Explore the vast range of titles available.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the added value of plain radiographs on top of clinical assessment in unselected patients presenting with acute abdominal pain at the emergency department (ED). In a multicenter prospective trial, patients with abdominal pain more than 2 hours and less than 5 days presented at the ED were evaluated clinically, and a diagnosis was made by the treating physician. Subsequently, all patients underwent supine abdominal and upright chest radiographs, after which the diagnosis was reassessed by the treating physician. A final (reference) diagnosis was assigned by an expert panel. The number of changes in the primary diagnosis, as well as the accuracy of these changes, was calculated. Changes in the level of confidence were evaluated for unchanged diagnoses. Between March 2005 and November 2006, 1021 patients, 55% female, mean age 47 years (range, 19-94 years), were included. In 117 of 1021 patients, the diagnosis changed after plain radiographs, and this change was correct in 39 patients (22% of changed diagnoses and 4% of total study population). Overall, the clinical diagnosis was correct in 502 (49%) patients. The diagnosis after evaluation of the radiographs was correct in 514 (50%) patients, a nonsignificant difference ( P = .14). In 65% of patients with unchanged diagnosis before and after plain radiography, the level of confidence of that diagnosis did not change either. The added value of plain radiographs is too limited to advocate their routine use in the diagnostic workup of patients with acute abdominal pain, because few diagnoses change and the level of confidence were mostly not affected.

Guidelines are inconclusive on whether contrast-enhanced MRI using gadoxetic acid and diffusion-weighted imaging should be added routinely to CT in the investigation of patients with colorectal liver metastases who are scheduled for curative liver resection or thermal ablation, or both. Although contrast-enhanced MRI is reportedly superior than contrast-enhanced CT in the detection and characterisation of colorectal liver metastases, its effect on clinical patient management is unknown. We aimed to assess the clinical effect of an additional liver contrast-enhanced MRI on local treatment plan in patients with colorectal liver metastases amenable to local treatment, based on contrast-enhanced CT. We did an international, multicentre, prospective, incremental diagnostic accuracy trial in 14 liver surgery centres in the Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, and Italy. Participants were aged 18 years or older with histological proof of colorectal cancer, a WHO performance status score of 0–4, and primary or recurrent colorectal liver metastases, who were scheduled for local therapy based on contrast-enhanced CT. All patients had contrast-enhanced CT and liver contrast-enhanced MRI including diffusion-weighted imaging and gadoxetic acid as a contrast agent before undergoing local therapy. The primary outcome was change in the local clinical treatment plan (decided by the individual clinics) on the basis of liver contrast-enhanced MRI findings, analysed in the intention-to-image population. The minimal clinically important difference in the proportion of patients who would have change in their local treatment plan due to an additional liver contrast-enhanced MRI was 10%. This study is closed and registered in the Netherlands Trial Register, NL8039. Between Dec 17, 2019, and July 31, 2021, 325 patients with colorectal liver metastases were assessed for eligibility. 298 patients were enrolled and included in the intention-to-treat population, including 177 males (59%) and 121 females (41%) with planned local therapy based on contrast-enhanced CT. A change in the local treatment plan based on liver contrast-enhanced MRI findings was observed in 92 (31%; 95% CI 26–36) of 298 patients. Changes were made for 40 patients (13%) requiring more extensive local therapy, 11 patients (4%) requiring less extensive local therapy, and 34 patients (11%) in whom the indication for curative-intent local therapy was revoked, including 26 patients (9%) with too extensive disease and eight patients (3%) with benign lesions on liver contrast-enhanced MRI (confirmed by a median follow-up of 21·0 months [IQR 17·5–24·0]). Liver contrast-enhanced MRI should be considered in all patients scheduled for local treatment for colorectal liver metastases on the basis of contrast-enhanced CT imaging. The Dutch Cancer Society and Bayer AG – Pharmaceuticals.

A 46-year-old woman presented with right upper abdominal pain and fever. At imaging, enlarged peripancreatic and hilar lymph nodes, as well as hypodense liver lesions, were detected, suggestive of malignant disease. At endoscopy, the mass adjacent to the duodenum was seen as a protruding lesion through the duodenal wall. A biopsy of this lesion, taken through the duodenal wall, showed a histiocytic granulomatous inflammation with necrosis. Serology for Bartonella henselae IgM was highly elevated a few weeks after presentation, consistent with the diagnosis of cat scratch disease. Clinical symptoms subsided spontaneously and, after treatment with azithromycin, the lymphatic masses, liver lesions and duodenal ulceration disappeared completely.

IntroductionInadequate treatment of enlarged lateral lymph nodes (LLNs) in rectal cancer patients is associated with an increased lateral local recurrence (LLR) risk, despite neoadjuvant treatment and total mesorectal excision (TME) surgery. There is a promising role for LLN dissection (LLND) to lower this risk, but this challenging procedure requires appropriate training. This study protocol describes a prospective evaluation of oncological outcomes after standardised treatment based on multidisciplinary training, thereby aiming for a 50% reduction in LLR rate.Methods and analysisA prospective registration study will be opened in hospitals in which the involved multidisciplinary team members (radiologists, radiation oncologists, surgeons and pathologists) have received dedicated training to enhance knowledge and awareness of LLNs and in which standardised treatment including LLND has been implemented. Patients with rectal cancer and at least one enlarged LLN (short-axis ≥7.0 mm), or intermediate LLN (short-axis 5.0–6.9 mm) with at least one malignant feature on primary MRI, evaluated by a trained radiologist, are eligible. Patients will undergo neoadjuvant treatment by trained radiation oncologists, followed by TME surgery in combination with a minimally invasive, nerve-sparing LLND performed by trained surgeons. LLND specimens are evaluated by trained pathologists or grossing assistants. The primary outcome is LLR rate 3 years postoperatively. Secondary outcomes are morbidity, disease-free survival, overall survival and quality of life. To demonstrate a significant reduction in LLR rate from 13% (based on historical control data) to 6% after optimised treatment, 200 patients with enlarged LLNs are required.Ethics and disseminationThe medical ethics board of the Vrije Universiteit Medical Centre (VUMC), the Netherlands, approved the study on 23 November 2022 (reference: 2021.0524). Participating centres must obtain local approval and participants are required to provide written informed consent. Results obtained from this study will be communicated via peer-reviewed medical journals and presentations at conferences.Trail registration number NCT04486131, 24 July 2020, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04486131.

The purpose of this study was to prospectively compare participant experience and preference of limited preparation computed tomography colonography (CTC) with full-preparation colonoscopy in a consecutive series of patients at increased risk of colorectal cancer. CTC preparation comprised 180 ml diatrizoate meglumine, 80 ml barium and 30 mg bisacodyl. For the colonoscopy preparation 4 l of polyethylene glycol solution was used. Participants’ experience and preference were compared using the Wilcoxon signed rank test and the chi-squared test, respectively. Associations between preference and experience parameters for the 173 participants were determined by logistic regression. Diarrhoea occurred in 94% of participants during CTC preparation. This side effect was perceived as severely or extremely burdensome by 29%. Nonetheless, the total burden was significantly lower for the CTC preparation than for colonoscopy (9% rated the CTC preparation as severely or extremely burdensome compared with 59% for colonoscopy; p  < 0.001). Participants experienced significantly more pain, discomfort and total burden with the colonoscopy procedure than with CTC ( p  < 0.001). After 5 weeks, 69% preferred CTC, 8% were indifferent and 23% preferred colonoscopy ( p  < 0.001). A burdensome colonoscopy preparation and pain at colonoscopy were associated with CTC preference ( p  < 0.04). In conclusion, participants’ experience and preference were rated in favour of CTC with limited bowel preparation compared with full-preparation colonoscopy.

Purpose The use of computed tomography (CT) to detect anastomotic leakage (AL) is becoming the standard of care. Accurate detection of AL is crucial. The aim of this study was to define CT criteria that are most predictive for AL. Methods From January 2006 to December 2012, all consecutive patients who had undergone CT imaging because of clinical suspicion of anastomotic leakage after colorectal surgery were analysed. All CT scans were re-evaluated by two independent abdominal radiologists blinded for clinical outcome. The images were scored with a set of criteria and a conclusion whether or not AL was present was drawn. Each separate criterion was analysed for its value in predicting AL by uni- and multivariable logistic regression Results Of 668 patients with colorectal surgery, 108 had undergone CT imaging within 16 days postoperatively. According to our standard of reference, 34 (31 %) of the patients had AL. Univariable analysis showed that “fluid near anastomosis” (radiologist 1 (rad 1), p  < 0.001; radiologist 2 (rad 2), p  < 0.001) and “air near anastomosis” (rad 1, p  < 0.001; rad 2, p  < 0.001), “air intra-abdominally” (rad 1, p  = 0.019; rad 2, p  = 0.004) and “contrast leakage” (rad 1, p  < 0.001; rad 2, p  < 0.001) were associated with AL. Contrast leakage was the only independent predictor for AL in multivariable analysis for both radiologists (rad 1, OR 5.43 (95 % CI 1.18–25.02); rad 2, OR 8.51 (95 % CI 2.21–32.83)). Conclusion The only independent variable predicting AL is leakage of contrast medium. To improve the accuracy of CT imaging, optimal contrast administration near the anastomosis appears to be crucial.

Background Pain is common during colonic insufflation required for CT colonography. We therefore evaluate whether a single intravenous alfentanil bolus has a clinically relevant analgesic effect compared with placebo in patients undergoing CT colonography. Methods A prospective multi-centre randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial was performed in patients scheduled for elective CT colonography. Patients were randomised to receive either a bolus of 7.5 μg/kg alfentanil (n = 45) or placebo (n = 45). The primary outcome was the difference in maximum pain during colonic insufflation on an 11-point numeric rating scale. We defined a clinically relevant effect as a maximum pain reduction of at least 1.3 points. Secondary outcomes included total pain and burden of CT colonography (5-point scale), the most burdensome aspect and side effects. Our primary outcome was tested using a one-sided independent samples t-test. Results Maximum pain scores during insufflation were lower with alfentanil as compared with placebo, 5.3 versus 3.0 ( P  < 0.001). Total CT colonography pain and burden were also lower with alfentanil (2.0 vs. 1.6; P  = 0.014 and 2.1 vs. 1.7; P  = 0.007, respectively). With alfentanil fewer patients rated the insufflation as most burdensome aspect (56.1% vs. 18.6%; P  = 0.001). Episodes with desaturations < 90% SpO2 were more common with alfentanil (8.1% vs. 44.4%; P  < 0.001, but no clinically relevant desaturations occurred. Conclusions A low-dose intravenous alfentanil bolus provides a clinically relevant reduction of maximum pain during CT colonography and may improve the CT colonography acceptance, especially for patients with a low pain threshold. Trial registration Dutch Trial Register: NTR2902