1 second, INR 1,080; Antinuclear Antibody titer 1/100. BNO and USG of the abdomen were normal. The patient was treated

with prednisone 1 mg/kg a day for 2 weeks, then tappered over 2 weeks, omeprazole 20 mg twice a day, and sucralfate syrup 30 ml three times a day before meal. After a year, patient came again with epigastric abdominal pain, palpable purpuric rash in both of lower legs but without melena and joint pain. Oesophagogastroduodenoscopy showed oesophagitis LA grade A and pangastritis. Biopsy result was chronic gastritis without H. pylori. Normal 0 false false false. Management still consists of the therapy on complication and definitive therapy. Conclusion: HSP patient with gastrointestinal involvement may experience recurrent symptoms after a year relieved symptoms. Key Word(s): 1. Henoch-Schönlein Cabozantinib supplier purpura; 2. pangastritis; 3. hematuria; 4. osteoarthritis pedis bilateral Presenting Author: JI HYUN SONG Additional Authors: SANG GYUN KIM, SU JIN CHUNG, HAE YEON KANG Corresponding Author: JI HYUN SONG Affiliations: Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital Gangnam Center, Seoul National University Hospital Gangnam Center Objective: Subepithelial Akt inhibitor mass is a relatively common finding in upper gastrointestinal endoscopy.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the natural course of asymptomatic subepithelial masses in upper gastrointestinal tract and analyze the risk factors of the subepithelial masses increasing in size. Methods: From 2004

to 2011, 2126 subepithelial masses in upper gastrointestinal tract were detected, and 935 were followed up using endoscopy. Results: The find more lesion size at initial endoscopy was 8.7 mm (range 1–100 mm). During a mean follow-up of 35.2 ± 21.2 month (range 6–96 month), 903 subepithelial masses (96.6%) were showed no interval change, 32 lesions (3.4%) were increased at least 25% in diameter with mean increment 5.0 ± 4.0 mm (range 1–15 mm). The risk of increasing subepithelial mass was significant in overlying mucosal changes (hyperemia, erosion, or ulcer) (OR = 8.22, 95% CI 1.48–45.70) and hard consistency (OR = 10.348, 95% CI 1.10–97.35). We evaluated the increasing velocity as size increment divided by follow-up years. The increasing velocity was faster (0.44 ± 2.12 mm/year, range 0.00–15.00 mm/year) for large lesions (≥2 cm) than small lesions (0.07 ± 0.38 mm/year, range 0.00–5.14 mm/year for <2 cm) (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Most of the small subepithelial masses were showed no interval change during 8 year follow-up period. Regular follow-up with endoscopy may be considered in small (<2 cm) subepithelial masses with intact overlying mucosa. Key Word(s): 1. Subepithelial mass; 2. upper gastrointestinal tract; 3.