients were categorized as non-compliant (0 DC), partially compliant (1–2 DCs), and highly compliant (≥ 3 DCs). A comparison was made among the three groups regarding % of total body weight loss (%TBWL) and ΔBMI at 180 ± 15 days when the IGB was in situ. Results: One hundred eighty-three obese patients treated with fluid-filled IGB were included. Body weight data at 180 ± 15 days during the IGB in situ, as well as attendance at the DCs, were available for 170 out of 183 patients. There was no difference among compliant, partially compliant, and non-compliant patients to DCs regarding %TBWL at 180 ± 15 days (p = 0.17). However, non-compliant patients had a higher ΔBMI at 180 ± 15 days in comparison to those compliant or partially compliant to DCs (p = 0.03). Conclusion: Despite its undisputed educational role, attendance at DCs does not seem to correlate with an additional weight loss while the IGB is in situ. © 2019, Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.

Introduction and Aims: Patients treated with intragastric balloon (IGB) may benefit from treatment and follow-up by a multidisciplinary team, where the dietician is considered the only essential professional besides the endoscopist. The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of dietician support and behavioral therapy in terms of weight loss in patients concomitantly treated with IGB while the device is in situ. Methods: Patients with IGB in situ, in period 2005–2018, were invited to undergo a dietician check-up (DC) every 1.5 months, accompanied by cognitive behavioral therapy. Considering their attendance at the dietician check-ups (DCs), patients were categorized as non-compliant (0 DC), partially compliant (1–2 DCs), and highly compliant (≥ 3 DCs). A comparison was made among the three groups regarding % of total body weight loss (%TBWL) and ΔBMI at 180 ± 15 days when the IGB was in situ. Results: One hundred eighty-three obese patients treated with fluid-filled IGB were included. Body weight data at 180 ± 15 days during the IGB in situ, as well as attendance at the DCs, were available for 170 out of 183 patients. There was no difference among compliant, partially compliant, and non-compliant patients to DCs regarding %TBWL at 180 ± 15 days (p = 0.17). However, non-compliant patients had a higher ΔBMI at 180 ± 15 days in comparison to those compliant or partially compliant to DCs (p = 0.03). Conclusion: Despite its undisputed educational role, attendance at DCs does not seem to correlate with an additional weight loss while the IGB is in situ. © 2019, Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.