Search

Background and Aim: Nonattendance of outpatient colonoscopy leads to inefficient use of health‐care resources. We aimed to study the effectiveness of using Short Message Service (SMS) reminder prior in patients scheduled for outpatient colonoscopy on their nonattendance rate. Methods: Patients who scheduled for an outpatient colonoscopy and had access of SMS were recruited from three clinics in Hong Kong. Patients were randomized to SMS group and standard care (SC) group. All patients were given a written appointment slip on the booking date. In addition, patients in the SMS group received an SMS reminder 7–10 days before their colonoscopy appointment. Patients' demographics, attendance, colonoscopy completion, and bowel preparation quality were recorded. Logistic regression was performed to identify predictors of nonattendance. Results: From November 2013 to October 2019, a total of 2225 eligible patients were recruited. A total of 1079 patients were allocated to the SMS group and 1146 to the SC group. The nonattendance rate of patients in the SMS group was significantly lower than that in the SC group (8.9% vs 11.9%, P = 0.022). There were no significant differences in their baseline characteristics and colonoscopy completion rate and bowel preparation quality. A trend towards a higher rate of adequate bowel preparation was observed in the SMS group when compared with the SC group (69.9% vs 65.8%, P = 0.053). Independent predictors for nonattendance included younger age, underprivilege, and existing diabetes. Conclusions: An SMS reminder for outpatient colonoscopy is effective in reducing the nonattendance rate and may potentially improve the bowel preparation quality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is a cost‐effective colorectal cancer (CRC) screening tool. However, longitudinal adherence, a factor that is critical to the success to any FIT‐based screening program, often is poor. The authors hypothesized that reminders sent via mobile messengers, such as WhatsApp, improve such adherence. Methods: In the current single‐blind, randomized study, subjects from an opportunistic FIT screening program who had a negative FIT result the year prior were randomly allocated (1:1) to receive either a 1‐off reminder via the WhatsApp messenger (WR) 1 month prior to the due appointments or no reminder (NR). All subjects were blinded to study participation and group allocation. At 24 months after randomization, a crossover of intervention was performed among those individuals who remained in the FIT program. The primary outcome was FIT adherence, defined as the pick‐up and on‐time return of the FIT. The secondary outcome was FIT adherence after the crossover. Results: A total of 500 subjects were randomized to receive WR (250 subjects) or NR (250 subjects). Three individuals were excluded from analysis (1 died and 2 underwent colonoscopy). Both the FIT pick‐up rate (80.3% vs 59.3%; P <.001) and return rate (79.9% vs 57.3%; P <.001) were significantly higher in the WR group compared with the NR group. After crossover of intervention (452 subjects), the WR group again was found to have a higher FIT pick‐up rate (79.1% vs 52.9%; P <.001) and return rate (78.2% vs 52.4%; P <.001). Conclusions: Text reminders sent via mobile messenger appear to improve the longitudinal adherence to FIT‐based opportunistic CRC screening programs. The routine use of this technology in CRC screening should be considered. The fecal immunochemical test is a cost‐effective screening tool for colorectal cancer. The results of the current single‐blind, crossover, randomized controlled study demonstrate that longitudinal adherence to a stool‐based screening program can be significantly improved by reminders sent via a mobile‐based messenger (WhatsApp Messenger). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aim: The reported prevalence and risk factors for sessile serrated lesions (SSLs) show significant variation. We aimed to specifically study the prevalence and potential risk factors of SSLs in an average risk colorectal cancer (CRC) screening population of Chinese subjects. Methods: This is a case–control study of prospectively collected data from a territory‐wide colorectal screening program in Hong Kong. Information on risk factors was obtained from questionnaires completed prior to screening colonoscopy. We compared subjects with SSLs against controls without these lesions to identify potential risk factors using multivariable logistic regression. Results: Of 12 039 asymptomatic screening subjects, 6011 subjects received a screening colonoscopy with 2214 subjects (36.8%) having conventional adenomas, 486 subjects (8.1%) having hyperplastic polyps, and 85 subjects (1.4%) having SSLs only. Of these subjects, three had synchronous advanced adenomas and were excluded from the analysis. More than 60% of these lesions were in the proximal colon. We compared these 82 subjects with SSLs only and 3226 controls without any polyps. After multivariable logistic regression, age ≥ 66 years, smoking, and diabetes mellitus (DM) were significant independent risk factors for SSLs. Conclusion: In this study, we report the prevalence of SSLs to be 1.4%. Age ≥ 66 years, smoking, and DM were independent risk factors for these lesions. Our findings provide relevant new data that should be taken into consideration when designing region‐specific surveillance programs for SSLs with the ultimate goal of reducing the risk of CRC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aim We validated a modified risk algorithm based on the Asia-Pacific Colorectal Screening (APCS) score that included body mass index (BMI) for prediction of advanced neoplasia. Methods Among 5744 Chinese asymptomatic screening participants undergoing a colonoscopy in Hong Kong from 2008 to 2012, a random sample of 3829 participants acted as the derivation cohort. The odds ratios for significant risk factors identified by binary logistic regression analysis were used to build a scoring system ranging from 0 to 6, divided into 'average risk' (AR): 0; 'moderate risk' (MR): 1-2; and 'high risk' (HR): 3-6. The other 1915 subjects formed a validation cohort, and the performance of the score was assessed. Results The prevalence of advanced neoplasia in the derivation and validation cohorts was 5.4% and 6.0%, respectively ( P = 0.395). Old age, male gender, family history of colorectal cancer, smoking, and BMI were significant predictors in multivariate regression analysis. A BMI cut-off at > 23 kg/m2 had better predictive capability and lower number needed to screen than that of > 25 kg/m2. Utilizing the score developed, 8.4%, 57.4%, and 34.2% in the validation cohort were categorized as AR, MR, and HR, respectively. The corresponding prevalence of advanced neoplasia was 3.8%, 4.3%, and 9.3%. Subjects in the HR group had 2.48-fold increased prevalence of advanced neoplasia than the AR group. The c-statistics of the modified score had better discriminatory capability than that using predictors of APCS alone (c-statistics = 0.65 vs 0.60). Conclusions Incorporating BMI into the predictors of APCS score was found to improve risk prediction of advanced neoplasia and reduce colonoscopy resources. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aim: Dedicated studies evaluating the impact of COVID‐19 on outcomes of pancreatobiliary IgG4 related disease (IgG4‐RD) patients are scarce. Whether COVID‐19 infection or vaccination would trigger IgG4‐RD exacerbation remains unknown. Methods: Pancreatobiliary IgG4‐RD patients ≥ 18 years old with active follow‐up since January 2020 from nine referral centers in Asia, Europe, and North America were included in this multicenter retrospective study. Outcome measures include incidence and severity of COVID‐19 infection, IgG4‐RD disease activity and treatment status, interruption of indicated IgG4‐RD treatment. Prospective data on COVID‐19 vaccination status and new COVID‐19 infection during the Omicron outbreak were also retrieved in the Hong Kong cohort. Results: Of the 124 pancreatobiliary IgG4‐RD patients, 25.0% had active IgG4‐RD, 71.0% were on immunosuppressive therapies and 80.6% had ≥ 1 risk factor for severe COVID. In 2020 (pre‐vaccination period), two patients (1.6%) had COVID‐19 infection (one requiring ICU admission), and 7.2% of patients had interruptions in indicated immunosuppressive treatment for IgG4‐RD. Despite a high vaccination rate (85.0%), COVID‐19 infection rate has increased to 20.0% during Omicron outbreak in the Hong Kong cohort. A trend towards higher COVID‐19 infection rate was noted in the non‐fully vaccinated/unvaccinated group (17.6% vs 33.3%, P = 0.376). No IgG4‐RD exacerbation following COVID‐19 vaccination or infection was observed. Conclusion: While a low COVID‐19 infection rate with no mortality was observed in pancreatobiliary IgG4‐RD patients in the pre‐vaccination period of COVID‐19, infection rate has increased during the Omicron outbreak despite a high vaccination rate. No IgG4‐RD exacerbation after COVID‐19 infection or vaccination was observed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aim: Secondary prophylaxis (SP) of variceal rebleeding was reported to improve outcomes of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients, but the optimal endoscopic approach is not well defined. We compared outcomes in HCC patients who underwent SP by endoscopic ultrasound‐guided cyanoacrylate obturation (EUS‐CYA) versus no SP. Methods: Between 2014 and 2018, 30 consecutive patients with inoperable HCC and recent endoscopically controlled variceal bleeding were prospectively recruited. Twenty‐seven patients with persistent varices ≥ 3 mm on endoscopic ultrasound underwent EUS‐CYA for SP. Thirty‐three HCC patients treated by esophagogastroduodenoscopy‐guided CYA obturation (EGD‐CYA) alone for acute variceal bleeding between 2009 and 2013 were identified from a prospective gastrointestinal bleed registry as standard of care controls for comparison. Outcome measures were death‐adjusted cumulative incidence of rebleeding, bleeding‐free survival, technical success, and procedure‐related adverse events of EUS‐CYA. Results: The majority of patients in both groups had advanced HCC, portal vein thrombosis, and Child–Pugh B cirrhosis. EUS‐CYA was successful in all 27 patients with no radiographic evidence of cyanoacrylate–lipiodol embolization. Significantly lower 30‐ and 90‐day death‐adjusted cumulative incidence of rebleeding (14.8% vs 42.4%, P = 0.023 and 18.5% vs 60.6%, P = 0.002, respectively) and significantly higher variceal bleeding‐free survival at 3 and 6 months (51.9% vs 21.2%, P = 0.009, 40.7% vs 15.2%, P = 0.010, respectively) were observed in the EUS‐CYA group when compared with standard of care group. Conclusions: Secondary prophylaxis by EUS‐CYA reduced rebleeding rate and improved variceal bleeding‐free survival in patients with inoperable HCC and variceal bleeding when compared with no SP. Randomized studies are needed to confirm the benefits of EUS‐CYA for this difficult‐to‐treat population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To test the hypothesis that trained nurse endoscopists are not inferior to medical endoscopists in finding adenomas during colonoscopy. Design This is a prospective, randomised, single-blind, non-inferiority study comparing nurses with medical endoscopists in performing screening colonoscopy. The nurse endoscopists had been trained according to the British Joint Advisory Group on GI Endoscopy curriculum and had completed at least 140 colonoscopic procedures prior to the study. The primary endpoint was the adenoma detection rate. Secondary endpoints included the caecal intubation rate, intubation time, complication rate, patient pain and satisfaction scores. Results We enrolled and analysed a total of 731 patients over a 15-month period. At least one adenoma was found in 159 (43.8%) of 363 patients by nurse endoscopists and 120 (32.7%) of 367 patients by medical endoscopists and a proportion difference of +11.1% compared with the medical endoscopists (95% CI 4.1% to 18.1%). The withdrawal time was, however, significantly longer among nurses (998 vs 575 s, p<0.001). After adjusting for differences in a regression analysis, colonoscopy by nurses was associated with a lower adenoma detection rate (OR 0.475: 95% CI 0.311 to 0.725). Nurse endoscopists had a lower caecal intubation rate (97.3% vs 100%), received better pain and satisfaction scores and had a high rate of patient acceptance. Conclusions In this pragmatic trial, nurses can perform screening colonoscopy but require a longer procedural time to achieve a comparable adenoma detection rate as medical endoscopists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To compare the performance of existing sigmoidoscopy-based strategies in predicting advanced proximal neoplasia (APN) in an asymptomatic Chinese cohort. Design We included all screening participants aged 50-70 years who received colonoscopy between 2008 and 2014 in Hong Kong. Sigmoidoscopy yield was estimated from the colonoscopic findings based on the: (1) UK flexible sigmoidoscopy; (2) Screening for COlon REctum (SCORE); (3) NORwegian Colorectal Cancer Prevention (NORCCAP) trials and (4) US clinical index based on age, gender and distal findings. The sensitivity, specificity, the number of subjects needed to screen (NNS) and the number of subjects needed to refer (NNR) for colonoscopy to detect one APN were evaluated. Binary logistic regression modelling identified the distal findings associated with APN. Results From 5879 eligible subjects, 132 (2.2%) had APN. The US strategy achieved the highest sensitivity for APN detection (42.0%) and the UK criteria attained the highest specificity (96%). The US criteria led to the lowest NNS (92 vs 103-267) and the UK criteria required the least NNR (12 vs 16-21). Using the US strategy, the rates of APN detected were 1.4% (low-risk group), 2.2% (intermediate risk) and 5.9% (high risk). The c-statistics of the UK, SCORE, NORCCAP and the US criteria were 0.55±0.03; 0.59±0.03; 0.59±0.03 and 0.62±0.05 respectively. Conclusions The US criteria had the highest sensitivity for detection of APN and lowest NNS and the UK score had the highest specificity and the lowest NNR. The performance of all these four criteria to predict APN is limited, highlighting an urgent need to devise a novel APN prediction system for Asian subjects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Very few studies examined the issue of regret on choosing colorectal cancer (CRC) screening tests. We evaluated the determinants of regret and tested the hypothesis that regret over screening choices was associated with poorer screening compliance. Methods: A bowel cancer screening centre invited all Hong Kong citizens aged 50-70 years who were asymptomatic of CRC to participate in free-of-charge screening programmes. Upon attendance they attended health seminars on CRC and its screening, and were offered an option to choose yearly faecal immunochemical test (FIT) for up to four years vs. one direct colonoscopy. They were not allowed to switch the screening option after decision. A self-administered, four-item validated survey was used to assess whether they regretted over their choice (> 2 = regretful from a scale of 0 [no regret]-5 [extreme regret]). A binary logistic regression model evaluated if initial regret over their choice was associated with poorer programme compliance. Results: From 4,341 screening participants who have chosen FIT or colonoscopy, 120 (2.8%) regretted over their decision and 1,029 (23.7%) were non-compliant with the screening programme. Younger subjects and people who felt pressure when making their decision were associated with regret. People who regretted their decision were 2.189 (95% C.I. 1.361-3.521, p = 0.001) times more likely to be non-compliant with the programme. Conclusions: This study is the first to show that regret over the initial CRC screening choice was associated with later non-compliance. Screening participants who expressed regret over their choice should receive additional reminders to improve their programmatic compliance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Recent studies showed that previous negative results from faecal immunochemical tests (FITs) for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening was associated with lower risk of advanced neoplasia (AN). We evaluated whether prior FIT results should be included to estimate the risk of AN in 2008–2012. Methods: A community-based screening practice recruited 5,813 asymptomatic residents aged 50 to 70 years in Hong Kong for CRC screening. We included study participants who had (1). positive FIT with subsequent colonoscopy workup (FIT+ group; n = 356); (2). negative FIT in three consecutive years and received a colonoscopy (FIT- group; n = 857); (3). received colonoscopy without FIT (colonoscopy group; n = 473); and (4). received both colonoscopy and FIT at the same time (combined group; n = 4,127). One binary logistic regression model evaluated whether prior FIT results were associated with colonoscopy findings of AN. Results: The proportion of participants having AN/CRC was 18.0% (FIT+), 5.5% (FIT-), 8.0% (colonoscopy group), and 4.3% (combined group), respectively. When compared with the colonoscopy group, those in the FIT- group were not significantly more or less likely to have AN/CRC (AOR  = 0.77, 95% C.I. = 0.51 to 1.18, p  = 0.230). Having one (AOR = 0.73, 95% C.I. 0.48–1.12, p = 0.151) or three consecutive negative FIT result (AOR = 0.98, 95% C.I. 0.60–1.62, p = 0.944) were not associated with lower risks of AN/CRC. Subjects in the FIT+ group was 3.32-fold (95% C.I. 2.07 to 5.32, p<0.001) more likely to have AN/CRC. Conclusions: These findings indicated that subjects with negative FIT findings could be risk stratified similarly as those who had not previously received FIT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVES:The objective of this study was to compare the level of adherence to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs among screening participants offered vs. not offered informed choices on screening modality.METHODS:We recruited 10,606 screening participants aged 50-70 years, including 6,397 subjects who were offered a choice of yearly fecal immunochemical test (FIT) for up to 3 years vs. one colonoscopy, and 4,209 subjects who were offered either FIT or colonoscopy without choice. They were prospectively followed up for 3 years. The proportion of screening participants who returned their specimens in all subsequent years (FIT group) and the attendance rate of scheduled endoscopy appointment (colonoscopy group) were compared between those with vs. without choice.RESULTS:The adherence rate with FIT was 97.6%, 84.1%, and 72.6% in the first 3 years of follow-up, respectively, among those who were offered a choice. The adherence rate with FIT was 97.5%, 78.4%, and 62.8%, respectively, among those without choices. The proportion of subjects attending colonoscopy was 95.7% (choice offered) and 90.6% (no choice). From binary logistic regression analysis, participants who were offered informed choice were significantly more likely to adhere to the program when compared with those without test choices (odds ratio (OR)=2.54, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.30-2.82, P<0.001). The respective adjusted OR for the FIT and colonoscopy groups was 1.60 (95% CI: 1.42-1.80, P<0.001) and 2.53 (95% CI: 1.94-3.31, P<0.001).CONCLUSIONS:This study found that patients who were offered an informed choice for screening had higher adherence rates than patients who were not offered a choice in real-life practices, suggesting that providing screening test options for CRC screening is preferred. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: to evaluate the proportion of self-referred screening participants having various psychological barriers and the factors associated with these barriers. Methods: A territory-wide bowel cancer screening centre sent an invitation via the media to all Hong Kong residents aged 50–70 years who were asymptomatic of CRC to join a free screening programme. Upon attendance they were requested to complete self-administered surveys on their perceived barriers of screening. Binary logistic regression analyses were used to evaluate the factors associated with these barriers. Results: From 10,078 consecutive screening participants (mean age 57.5 years; female 56.4%) completed the surveys between May 2008 to September 2012. There were high proportions who agreed or strongly agreed with the following barriers: financial difficulty (86.0%), limited service accessibility (58.2%), screening-induced bodily discomfort (55.2%), physical harm (44.4%), embarrassment (40.1%), apprehension (38.8%) and time constraints (13.9%). From regression models, older participants (aged ≥56) were less likely to have these barriers (Adjusted odds ratio [AOR] ranged from 0.738 to 0.952) but they encountered more difficulties to access to screening services (AOR ranged from 1.141 to 1.371). Female subjects were more likely to encounter most of these barriers (AOR ranged from 1.188 to 2.179). Participants who were uncertain of the necessity of CRC screening for people aged ≥50 were more likely to report these barriers (AOR ranged from 1.151 to 1.671). Conclusion: The proportions of perceptual barriers of CRC screening were high among these participants. Those with these associated factors should receive more thorough explanation of the screening test procedures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: We tested the a priori hypothesis that self-perceived and real presences of risks for colorectal cancer (CRC) are associated with better knowledge of the symptoms and risk factors for CRC, respectively. Methods: One territory-wide invitation for free CRC screening between 2008 to 2012 recruited asymptomatic screening participants aged 50–70 years in Hong Kong. They completed survey items on self-perceived and real presences of risks for CRC (advanced age, male gender, positive family history and smoking) as predictors, and knowledge of CRC symptoms and risk factors as outcome measures, respectively. Their associations were evaluated by binary logistic regression analyses. Results: From 10,078 eligible participants (average age 59 years), the mean knowledge scores for symptoms and risk factors were 3.23 and 4.06, respectively (both score range 0–9). Male gender (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.34, 95% C.I. 1.20–1.50, p<0.01), self-perception as not having any risks for CRC (AOR = 1.12, 95% C.I. 1.01–1.24, p = 0.033) or uncertainty about having risks (AOR = 1.94, 95% C.I. 1.55–2.43, p<0.001), smoking (AOR 1.38, 95% C.I. 1.11–1.72, p = 0.004), and the absence of family history (AOR 0.61 to 0.78 for those with positive family history, p<0.001) were associated with poorer knowledge scores (≤4) of CRC symptoms. These factors remained significant for knowledge of risk factors. Conclusions: Male and smokers were more likely to have poorer knowledge but family history of CRC was associated with better knowledge. Since screening of these higher risk individuals could lead to greater yield of colorectal neoplasm, educational interventions targeted to male smokers were recommended. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]