AIMS65 is a score designed to predict in-hospital mortality, length of stay, and costs of gastrointestinal bleeding. Our aims were to revalidate AIMS65 as predictor of inpatient mortality and to compare AIMS65’s performance with that of Glasgow–Blatchford (GBS) and Rockall scores (RS) with regard to mortality, and the secondary outcomes of a composite endpoint of severity, transfusion requirements, rebleeding, delayed (6-month) mortality, and length of stay. The study included 309 patients. Clinical and biochemical data, transfusion requirements, endoscopic, surgical, or radiological treatments, and outcomes for 6 months after admission were collected. Clinical outcomes were in-hospital mortality, delayed mortality, rebleeding, composite endpoint, blood transfusions, and length of stay. In receiver-operating characteristic curve analyses, AIMS65, GBS, and RS were similar when predicting inpatient mortality (0.76 vs. 0.78 vs. 0.78). Regarding endoscopic intervention, AIMS65 and GBS were identical (0.62 vs. 0.62). AIMS65 was useless when predicting rebleeding compared to GBS or RS (0.56 vs. 0.70 vs. 0.71). GBS was better at predicting the need for transfusions. No patient with AIMS65 = 0, GBS ≤ 6, or RS ≤ 4 died. Considering the composite endpoint, an AIMS65 of 0 did not exclude high risk patients, but a GBS ≤ 1 or RS ≤ 2 did. The three scores were similar in predicting prolonged in-hospital stay. Delayed mortality was better predicted by AIMS65. AIMS65 is comparable to GBS and RS in essential endpoints such as inpatient mortality, the need for endoscopic intervention and length of stay. GBS is a better score predicting rebleeding and the need for transfusion, but AIMS65 shows a better performance predicting delayed mortality.

Capsule endoscopy (CE) has become a first-line tool for small bowel (SB) examination. However, adverse events (AEs), such as CE retention or aspiration, may occur. The aims of this study were to evaluate incidence, clinical outcomes and therapeutic approaches of CE-related AEs in the largest series published to date. Data from 5428 procedures performed at 12 institutions between August 2001 and January 2012 were retrospectively analyzed. Baseline patient characteristics; procedure; type, localization and symptoms before/after AEs; previous patency tests performed; therapeutic management and patient's outcome were recorded. The overall incidence of CE-related AEs was 1.9%: 2.0% for SB, 0.9% for esophageal and 0.5% for colon CE. The incidence of capsule retention was significantly higher than capsule aspiration (1.87% vs. 0.003%; p < 0.05), in patients suffering from inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) than in obscure GI bleeding (OGIB) (3.3% vs. 1.5%; p < 0.05) and in patients with the combination of nausea/vomiting, abdominal pain and distension. The SB was the most frequent localization of retention (88.2%). The use of patency tests -except for Patency© capsule- before CE was not a good predictor for AEs. Most of the patients with AEs developed no or mild symptoms (97%) and were managed by non-surgical methods (64.4%). CE-related AEs are uncommon and difficult to predict by imagiological examinations. SB retention, that is usually asymptomatic, is the most frequent AE. In absence of symptoms, non-surgical management of CE-related AEs is recommended.

Eosinophilic gastroenteritis is an unusual entity that is rarely found in daily clinical practise. Its aetiology is unknown and diagnosis can be made microscopically with evidence of massive eosinophilic infiltration in patients with chronic gastrointestinal symptoms, excluding entities that may cause such findings (parasitic infestation, medical therapy, inflammatory bowel disease, and so on). Allergic processes are usually associated and these normally respond well to steroids. We present our last year's experience of four women with eosinophilic gastroenteritis with an extraordinary atypical clinical onset. Two of the women presented with an acute abdomen and two with isolated colonic involvement. The management of acute abdomen avoiding surgery and a complete response with azathioprine are the outstanding variables that make our recent cases of special interest. Demographic variables were similar to others reported from our medium, with the exception of a higher incidence of women. Our cases suggest the wide spectrum of clinical presentations and show the high suspicion index needed for a diagnosis that is made by pathologists.