Abdominal pain post endoscopic mucosal resection: Treat the patient not the CT scan

An 85-year-old female, with hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer syndrome, underwent a colonoscopy and endoscopic mucosal resection(EMR) of a 25-mm proximal ascending colon polyp(Paris classification 0-Is). Post-procedure, the patient developed abdominal pain in the right iliac fossa which settled 1 h later. An urgent computed tomography(CT) scan of her abdomen was organised which happened 6 h post onset of abdominal pain. She had radiological evidence of perforation on the CT scan but clinically remained well and was managed conservatively. The exact aetiology of this patient's symptoms is not known. We suspect the radiological findings are probably due to a combination of injectate within the colonic wall and leakage of insufflated air or CO2 following transmural passage of the EMR needle. As EMR is becoming an increasingly effective treatment modality in the management of large sessile polyps, clinicians need to be aware of potential complications of treatment. It is also important to recognise that radiological features of perforation can be seen post EMR in the absence of an EMR associated perforation.

Prevalence of eosinophilic oesophagitis in adults presenting with oesophageal food bolus obstruction

AIM: To look at the relationship between eosinophilic oesophagitis(EO) and food bolus impaction in adults. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed medical records of 100 consecutive patients who presented to our hospital with oesophageal food bolus obstruction(FBO) between 2012 and 2014. In this cohort, 96 were adults(64% male), and 4 paediatric patients were excluded from the analysis as our centre did not have paediatric gastroenterologists. Eighty-five adult patients underwent emergency gastroscopy. The food bolus was either advanced into the stomach using the push technique or retrieved using a standard retrieval net. Biopsies were obtained in 51 patients from the proximal and distal parts of the oesophagus at initial gastroscopy. All biopsy specimens were assessed and reviewed by dedicated gastrointestinal pathologists at the Department of Pathology, University Hospital Geelong. The diagnosis of EO was defined and established by the presence of the following histological features:(1) peak eosinophil counts > 20/hpf;(2) eosinophil microabscess;(3) superficial layering of eosinophils;(4) extracellular eosinophil granules;(5) basal cell hyperplasia;(6) dilated intercellular spaces; and(7) subepithelial or lamina propria fibrosis. The histology results of the biopsy specimens were accessed from the pathology database of the hospital and recorded for analysis. RESULTS: Our cohort had a median age of 60. Seventeen/51(33%) patients had evidence of EO on biopsy findings. The majority of patients with EO were male(71%). Classical endoscopic features of oesophageal rings, furrows or white plaques and exudates werefound in 59% of patients with EO. Previous episodes of FBO were present in 12/17 patients and 41% had a history of eczema, hay fever or asthma. Reflux oesophagitis and benign strictures were found in 20/34 patients who did not have biopsies. CONCLUSION: EO is present in approximately one third of patients who are admitted with FBO. Biopsies should be performed routinely at index endoscopy in order to pursue this treatable cause of long term morbidity.