Purpose: We identified the risk factors for remnant gastric cancer (RGC) based on remnant gastric mucosal characteristics and gastritis morphology in patients undergoing distal gastrectomy. Materials and Methods: This multicenter retrospective study included 100 patients with RGC after distal gastrectomy and 550 patients without RGC treated between 2013 and 2020.Endoscopic findings, including anastomotic redness, red streaks, enlarged folds, bile reflux as anastomotic findings, as well as disappearance of the regular arrangement of collecting venules (RAC), atrophic gastritis, and intestinal metaplasia as background gastric mucosal findings, were evaluated. Disease risk score matching (1:1) was adjusted for baseline characteristics. Logistic regression analysis was used to develop a risk score model to stratify RGC risk into low, moderate, and high categories. Results: After matching, 96 patients with RGC and 96 controls were analyzed. Anastomotic redness and red streaks, as well as the disappearance of RAC and atrophic gastritis, were significantly more frequent in the RGC group than in the control group, whereas enlarged folds and bile reflux showed no significant differences. Risk scores were assigned as follows:anastomotic redness, 2; red streaks, 3; disappearance of RAC, 7; and atrophic gastritis, 3. The total score stratified patients into high (≥15), moderate (7–14), and low risk (≤6). The positive and negative predictive values were 67.7% and 83.3%, respectively. Conclusions The endoscopic findings of anastomotic redness, red streaks, RAC disappearance, and atrophic gastritis were significantly associated with RGC development.The proposed risk-scoring model could serve as a stratification tool for RGC surveillance.

Objective: To implement early rehabilitation interventions by physical therapists is recommended. However, the effectiveness of early rehabilitation for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients in the prevention of post-intensive care syndrome (PICS) is unclear. We analyzed a multicenter prospective observational study (Post-Intensive Care outcomeS in patients with COronaVIrus Disease 2019) to examine the association between early rehabilitation interventions and PICS physical impairment. Methods: An analysis was performed on COVID-19 patients who were admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) between March 2020 and March 2021, and required mechanical ventilation. The primary outcome was the incidence of PICS physical impairment (Barthel Index≤90) after one year. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to estimate the association between early rehabilitation interventions and PICS physical impairment by adjusting ICU mobility scale (IMS) during seven-day following ICU admission, and clinically relevant risk factors. Results: The analysis included 259 patients, 54 of whom developed PICS physical impairment one year later. In 81 patients, physical therapists intervened within seven days of ICU admission. There was no significant difference in mean IMS by day seven of admission between the early and non-early rehabilitation patients (0.70 and 0.61, respectively). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that early rehabilitation interventions were significantly associated with a low incidence of PICS physical impairment (odds ratio, 0.294; 95% confidence interval, 0.123–0.706; p=0.006). Conclusion Early rehabilitation interventions by physical therapists were an independent factor associated with the decreased development of PICS physical impairment at one year, even though early rehabilitation had no significant effect on IMS.

Objective: To implement early rehabilitation interventions by physical therapists is recommended. However, the effectiveness of early rehabilitation for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients in the prevention of post-intensive care syndrome (PICS) is unclear. We analyzed a multicenter prospective observational study (Post-Intensive Care outcomeS in patients with COronaVIrus Disease 2019) to examine the association between early rehabilitation interventions and PICS physical impairment. Methods: An analysis was performed on COVID-19 patients who were admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) between March 2020 and March 2021, and required mechanical ventilation. The primary outcome was the incidence of PICS physical impairment (Barthel Index≤90) after one year. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to estimate the association between early rehabilitation interventions and PICS physical impairment by adjusting ICU mobility scale (IMS) during seven-day following ICU admission, and clinically relevant risk factors. Results: The analysis included 259 patients, 54 of whom developed PICS physical impairment one year later. In 81 patients, physical therapists intervened within seven days of ICU admission. There was no significant difference in mean IMS by day seven of admission between the early and non-early rehabilitation patients (0.70 and 0.61, respectively). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that early rehabilitation interventions were significantly associated with a low incidence of PICS physical impairment (odds ratio, 0.294; 95% confidence interval, 0.123–0.706; p=0.006). Conclusion Early rehabilitation interventions by physical therapists were an independent factor associated with the decreased development of PICS physical impairment at one year, even though early rehabilitation had no significant effect on IMS.

Objective: To implement early rehabilitation interventions by physical therapists is recommended. However, the effectiveness of early rehabilitation for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients in the prevention of post-intensive care syndrome (PICS) is unclear. We analyzed a multicenter prospective observational study (Post-Intensive Care outcomeS in patients with COronaVIrus Disease 2019) to examine the association between early rehabilitation interventions and PICS physical impairment. Methods: An analysis was performed on COVID-19 patients who were admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) between March 2020 and March 2021, and required mechanical ventilation. The primary outcome was the incidence of PICS physical impairment (Barthel Index≤90) after one year. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to estimate the association between early rehabilitation interventions and PICS physical impairment by adjusting ICU mobility scale (IMS) during seven-day following ICU admission, and clinically relevant risk factors. Results: The analysis included 259 patients, 54 of whom developed PICS physical impairment one year later. In 81 patients, physical therapists intervened within seven days of ICU admission. There was no significant difference in mean IMS by day seven of admission between the early and non-early rehabilitation patients (0.70 and 0.61, respectively). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that early rehabilitation interventions were significantly associated with a low incidence of PICS physical impairment (odds ratio, 0.294; 95% confidence interval, 0.123–0.706; p=0.006). Conclusion Early rehabilitation interventions by physical therapists were an independent factor associated with the decreased development of PICS physical impairment at one year, even though early rehabilitation had no significant effect on IMS.

Background/Aims: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of sedation with propofol as an alternative to benzodiazepine drugs in outpatient endoscopy. Methods: In this prospective study, examinees who underwent outpatient endoscopy under propofol sedation and submitted a nextday questionnaire with providing informed consent were evaluated. Periprocedural acute responses, late adverse events within 24 hours, and examinee satisfaction were evaluated. Results: Among the 4,122 patients who received propofol in the 17,978 outpatient-based endoscopic examinations performed between November 2016 and March 2018, 2,305 eligible examinees (esophagogastroduodenoscopy for 1,340, endoscopic ultrasonography for 945, and total colonoscopy for 20) were enrolled, and their responses to a questionnaire were analyzed. The mean propofol dose was 69.6±24.4 mg (range, 20–200 mg). Diazepam, midazolam, and/or pentazocine in combination with propofol was administered to 146 examinees. Mild oxygen desaturation was observed in 59 examinees (2.6%); and mild bradycardia, in 2 (0.09%). Other severe reactions or late events did not occur. After eliminating 181 invalid responses, 97.7% (2,065/2,124) of the patients desired propofol sedation in future examinations. Conclusions Propofol sedation was found to be safe—without severe adverse events or accidents—for outpatient endoscopy on the basis of the patients’ next-day self-evaluation. Given the high satisfaction level, propofol sedation might be an ideal tool for painless endoscopic screening.

Background/Aims: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of sedation with propofol as an alternative to benzodiazepine drugs in outpatient endoscopy. Methods: In this prospective study, examinees who underwent outpatient endoscopy under propofol sedation and submitted a nextday questionnaire with providing informed consent were evaluated. Periprocedural acute responses, late adverse events within 24 hours, and examinee satisfaction were evaluated. Results: Among the 4,122 patients who received propofol in the 17,978 outpatient-based endoscopic examinations performed between November 2016 and March 2018, 2,305 eligible examinees (esophagogastroduodenoscopy for 1,340, endoscopic ultrasonography for 945, and total colonoscopy for 20) were enrolled, and their responses to a questionnaire were analyzed. The mean propofol dose was 69.6±24.4 mg (range, 20–200 mg). Diazepam, midazolam, and/or pentazocine in combination with propofol was administered to 146 examinees. Mild oxygen desaturation was observed in 59 examinees (2.6%); and mild bradycardia, in 2 (0.09%). Other severe reactions or late events did not occur. After eliminating 181 invalid responses, 97.7% (2,065/2,124) of the patients desired propofol sedation in future examinations. Conclusions Propofol sedation was found to be safe—without severe adverse events or accidents—for outpatient endoscopy on the basis of the patients’ next-day self-evaluation. Given the high satisfaction level, propofol sedation might be an ideal tool for painless endoscopic screening.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: We applied a back light system (BLS) with a magnifying glass to improve the ability to assess the adequacy of specimen sampling using endosonography. We conducted this study to evaluate the efficacy of the BLS in sampling of specimens by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of solid pancreatic masses. METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, crossover, single-center clinical trial. An endosonographer evaluated adequacy on gross visual inspection and identified whitish specimen sampling sites with and without the BLS according to a randomization sequence in the first and second passes with a 25-G needle. On cytological evaluation, the presence of well-defined pancreatic ductal epithelium was evaluated by a cytopathologist who was blinded to any clinical information. RESULTS: A total of 80 consecutive patients were eligible during the study period. Adequacy was observed for 52 specimens (65%) with the BLS and 54 (68%) without the BLS (p=0.88). In assessment of specimen adequacy on gross examination, only fair agreement was observed both with and without BLS (kappa score 0.40 and 0.29, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The BLS did not influence the ability to identify specimen sampling sites or reliable assessment of specimen site adequacy using gross visual inspection.
Biopsy, Fine-Needle ; Cross-Over Studies ; Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration ; Endosonography ; Epithelium ; Glass ; Humans ; Needles ; Pancreatic Ducts ; Pancreatic Neoplasms ; Prospective Studies ; Random Allocation

Background : Endovascular treatment of the thoracic aorta (TEVAR) for type B aortic dissection is reported to be effective if the interval between the onset and the procedure is relatively short. However, the optimal timing for TEVAR is still controversial. Method : From December 2008 to April 2015, we experienced 46 TEVARs for type B aortic dissection. The interval between onset and TEVAR was within 3 months in 15 cases (Group A), from 3 months to 1 year in 10 cases (Group B), and more than 1 year in 21 cases (Group C). Result : Primary success was obtained in all cases, and no new intimal tear was formed during the procedure. There was no hospital death. At the time of discharge, disappearance of ULP or thrombosed thoracic false lumen occurred significantly more frequently in Group A (93%) than in Group B (50%) and Group C (43%) (p<0.05). At 6 months, the rate of the patients with reduced aneurysm diameter more than 5 mm was significantly higher in Group A (87%) and Group B (70%) than in Group C (19%) (p<0.05). Three cases of Group C had enlargement of the aneurysm despite of TEVAR, and graft replacement of thoracoabdominal aorta was performed in one of the cases. Conclusion : For type B aortic dissection, TEVAR is more effective if performed within 3 months from the onset.

Objective: The aim of this study was to establish the proper definitions of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and bleeding events for a healthcare database in Japan.
Study Design: Validation study.
Methods: The study comprised patients with VTE or who had undergone orthopedic surgery of the lower extremities and whose outpatient or inpatient medical information from April 1, 2008 to September 30, 2013 was available.  The source population of the database was derived from 100 acute-care hospitals.  The endpoints were VTE events (deep venous thrombosis [DVT], pulmonary thromboembolism [PE]) and bleeding events (bleeding requiring blood transfusion, intracranial hemorrhage, intraocular hemorrhage, upper gastrointestinal [GI] bleeding, and lower GI bleeding).  The frequent events with laboratory data were randomly extracted and evaluated, while all the infrequent events with laboratory data were extracted and evaluated.  Positive predictive value (PPV) was defined as the proportion of events judged to be clinical by medical experts of all the extracted events.  First, we conducted a test with a small number of cases and then revised the definitions of events.  Second, we extracted and evaluated data in 50 patients for VTE and bleeding events patients, based on which we defined the target PPV level between 60 and 70%.
Results: Of the 5,044,743 patients in the database, 36,947 patients underwent orthopedic surgeries of the lower extremities and 3,578 patients experienced a VTE event.  The PPV at the first evaluation was 80.0% (8/10) for DVT, 57.1% (4/7) for PE, and 27.3% (6/22) for bleeding events.  At the second evaluation using the revised definitions, the PPV were 75.0% (42/56) for VTE and 73.3% (33/45) for bleeding events.  Overall, the PPVs for VTE and bleeding events were over 70%.  The PPV of the VTE events were 76.9% (30/39) for DVT and 70.6% (12/17) for PE.  The PPVs of each type of bleeding event were over 70% except for intracranial hemorrhage (44.4%, 4/9).
Conclusion: The PPV was high for VTE events (75.0%) and bleeding events (73.3%).  The definitions used in this study are rational for the identification of VTE, DVT, PE, and bleeding events in the healthcare database in Japan.  The definition for each type of bleeding event should be investigated in further studies.