Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Douglas O Faigel

Publications and source records attributed to Douglas O Faigel.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2003

Risk factors for dysplasia in patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE): results from a multicenter consortium.

Studies show Barrett's esophagus prevalence increases with age, while mean length of Barrett's esophagus is unchanged. Few data are available about the relationship between age and length on the development of dysplasia. Our aim was to assess age and length as risk factors for dysplasia. Consecutive patients with Barrett's esophagus were enrolled in a multicenter study establishing a tissue bank of Barrett's esophagus patients 1994 and 1998. Demographics, length of Barrett's esophagus (centimeters), and histology were recorded. Risk factors for dysplasia were assessed, including patient age, gender, and length of Barrett's esophagus. Statistical analysis was performed comparing prevalence of dysplasia (which included the presence of any carcinoma and high- or low-grade dysplasia) to age and length. In all, 309 patients were studied [278 (90%) male and 31 (10%) female]: 5 had adenocarcinoma of the esophagus, 11 had high-grade dysplasia, and 29 had low-grade dysplasia. Patients with Barrett's esophagus without dysplasia were younger than those with dysplasia [62 +/- 0.8 years vs 67 +/- 1.7 years (mean +/- SEM, P = 0.02)]. The risk of dysplasia increased by 3.3%/yr of age. Mean length of Barrett's esophagus in patients with Barrett's alone vs dysplasia was 4.0 +/- 0.2 cm vs 5.4 +/- 0.4 cm (P = 0.003). Patients with Barrett's esophagus length > or = 3 cm had a significantly greater prevalence of dysplasia compared to length < 3 cm (23% vs 9%, P = 0.0001). The risk of dysplasia increased by 14%/cm of increased length. Multivariate analysis showed age and length to be independent risk factors. In conclusions: prevalence of dysplasia is strongly associated with age and length of Barrett's esophagus. These preliminary results can be used to develop a strategy for screening/surveillance based on age and length of Barrett's epithelium.

Adenocarcinoma↗
PubMed2003

A comparison of EUS features between CD-117 positive GI stromal tumors and CD-117 negative GI spindle cell tumors.

BACKGROUND: GI stromal tumors are spindle cell tumors that stain positive for immunohistochemical CD-117 (c-kit). Prognostic factors for malignancy include size (> or =4 cm), mitotic index (5 mitotic figures/50 high-powered fields), and ulcerated, cystic, or necrotic areas within the tumor. The purpose of this study was to compare these features in c-kit positive vs. c-kit negative tumors. METHODS: All patients referred for EUS of submucosal lesions were identified, and histopathology, including immunohistochemical staining, was reviewed to determine all diagnoses of GI stromal tumors. Size, echo pattern, and presence of cystic spaces and ulceration were recorded as diagnosed by EUS. Histopathologic diagnoses were made by FNA or endoscopic submucosal-mucosal resection. If surgical resection followed, the surgical diagnosis, staining pattern, mitotic index, and presence of ulceration, necrosis, and nuclear atypia were recorded. RESULTS: Forty patients (21 men, 19 women; 38 white, 2 African American; mean age 58 +/- 2.6 years) had 46 EUS procedures performed for evaluation of spindle cell tumors. Seventeen stained positive for c-kit (mean age, 59 +/- 3.6 years; range 19 to 80 years) and 12 negative (mean age, 57 +/- 3.8 years; range 31 to 76 years); 11 were not stained for c-kit (excluded from analysis). On EUS, 7 were ulcerated, 3 cystic, and 6 were larger than 4 cm. This group of findings was observed in 12 patients, 11 of whom had c-kit positive tumors (11/17 vs. 1/12; p = 0.006). Tumors positive for c-kit were larger (42.4 +/- 5.5 mm vs. 19.0 +/- 5.9 mm; p = 0.005). There were 13 c-kit positive tumors in the stomach, 2 in the duodenum, and 1 each in the esophagus and at the gastroesophageal junction. Of the 12 c-kit negative tumors, 8 were located in the esophagus and 1 at the gastroesophageal junction (9/12 vs. 2/17; p < 0.01). Surgical resection was performed on 13 patients, 12 of whom had c-kit positive tumors, and 3 of these 12 tumors had greater than 5 mitoses per 50 high-powered field. CONCLUSIONS: If a GI stromal tumor is suspected, EUS-FNA with immunohistochemical staining should be performed for CD-117 (c-kit). C-kit tumors are more likely to have malignant features and should be resected or subjected to close clinical follow-up.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

Interobserver agreement among endosonographers for the diagnosis of neoplastic versus non-neoplastic pancreatic cystic lesions.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the degree of agreement among endosonographers for EUS diagnosis of neoplastic versus non-neoplastic pancreatic cystic lesions and the specific type of cystic lesion. METHODS: Videotapes of EUS procedures from 31 consecutive cases of a range of histopathologically proven lesions, including mucinous cystic neoplasm, serous cystadenoma, neuroendocrine tumor, intraductal papillary mucinous tumor, and pseudocyst, were used to make a study videotape, which was reviewed by 8 experienced endosonographers. The reviewers, blinded to clinical and surgical histopathology results, reviewed each case for the presence or absence of the following features: abnormality of pancreatic duct and parenchyma, margins, solid component, debris, and septations. They were asked to identify each lesion as neoplastic or non-neoplastic and to give a specific diagnosis for each lesion. RESULTS: There was fair agreement between endosonographers for diagnosis of neoplastic versus non-neoplastic lesions (kappa = 0.24). Agreement for individual types of lesions was moderately good for serous cystadenomas (kappa = 0.46) but fair for the remainder. Agreement was moderately good for presence or absence of solid component (kappa = 0.43); fair for presence or absence of abnormal pancreatic duct (kappa = 0.29), debris (kappa = 0.21), and septations (kappa = 0.30); and slight for presence or absence of margins (kappa = 0.01) and abnormal pancreatic parenchyma (kappa = 0.01). Accuracy rates of EUS for the diagnosis of neoplastic versus non-neoplastic lesions ranged from 40% to 93%. CONCLUSIONS: There is little more than chance interobserver agreement among experienced endosonographers for diagnosis of neoplastic versus non-neoplastic, specific type, and EUS features of pancreatic cystic lesions.

Aged↗
PubMed2003

GI stromal tumors.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Biopsy, Needle↗
PubMed2003

Yield of tissue sampling for submucosal lesions evaluated by EUS.

BACKGROUND: Evaluation of submucosal nodules or large gastric folds is a common indication for EUS. Establishing a tissue diagnosis is challenging because the yield of forceps biopsies is low. The aim of this study was to determine the diagnostic yield of EUS-guided endoscopic submucosal-mucosal resection and forceps biopsy for submucosal nodules and large gastric folds. METHODS: Patients who underwent EUS from March 1997 through January 2002 for evaluation of submucosal nodules or large gastric folds were identified, and the procedure and pathology reports reviewed. Patients were included who underwent endoscopic submucosal-mucosal resection (n = 45) or large-capacity ("jumbo") biopsy (n = 36) of submucosal lesions (arising from third endosonographic layer) or large gastric folds. Endoscopic submucosal-mucosal resection was performed with an electrosurgical snare or with a cap-fitted endoscopic mucosal resection device. RESULTS: Sixty-six patients (62% men; mean age, 61 years; range 27-80 years) underwent 69 EUS procedures to obtain tissue samples of subepithelial lesions. Diagnostic yields were as follows: endoscopic submucosal-mucosal resection 40/45 (89%; 95% CI [80%, 98%]), jumbo biopsy 15/36 (42%; 95% CI [26%, 58%]) (p < 0.001 by two-tailed Fisher exact test). There were 9 complications: 7 instances of bleeding (6 endoscopic submucosal-mucosal resection, 1 jumbo biopsy), 3 requiring hospitalization (2 endoscopic submucosal-mucosal resection, 1 jumbo biopsy) and 2 requiring transfusion; 1 chest pain and odynophagia (esophageal endoscopic submucosal-mucosal resection); and 1 oversedation (requiring administration of reversal agents). CONCLUSIONS: For submucosal lesions and large gastric folds, endoscopic submucosal-mucosal resection has a better diagnostic yield than the jumbo biopsy, but may have a higher complication rate.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

Novel markers of pancreatic adenocarcinoma in fine-needle aspiration: mesothelin and prostate stem cell antigen labeling increases accuracy in cytologically borderline cases.

The interpretation of pancreas fine-needle aspiration (FNA) is extremely difficult given the cytologic overlap of neoplastic and reactive processes. Using serial analysis of gene expression, we have discovered 2 new markers of pancreatic adenocarcinoma, mesothelin and prostate stem cell antigen (PSCA), and confirmed their specificity by immunohistochemical labeling. Here we evaluate the potential contribution of immunohistochemical labeling of mesothelin and PSCA to the interpretation of pancreas FNAs. Thirty pancreas FNAs with follow-up data were reviewed. Unstained cell block sections from these aspirates labeled for mesothelin and PSCA using immunohistochemistry were compared with initial cytologic diagnoses and with follow-up diagnoses. On follow-up, 19 patients proved to have cancer, and 11 did not. Initial cytologic diagnosis of malignancy correlated with carcinoma on follow-up in 12 of 12 cases, and initial benign cytologic diagnosis correlated with benign follow-up in 8 of 9 cases (sensitivity, 92%; specificity, 100%). Six of the 9 patients with suspicious cytology were found to have a carcinoma on follow-up. PSCA labeling was present in 16 of the 19 patients who ultimately were proven to have carcinoma; PSCA labeling was absent in 10 of the 11 lesions proven to be benign (sensitivity, 84%; specificity, 91%). Mesothelin labeling was present in 13 of the 19 patients who ultimately were proven to have carcinoma; mesothelin labeling was absent in 10 of the 11 lesions proven to be benign (sensitivity, 68%; specificity, 91%). Five of the 6 cytologically suspicious cases with malignant follow-up labeled for either PSCA or mesothelin (83%), and 2 of the 6 cases labeled for both markers. None of the 3 suspicious cases with benign follow-up labeled for either PSCA or mesothelin. Increasingly, molecular techniques are identifying potential cancer markers that may have diagnostic utility. In this study, immunohistochemical labeling for 2 of these markers, PSCA and mesothelin, appears highly specific for pancreatic adenocarcinoma in FNA specimens and useful in categorizing cytologically suspicious lesions.

Adenocarcinoma↗
PubMed2002

Potential impact of preoperative EUS on esophageal cancer management and cost.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to determine the relative proportions of esophageal cancer stages in a group of patients referred for preoperative EUS, to determine the proportions of EUS stage 1 and 4 tumors that would not be treated with combined modality therapy, and to estimate the impact of the EUS diagnosis of these stages on costs. METHODS: A large national endoscopic database was reviewed retrospectively to identify cases of esophageal cancer in which there was a referral for preoperative staging with EUS. Data were analyzed as to demographics, histology and tumor stage by EUS according to the American Joint Commission for Cancer tumor node metastasis classification system for esophageal cancer. Cost estimates were based on Medicare reimbursement rates and published figures. RESULTS: Of 188 EUS procedures done for preoperative staging of esophageal cancer (82% men, mean age 66.5 years), the histopathologic types of cancer were: adenocarcinoma, 107; squamous cell carcinoma, 39; and unknown histology, 42. Numbers and proportions of patients by American Joint Commission for Cancer group stage based on 162 procedures for which complete staging information was available are as follows: Stage I, 23 patients (14%); Stage II, 51 (31%); Stage III, 69 (43%); and Stage IV, 19 (12%). Therefore, for every 100 patients staged before surgery with EUS (cost $63,420), 14 patients with Stage I disease would be spared neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (saving $122,192) and 12 patients with Stage IV cancer would be spared surgery (saving $285,600) for an average cost savings of $3443 per patient. CONCLUSION: Preoperative staging of esophageal cancer with EUS identifies a significant proportion of patients (26% in this series) with stage I and IV tumors who may be spared combined modality therapy with an associated potential for cost savings.

Adenocarcinoma↗
PubMed2002

Guideline on the management of anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapy for endoscopic procedures.

This is one of a series of statements discussing the practice of gastrointestinal endoscopy in common clinical situations. It is intended to aid endoscopists in determining the appropriate use of endoscopic procedures in conjunction with anticoagulation and/or antiplatelet therapy. Guidelines for the appropriate practice of endoscopy are based on critical review of the available data and expert consensus. Controlled clinical studies would be beneficial to clarify some aspects of this statement and revision might be necessary as new data appear. Clinical consideration may justify a course of action at variance from these specific recommendations.

Anticoagulants↗
PubMed2002

Methods of granting hospital privileges to perform gastrointestinal endoscopy.

This is one of a series of statements discussing the utilization of gastrointestinal endoscopy in common clinical situations. The Standards of Practice Committee of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy prepared this text. In preparing this guideline, a MEDLINE literature search was performed, and additional references were obtained from the bibliographies of the identified articles and from recommendations of expert consultants. When little or no data exist from well-designed prospective trials, emphasis is given to results from large series and reports from recognized experts. Guidelines for appropriate utilization of endoscopy are based on a critical review of the available data and expert consensus. Further controlled clinical studies are needed to clarify aspects of this statement, and revision may be necessary as new data appear. Clinical consideration may justify a course of action at variance to these recommendations.

Credentialing↗