Search

AIM In the UK Bowel Scope Screening Programme (BSSP), patients progress to colonoscopy based on high-risk features on flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS). We aim to assess the practice of colonoscopy conversion and predictors of detection of additional adenomas on colonoscopy. METHOD The Bowel Cancer Screening database was interrogated and collated with endoscopic and histological findings from patients undergoing colonoscopy following FS between August 2013 and August 2016. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify predictors of new adenomas. RESULTS FS was performed on 11 711 patients, with an adenoma detection rate (ADR) of 8.5% and conversion to colonoscopy in 421 (3.6%). The additional ADR at colonoscopy was 35.2%, with one additional malignant diagnosis (0.26%). The adenoma miss rate was 3.6%. On multivariate analysis, a polyp ≥ 10 mm was the only high-risk indication associated with additional ADR at colonoscopy (OR 3.68, 95% CI 1.51-3.65, P

Gastrointestinal haemorrhage is a common clinical scenario and, in those using antithrombotic agents, the risk is significantly increased. Management of these patients, in terms of initial resuscitation is well established and numerous guidelines exist in this area. However, few studies have addressed the subsequent dilemma of if and when antithrombotic agents should be reintroduced. Consequently, practice is variable and not necessarily evidenced-based. Overall, for patients that are either anticoagulated or using antiplatelet drugs for secondary prophylaxis, there is a clear benefit to restarting these agents. However, there is limited data to guide when this should occur. For individuals at low risk of re-bleeding, current guidelines suggest single agent aspirin can be continued without interruption, assuming haemostatic control has been confirmed endoscopically. For those at higher bleeding risk, aspirin should be withheld, but reintroduced early (within 3 days of index endoscopy). However, randomised evidence is lacking, as are studies including more modern agents or combined anticoagulant/ antiplatelet regimens. As such, guidance statements are limited and management suggestions must be extrapolated from clinical trials, retrospective studies and data relating specifically to warfarin and aspirin. The intention of this review is to summarise what evidence is available and, where this is lacking, suggest pragmatic management options based on a risk-benefit assessment of thromboembolism and recurrent bleeding.

Aim The management of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs) is complex, with widespread variation in management and outcome, even amongst experienced clinicians. Variations in the assessment and decision-making processes are likely to be a major factor in this variability. The creation of a standardized minimum dataset to aid decision-making may therefore result in improved clinical management. Method An official working group of 13 multidisciplinary specialists was appointed by the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI) and the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) to develop a minimum dataset on LNPCPs. The literature review used to structure the ACPGBI/BSG guidelines for the management of LNPCPs was used by a steering subcommittee to identify various parameters pertaining to the decision-making processes in the assessment and management of LNPCPs. A modified Delphi consensus process was then used for voting on proposed parameters over multiple voting rounds with at least 80% agreement defined as consensus. The minimum dataset was used in a pilot process to ensure rigidity and usability. Results A 23-parameter minimum dataset with parameters relating to patient and lesion factors, including six parameters relating to image retrieval, was formulated over four rounds of voting with two pilot processes to test rigidity and usability. Conclusion This paper describes the development of the first reported evidence-based and expert consensus minimum dataset for the management of LNPCPs. It is anticipated that this dataset will allow comprehensive and standardized lesion assessment to improve decision-making in the assessment and management of LNPCPs.

Aims South Asians comprise 13.6% of the Wolverhampton population. We aimed to compare the incidence and trend of colorectal cancer in this subgroup with the non South Asian population over a 20-year period. Method Patients of South Asian origin diagnosed with colorectal cancer from 1989 to 2008 were identified from the hospital histopathology database and compared with those of non South Asian origin. 1991 and 2001 census data were used to standardize for differing age and sex distributions in the two study populations. Results The median unadjusted incidence of colorectal cancer from 1989 to 2008 was 6.17 per 100 000 per year in South Asians compared with 71.70 per 100 000 per year in non South Asians (77.79% white British). The age and sex adjusted odds ratio for colorectal cancer in South Asians was 0.2 (P females). Conclusion There was a markedly lower incidence of colorectal cancer in South Asians compared with non South Asians, maintained over 20 years. Colorectal cancer incidence increased by a small and similar amount over the period in both groups. There was a male preponderance of colorectal cancer in both populations over 50 years.