Search

National consensus recommendations have recently been developed to standardize colorectal tumour localization and documentation during colonoscopy. In this qualitative semi-structured interview study, we identified and contrast the perceived barriers and facilitators to using these new recommendations according to gastroenterologists and surgeons in a large central Canadian city. Interviews were analyzed according to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) through directed content analysis. Solutions were categorized using the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) framework. Eleven gastroenterologists and ten surgeons participated. Both specialty groups felt that the new recommendations were clearly written, adequately addressed current care practice tensions, and offered a relative advantage versus existing practices. The new recommendations appeared appropriately complex, applicable to most participants, and could be trialed and adapted prior to full implementation. Major barriers included a lack of relevant external or internal organizational incentives, non-existing formal feedback processes, and a lack of individual familiarity with the evidence behind some recommendations. With application of the ERIC framework, common barriers could be addressed through accessing new funding, altering incentive structures, changing record systems, educational interventions, identifying champions, promoting adaptability, and employing audit/feedback processes. Future research is needed to test strategies for feasibility and effectiveness., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Introduction: Polyp size determination plays an important role in endoscopic decision making and follow-up determination. However, there is a lack of knowledge of endoscopist accuracy for polyp sizing and efficacy of available tools for size measurement. Our aim was to compare the accuracy of visual assessment, snare, forceps, and virtual scale endoscope (VSE) in estimating polyp size among a diverse group of endoscopists., Methods: We conducted a prospective video-based study. One hundred twenty polyps measured and recorded along with all available measurement tools were randomized to visual assessment, snare, forceps, or VSE group. Eleven endoscopists conducted video-based measurement using the randomized measurement tool. Primary outcome was relative accuracy in polyp size measurement compared with caliper measurement immediately postresection., Results: One thousand three hundred twenty measurements were performed. VSE had statistically significantly higher relative accuracy when compared to forceps (79.3 vs 71.3%; P < 0.0001). Forceps had statistically significantly higher relative accuracy when compared to visual assessment (71.3 vs 63.6%; P = 0.0036). There was no statistically significant difference when comparing visual assessment and snare-based measurements (63.6 vs 62.8%; P = 0.797). Overall, 21.5% of polyps >5 mm were misclassified as ≤5 mm and 17.3% of polyps ≥10 mm were misclassified as <10 mm. VSE had the lowest percentage of polyps >5 mm misclassified as ≤5 mm (2.6%), polyps ≤5 mm misclassified as >5 mm (5.1%), and polyps <10 mm misclassified as ≥10 mm (1.7%)., Discussion: Visual size estimation of polyps is inaccurate independently of training level, sex, and specialty. Size measurement accuracy can be improved using forceps and yields the highest relative accuracy when an adaptive scale technology is used., (Copyright © 2023 by The American College of Gastroenterology.)

Background and Aims: ChatGPT, an advanced language model, is increasingly used in diverse fields, including medicine. This study explores using ChatGPT to optimize postcolonoscopy management by providing guideline-based recommendations and addressing low compliance rates and timing issues., Methods: In this proof-of-concept study, 20 clinical scenarios were prepared as structured reports and free-text notes, and ChatGPT's responses were evaluated by 2 senior gastroenterologists. Compliance with guidelines and accuracy were assessed, and inter-rater agreement was calculated using Fleiss' kappa coefficient., Results: ChatGPT exhibited 90% compliance with guidelines and 85% accuracy, with a very good inter-rater agreement (Fleiss' kappa coefficient of .84, P < .01). ChatGPT handled multiple variations and descriptions and crafted concise patient letters., Conclusions: Results suggest that ChatGPT could aid healthcare providers in making informed decisions and improve compliance with postcolonoscopy surveillance guidelines. Future research should investigate integrating ChatGPT into electronic health record systems and evaluating its effectiveness in different healthcare settings and populations., Competing Interests: Disclosure All authors disclosed no financial relationships., (Copyright © 2023 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Sessile serrated lesions (SSLs) are important precursor lesions for the CpG island-methylated pathway to colorectal cancer. The reported detection rates of SSL are highly variable, and national or population-based estimates are not available. Patient-, provider-, and procedure-level factors associated with the detection rates of SSL have not been well described. The aim of our study was to study the detection rates of SSL, variability of rates over time, and factors associated with detection rates of SSL in a national sample of patients undergoing colonoscopy using the GIQuIC registry., Methods: We used colonoscopies submitted to the GIQuIC registry from 2014 to 2017 on adults, aged 18-89 years. Only the first colonoscopy record per patient was included. Indications for colonoscopy were categorized as screening, diagnostic, and surveillance. We used the hierarchical logistic models to study the factors associated with the detection rates of SSL. The Cochrane-Armitage test was used to study the significance of trend over time., Results: There were a total of 5,173,211 colonoscopies performed by 3,934 endoscopists during the study period. Among the 2,101,082 screening colonoscopies over the study period in adults older than or equal to 50 years that were complete to the cecum, the average detection rate per endoscopist for SSL was 6.43% (SD 5.18) and 6.25% standardized for the 2010 US population. There was a significant increase in the detection rates of SSLs from screening colonoscopies over the study period from 4.99% in 2014 to 7.09% in 2017 (P trend <0.001). Clinically significant factors associated with higher detection rates of SSL were longer withdrawal times (>11 minutes vs ≤6 minutes) (odds ratio [OR] 9.61; 9.03-10.24), adequate preparation (OR 1.25; 1.22-1.28), female sex (OR 1.17; 1.16-1.18), and use of a specialized gastrointestinal pathology group (OR 1.12; 95% confidence interval 1.04, 1.19)., Discussion: Population-based estimates of the detection rates of SSL are 6% and have increased over time., (Copyright © 2020 by The American College of Gastroenterology.)

Background: Many communities face a shortage of qualified endoscopists. Training physician assistants (PAs) to perform colonoscopies can expand the availability of colorectal cancer screening. This study examined screening colonoscopy metrics and quality indicators among gastroenterologists, supervised PAs, and gastroenterology fellows., Methods: Consecutive patients undergoing average-risk screening colonoscopy were stratified into one of three groups by endoscopist type. Procedure and pathology reports were reviewed for the technical performance and quality metrics of the providers., Results: PAs performed comparably to gastroenterologists in technical performance and quality metrics, and demonstrated higher cecal intubation rates than their gastroenterologist colleagues. Comparisons of attending physicians and PAs grouped by years of experience also did not show notable differences in performance., Conclusions: In a supervised practice, PAs performed on par with their gastroenterology colleagues on established colonoscopy quality indicators. Following proper training, PAs can be employed in the provision of screening colonoscopy.

Background and Aims: Polypectomy competency varies significantly among providers. Poor polypectomy technique may lead to interval cancer and/or adverse events. Our aim was to determine the effect of a polypectomy skills report card on subsequent polypectomy performance., Methods: We conducted a 3-phase, prospective, single-blinded study. In phase 1 ("baseline"), we graded 10 polypectomies per endoscopist using the Direct Observation of Polypectomy Skills (DOPyS) tool (scores 1-4); mean overall scores ≥3 are competent. In phase 2 ("pre-report card"), we selected 10 additional polypectomies per endoscopist. We subsequently gave endoscopists a report card with baseline scores and instructional videos demonstrating optimal polypectomy technique. In phase 3 ("post-report card"), 10 additional polypectomies per endoscopist were selected. Raters, blinded to study phase, graded 10 pre- and 10 post-report card polypectomies per endoscopist. We compared mean DOPyS scores and rate of competent polypectomy in the pre- and post-report card phases., Results: We graded 110 pre- and 110 post-report card polypectomies performed by 11 endoscopists. The mean DOPyS score increased between the pre- and post-report card phases (2.7 ± .9 vs 3.0 ± .8, P = .01); this improvement was seen for diminutive (P < .0001) but not for small-to-large polyps. Rate of competent polypectomy significantly improved from the pre- to post-report card phase (56% vs 69%, P = .04); this improvement was seen for diminutive (57% vs 81%, P = .001) but not for small-to-large polyps (55% vs 36%, P = .2)., Conclusions: Report cards with educational videos effectively improved polypectomy technique, primarily because of improvements in resecting diminutive polyps. The improved competency and decreased piecemeal resection may reduce the risk of polyp recurrence. Further education is needed to improve larger polyp resection., (Copyright © 2019 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Accurate localization of a colonic lesion is crucial to successful resection. Although colonic tattooing is a widely accepted technique to mark lesions for future identification surgery or repeat colonoscopy, no consensus guidelines exist. The objective of this study was to determine whether the current tattooing practice at a tertiary medical center differs from recommendations in the literature and self-reported provider practice., Methods: The study consisted of an observational retrospective chart review of patients who received colonic tattoos, as well as a provider survey of reported tattooing practices at a tertiary academic medical center. A total of 747 patients older than 18 years of age who underwent colonoscopy with tattoo were included. Forty-four gastroenterologists performing endoscopy were surveyed on tattooing techniques., Results: In the majority of cases, neither the number of tattoos, location of the tattoo nor the distance from the lesion was specified within the report. Following the index procedure, a tattoo was detected in 75% of surgical resections and 73% of endoscopies. At the time of surgery, however, the tattoo and/or the lesion was detected approximately 94% of the time. Twenty-five endoscopists (56.8%) completed the survey. Differences were seen the between the chart review and reported practice. Most providers report placing ≥2 marks (87.2%); however, chart review revealed that only 56.2 % were tattooed with ≥2 marks., Conclusions: Variation exists between the reported tattooing practice and actual practice. Despite this, most tattoos are identified at the time of surgery or repeat endoscopy. Further research is needed to determine whether a standardized approach to tattooing and reporting could improve localization at repeat endoscopy.

Purpose: Patients with ulcerative colitis, a high-risk group for the development of colon cancer, undergo colonoscopy more frequently than the general population. This increase in endoscopic evaluation also exposes these patients to an increased risk of complications, including iatrogenic perforation. Our survey study aims to determine factors that affect the management choices for iatrogenic perforations for ulcerative colitis patients in remission and identify areas of consensus among general gastroenterologists, inflammatory bowel disease specialists, and colorectal surgeons., Methods: An anonymous, cross-sectional survey was performed using an online platform. A matrix questionnaire posed five clinical scenarios with six management options for an iatrogenic perforation in ulcerative colitis patients with varying disease distribution, disease activity, and maintenance regimens., Results: One hundred thirty-eight general gastroenterologists, 35 inflammatory bowel disease specialists, and 174 colorectal surgeons responded to the survey; 47, 41, and 23%, respectively, answered they did not feel comfortable managing perforations in ulcerative colitis patients in remission. We found the greatest concordance among gastroenterologists and colorectal surgeons in cases of perforation in ulcerative colitis with a history of dysplasia; the majority of respondents chose staged total proctocolectomy with ileal pouch anal anastomosis. We found discordance in decision making for ulcerative colitis in remission without dysplasia, with perforation occurring in colitis involved and uninvolved areas., Conclusion: Our survey revealed that a significant fraction of gastroenterologists and colorectal surgeons are uncomfortable managing iatrogenic colonic perforations in ulcerative colitis patients. We have identified knowledge and practice gaps in defining the optimal management of iatrogenic perforations in ulcerative colitis patients.

Background: Previous studies have shown the colonoscopy quality affected by the endoscopist's fatigue. This study was aimed to evaluate this potential factor in a colorectal cancer-screening cohort of Chinese patients., Methods: The attendances at department of gastroenterology for colorectal cancer screening between 2013 and 2015 were retrospectively analyzed. The procedure time-of-day and hours elapse were recorded. The primary outcome was defined as adenoma detection rate (ADR)., Results: A total of 1342 screening colonoscopies were performed by 19 gastroenterologists in the study. Detection rates were 7.7% for all polyps and 20.0% for adenomas. Time-of-day was not significantly associated with ADR. With time elapsing, the first climax for ADR was presented at 09:00-10:00, and persistently rose again after the lunch break. Significant inclined trend in ADR was noted for each hour blocks of a full day (p =  .0021)., Conclusions: The procedure time-of-day, morning versus afternoon, did not affect the diagnostic efficacy of screening endoscopy in Chinese patients.

Background: Endoscopy is routinely performed in patients with inflammatory bowel disease to evaluate disease severity and guide important clinical decisions. However, variability in the interpretation of endoscopic findings can significantly impact patient management., Methods: Fifty-eight gastroenterologists were invited to participate in an online survey including pictures and video recordings of colonoscopies performed in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD). Participants were asked to rate the colorectal mucosa in patients with UC using the Mayo endoscopic subscore (MES), and the neo-terminal ileum and anastomosis in operated patients with CD using the Rutgeerts score (RS). Overall interrater agreement (IRA) and for several key end points was assessed using Krippendorff's alpha test., Results: The IRAs for the MES and RS were 0.47 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41-0.54) and 0.33 (95% CI, 0.28-0.38). The IRAs for UC mucosal healing (MES ≤ 1) and complete mucosal healing (MES = 0) were 0.57 (95% CI, 0.40-0.72) and 0.89 (95% CI, 0.73-1) and for CD postoperative recurrence (RS ≥ i2), and IRAs for severe postoperative recurrence (RS ≥ 3) were 0.44 (95% CI, 0.24-0.62) and 0.54 (95% CI, 0.36-0.71), respectively. Unexpectedly, although clinical information significantly influenced the IRA, participant expertise and consultation of scores did not produce significant changes in the IRA., Conclusions: A high rate of disagreement in endoscopic scoring was found in this study, even among experienced physicians. The variability in the assessment of mucosal healing and postoperative recurrence may translate into relevant differences in patient management., (© 2018 Crohn’s & Colitis Foundation of America. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com)

Purpose: Linked color imaging (LCI) by laser endoscopy is a novel narrow band light observation. In this study, we analyzed the efficacy of LCI for improving the various featured colorectal polyp's visibility utilizing a subjective endoscopist's visibility scoring and objective color difference (CD) value., Methods: We retrospectively reviewed two pictures both with white light (WL) and LCI for 54 consecutive neoplastic polyps 2-20 mm in size. All pictures were evaluated by four endoscopists according to a published polyp visibility score from four (excellent visibility) to one (poor visibility). Additionally, we calculated CD value between each polyp and surrounding mucosa in LCI and WL using an original software., Results: The mean polyp visibility scores of LCI (3.11 ± 1.05) were significantly higher than those of WL (2.50 ± 1.09, P < 0.001). The ratio of an endoscopist's poor visibility (polyp visibility scores 1 and 2) was significantly lower in LCI (27.9%) than WL (55.6%, P < 0.001). With respect to the CD analysis, the CD value of LCI was significantly higher than that of WL (33.3 ± 13.9 vs. 20.7 ± 13.6, P < 0.001). In a subgroup analysis, the polyp visibility scores and CD values of LCI about 24 diminutive polyps (≤5 mm) were higher than those of WL (3.29 ± 0.99 vs. 2.12 ± 0.99, P < 0.001; 31.6 ± 12.8 vs. 14.7 ± 7.6, P < 0.001). Additionally, the polyp visibility scores and CD values of LCI for polyps with any location, size, histology, and morphology were significantly higher than those of WL., Conclusions: LCI improved the various featured polyp's visibility compared to WL in both polyp visibility scores and CD value.

Background and Aims: Endoscopist fatigue may impact colonoscopy quality, but prior studies conflict, and minimal data exist from community-based practices where most colonoscopies are performed., Methods: Within a large, community-based integrated healthcare system, we evaluated the associations among 4 measures of endoscopist fatigue and colonoscopic adenoma detection from 2010 to 2013. Fatigue measures included afternoon versus morning colonoscopy and the number of GI procedures performed before a given colonoscopy, including consideration of prior procedure complexity. Analyses were adjusted for potential confounders using multivariate logistic regression., Results: We identified 126 gastroenterologists who performed 259,064 total GI procedures (median, 6 per day; range, 1-24), including 76,445 screening and surveillance colonoscopies. Compared with morning examinations, colonoscopies in the afternoon were not associated with lower adenoma detection for screening examinations, surveillance examinations, or their combination (OR for combination, .99; 95% CI, .96-1.03). The number of procedures performed before a given colonoscopy, with or without consideration of prior procedure complexity, was also not inversely associated with adenoma detection (OR for adenoma detection for colonoscopies in the fourth quartile of fatigue based on the number of prior procedures performed vs colonoscopies performed as the first procedure of the day, .99; 95% CI, .94-1.04)., Conclusions: In a large community-based setting, adenoma detection for screening and surveillance colonoscopies were not associated with either time of day or the number of prior procedures performed by the endoscopist, within the range of procedure volumes evaluated. The lack of association persisted after accounting for prior procedure complexity., (Copyright © 2017 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: Non-neoplastic polypectomies (NNPs) add pathology and procedural costs but do not reduce cancer risk and should be minimized. We sought to define the minimal non-neoplastic polypectomy rate (NNPR) for those colonoscopists achieving high-quality colorectal cancer screening based on adenoma detection rates (ADRs)., Methods: NNPRs for colonoscopists achieving high-quality adenoma detection rates were reported to determine minimal NNPR goals. Two approaches to tracking NNPR monitoring were compared: (1) total NNPR, an NNPR inclusive of all non-neoplastic specimens with exclusion of only hyperplastic polyp, sessile serrated polyp, and adenoma; and (2) normal tissue-only NNPR, an NNPR inclusive of those specimens with only normal colonic mucosa or lymphoid follicles., Results: For those performing colonoscopy with high-quality ADRs (≥25%), half (6/12) of the colonoscopists had a total NNPR of ≤8.5% and 2 gastroenterologists had a total NNPR of ≤3.4%. The mean total NNPR of the cohort was 8.7% versus the normal tissue only NNPR, which was 7.5% (mean difference of 1.2%, standard deviation ± 0.97). The widest variation between total NNPR versus normal tissue only NNPR for any colonoscopist was 2.9%. The total NNPR ranged between 2.6% and 21.3% among 14 colonoscopists., Conclusions: Colonoscopy with a high-quality ADR can be achieved while maintaining a low total NNPR. A total NNPR, inclusive of all non-neoplastic specimens as an alternative to an approach in which all specimens require individual review in order to select out only normal tissue can be considered for monitoring of NNPR., (Copyright © 2017 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Lynch syndrome is an autosomal-dominant hereditary cancer syndrome. Mutations in mismatch repair genes, including MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and PMS2, are implicated in the pathogenesis of the syndrome through microsatellite instability (MSI) and a rapid adenoma-carcinoma sequence. The primary methodologies for diagnosis include clinical criteria (Amsterdam I/II, Revised Bethesda Guidelines), computational models, and genetic testing (MSI, immunohistochemistry, germline testing). Universal genetic testing of colorectal cancers has gained popularity as a method to identify high-risk individuals and to offer appropriate cancer surveillance, psychological reassurance, and family planning. Management includes short-interval surveillance with colonoscopy in those without colorectal cancer and colectomy for those with cancer. Long-term chemoprevention with aspirin may improve mortality.

Background and Objective: Considerable variation in adenoma detection has been shown between endoscopists, which may be explained by differences in colon inspection. Eye-tracking technology is an objective tool that detects differences in viewing patterns. We investigated the feasibility of eye-tracking technology during real-time, self-performed colonoscopies., Methods: In this pilot study, 10 endoscopists performed two colonoscopies each. A mobile eye-tracking system to register the right eye position was used to determine the gaze across four areas of interest of the endoscopy monitor (upper, lower, left, and right quadrant). The measured gaze across the endoscopy monitor was correlated with the gaze across the endoscopically visualized colonic surface., Results: Gaze patterns were measured successfully in 18 of 20 procedures. Significant differences in the time spent per area of interest were observed between endoscopists. The measured total gaze time per area of interest correlated strongly with the time spent on the corresponding area of the colonic surface (Pearson correlation coefficients ranging between 0.91 and 0.97). Endoscopists with more years of colonoscopy experience showed significantly higher percentages of overlap between the measured gaze position in the different areas of interest and the actual inspected area of the colonic surface (r=0.65, P=0.02). More experienced endoscopists had nonsignificantly longer mean gaze times per area of interest (r=0.52, P=0.06)., Conclusion: Eye-tracking technology to measure gaze patterns of endoscopists during real-time, self-performed colonoscopies is feasible and may be used to evaluate and compare viewing behavior across the colonic surface of experienced endoscopists.

Background and Aims: To minimize delays for colonoscopy within Veterans Affairs (VA) facilities, veterans may receive care at non-VA facilities based on fee-for-service contracts, and more recently, through the Veterans Access, Choice, and Accountability Act. The impact of diverting care from VA to non-VA facilities on quality of colonoscopy practice is unknown., Methods: We identified all veterans aged 50 to 85 years who received a fee-basis colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening or surveillance at non-VA facilities in 2007 to 2010. These patients were matched for sex, age, and year of procedure to veterans who underwent colonoscopies at VA medical centers. The outcomes of interest were the adenoma detection rates (ADR) and compliance with surveillance guidelines., Results: During the observation period, 409 veterans (mean age 64 years; 94% men) underwent a fee-basis colonoscopy at 30 nonacademic (54%) and 2 academic (46%) facilities. Compared with colonoscopies performed at VA facilities, fee-basis colonoscopy patients had lower ADRs (38% vs 52%; P < .001), lower mean number of adenomas per procedure (0.72 vs 1.41; P < .001), and lower number of advanced ADRs (13% vs 22%; P < .001). Colonoscopies done at non-VA facilities were associated with lower ADRs in multivariate regression analysis (odds ratio 0.64; 95% CI, 0.44-0.92), whereas colonoscopies done in nonacademic settings or by colonoscopists who were not gastroenterologists were not. Compliance with surveillance guidelines was lower for colonoscopies performed outside VA facilities (80% vs 87%; P = .03)., Conclusions: In this regional study (Northern New England), compliance with colonoscopy surveillance guidelines was high in both VA and non-VA settings; however, lower ADRs raise concern that referring veterans outside the VA system may impact colonoscopy quality., (Copyright © 2016 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. All rights reserved.)

Background: Studies have suggested a diagnostic role for faecal calprotectin (FC) in patients with gastroenterological disorders., Aim: To investigate Australian gastroenterologists' (GE) views on FC use and to elicit factors that affect physicians' choices., Methods: Electronic surveys were sent out to 405 consultants and 34 registrars in Australia. Respondents who answered <50% of the survey were excluded., Results: In all, 140 participants provided a >50% response; 73% reported using FC in their clinical practice. Factors cited by non-users in restricting their FC use included cost (24%), availability (47%) and familiarity (18%). Even among users, 69% cited funding as a major deciding factor; 98 and 86% of FC users believed that the test is a reliable method of differentiating between inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and assessing for mucosal healing in IBD respectively. Of non-users, 78 and 58%, respectively, would use FC to differentiate IBD from IBS and assess for mucosal healing in IBD, if FC testing was Medical Benefits Schedule (MBS) listed. Both users (79%) and non-users (68%) reported that use of FC to defer or avoid colonoscopies was likely if the test was MBS funded., Conclusion: Australian GE endorse the use of FC to discriminate between IBD and IBS, to check for mucosal healing in IBD and to reduce colonoscopy rates. Absence of MBS funding is an important factor contributing to the lack of usage of FC, in addition to the lack of familiarity with FC testing and availability., (© 2016 Royal Australasian College of Physicians.)

Background and Aims: Interventions to improve physician adenoma detection rates for colonoscopy have generally not been successful, and there are little data on the factors contributing to variation that may be appropriate targets for intervention. We sought to identify factors that may influence variation in detection rates by using theory-based tools for understanding behavior., Methods: We separately studied gastroenterologists and endoscopy nurses at 3 Kaiser Permanente Northern California medical centers to identify potentially modifiable factors relevant to physician adenoma detection rate variability by using structured group interviews (focus groups) and theory-based tools for understanding behavior and eliciting behavior change: the Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation behavior model; the Theoretical Domains Framework; and the Behavior Change Wheel., Results: Nine factors potentially associated with adenoma detection rate variability were identified, including 6 related to capability (uncertainty about which types of polyps to remove, style of endoscopy team leadership, compromised ability to focus during an examination due to distractions, examination technique during withdrawal, difficulty detecting certain types of adenomas, and examiner fatigue and pain), 2 related to opportunity (perceived pressure due to the number of examinations expected per shift and social pressure to finish examinations before scheduled breaks or the end of a shift), and 1 related to motivation (valuing a meticulous examination as the top priority). Examples of potential intervention strategies are provided., Conclusions: By using theory-based tools, this study identified several novel and potentially modifiable factors relating to capability, opportunity, and motivation that may contribute to adenoma detection rate variability and be appropriate targets for future intervention trials., (Copyright © 2016 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: In the United States, little is known about the rates of interval upper gastrointestinal (GI) cancer (possibly missed out) after an esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is performed. Data from non-US studies reported interval cancer rates of 7-26%. We aimed to study the rate and predictors of interval upper GI cancers in the United States., Methods: Using the random 5% sample of Medicare beneficiaries in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare linked database, we identified patients diagnosed with esophageal or gastric cancer during 2000-2007. EGD performed within 36 months prior to cancer diagnosis was identified using CPT codes. Cancers diagnosed 6-36 months after EGD were defined as interval (vs. detected) cancers. The chi-square test and the multivariate logistic model were used in statistical analysis., Results: Of 751 patients diagnosed with upper GI cancer, 52 patients (6.9%) were diagnosed with interval cancers 6-36 months after EGD. The rate of interval cancers was 5.5% (31/568) for gastroenterologists and 11.5% (21/183) for non-gastroenterologists (p < 0.01). In multivariate logistic regression, EGDs performed by gastroenterologists (vs. non-gastroenterologists: OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.25-0.83) and those in inpatient setting (vs. outpatient: OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.28-0.997) were associated with a lower likelihood of interval cancers. Sensitivity analyses limited to outpatient EGDs or interval cancers 6-30 months after EGDs led to similar results., Conclusions: The rate of interval cancers after EGD is the same as the rate of colonoscopy among Medicare patients in the United States. EGDs performed by gastroenterologists and in in-patient settings were associated with a lesser likelihood of interval cancers., (© 2016 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Colonoscopy is an important endoscopic examination for the diagnosis and treatment of pathological conditions of the colon, like polyps and colorectal cancer. However, several factors determine the quality of colonoscopy and thus the quality of polyp and colorectal cancer detection. The Flemish Society of Gastroenterology (VVGE) performed a voluntary on-line registry among its members to identify quality of colonoscopy in Flanders, Belgium. 64 gastroenterologists voluntarily registered 4276 consecutive colonoscopies performed during a 3 month study period. Colonoscopy quality indicators were prospectively collected and analysed. Results showed a low voluntary participation rate (17%), acceptable overall adenoma detection rate of 20,5% and colorectal cancer interval rate of 5,4%. Complications were low (perforation 0,1% and major bleeding 1,5%). The current study showed that in Flanders, Belgium on-line registration of colonoscopy quality indicators is feasible and that quality of colonoscopy in daily practice meets the expectations of (inter)national guidelines. However, further improvement of the registry and an open debate on the quality control of colonoscopy in Flanders is warranted (Belgian Registry B30020096548)., (Copyright© Acta Gastro-Enterologica Belgica.)

Treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors is effective in various cancers, but may be associated with immune-mediated side effects in other organs. Among the more common ones is gastrointestinal tract involvement, especially colitis. In most patients, colitis is mild or responds to corticosteroid treatment. A smaller proportion of patients, more often those treated with cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4 inhibitors, may have a more severe course of colitis, even life-threatening complications. In these patients, prompt action, timely diagnosis with endoscopic evaluation and early treatment with high-dose corticosteroids and, if ineffective, rescue therapy with biologic agents such as infliximab and vedolizumab are needed. We present three cases from our clinical practice, data on incidence and clinical presentation, current recommendations regarding diagnostic approach and treatment of immune checkpoint inhibitors induced colitis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

INTRODUCTION: Anorectal function testing is traditionally relegated to subspecialty centers. Yet, it is an office-based procedure that appears capable of triaging care for the many patients with Rome IV functional constipation that fail empiric over-the-counter therapy in general gastroenterology, as an alternative to empirical prescription drugs. We aimed to evaluate cost-effectiveness of routine anorectal function testing in this specific population. METHODS: We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis from the patient perspective and a cost-minimization analysis from the insurer perspective to compare 3 strategies: (i) empiric prescription drugs followed by pelvic floor physical therapy (PFPT) for drug failure, (ii) empiric PFPT followed by prescription drugs for PFPT failure, or (iii) care directed by up-front anorectal function testing. Model inputs were derived from systematic reviews of prospective clinical trials, national cost data sets, and observational cohort studies of the impact of chronic constipation on health outcomes, healthcare costs, and work productivity. RESULTS: The most cost-effective strategy was upfront anorectal function testing to triage patients to appropriate therapy, in which the subset of patients without anal hypocontractility on anorectal manometry and with a balloon expulsion time of at least 6.5 seconds would be referred to PFPT. In sensitivity analysis, empiric PFPT was more cost effective than empiric prescription drugs except for situations in which the primary goal of treatment was to increase bowel movement frequency. If adopted, gastroenterologists would refer ~17 patients per year to PFPT, supporting feasibility. DISCUSSION: Anorectal function testing seems to be an emergent technology to optimize cost-effective outcomes, overcoming testing costs by phenotyping care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Polyps are well-known cancer precursors identified by colonoscopy. However, variability in their size, appearance, and location makes the detection of polyps challenging. Moreover, colonoscopy surveillance and removal of polyps are highly operator-dependent procedures and occur in a highly complex organ topology. There exists a high missed detection rate and incomplete removal of colonic polyps. To assist in clinical procedures and reduce missed rates, automated methods for detecting and segmenting polyps using machine learning have been achieved in past years. However, the major drawback in most of these methods is their ability to generalise to out-of-sample unseen datasets from different centres, populations, modalities, and acquisition systems. To test this hypothesis rigorously, we, together with expert gastroenterologists, curated a multi-centre and multi-population dataset acquired from six different colonoscopy systems and challenged the computational expert teams to develop robust automated detection and segmentation methods in a crowd-sourcing Endoscopic computer vision challenge. This work put forward rigorous generalisability tests and assesses the usability of devised deep learning methods in dynamic and actual clinical colonoscopy procedures. We analyse the results of four top performing teams for the detection task and five top performing teams for the segmentation task. Our analyses demonstrate that the top-ranking teams concentrated mainly on accuracy over the real-time performance required for clinical applicability. We further dissect the devised methods and provide an experiment-based hypothesis that reveals the need for improved generalisability to tackle diversity present in multi-centre datasets and routine clinical procedures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study aimed to analyze the correlation between different attributes of doctors who prescribe colonoscopies and the cleanliness of the intestine to guide the development of colonoscopy application protocols. Data on colonoscopy cases conducted in the gastroenterology department of Hangzhou First People's Hospital between April 2018 and March 2021 were collected. The gender, age, professional attributes of the prescribing doctors, and Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) score were recorded. In addition, the correlation between the prescribing doctors' characteristics and the intestine's cleanliness was analyzed. The study included 22,522 patients with a mean BBPS score of 6.83 ± 1.94. There were 16,459 male and 6,063 female doctors with similar BBPS scores (p = 0.212). The study found no significant difference in BBPS scores between 19,338 internist and 3,184 non-internist (p = 0.154). However, BBPS scores differed significantly between 18,168 gastroenterologists and 4,354 non-gastroenterologists (p = 0.016) and between 19,990 intestinal-related specialties(gastroenterology and gastrointestinal surgery) and 2,532 non-intestinal-related specialties (p = 0.000). In addition, BBPS scores were significantly different between 18,126 prescribing endoscopiests and 4,396 non-endoscopiests (p = 0.014). However, there was no significant difference in BBPS scores among doctors of different ages (p = 0.190). The study found significant differences in BBPS scores between male and female patients and those under or over 40 years (p = 0.000). To improve colonoscopy preparation quality, priority should be given to doctors in gastroenterology, intestinal-related specialties, and endoscopiests. Their expertise may result in better education and improved bowel cleanliness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, elective colonoscopies were postponed in Ohio from 3/17/2020 to 5/1/2020. When the ban was lifted, canceled patients determined whether to reschedule their colonoscopy in the midst of the ongoing pandemic. Aims: We aim to determine whether demographic, colorectal cancer (CRC) risk, and COVID-19 morbidity and mortality risk factors are associated with rescheduling of colonoscopies canceled by the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: A medical record review of 420 participants ages 40–74 at a midwestern academic health system with elective colonoscopies canceled from 3/17/2020 to 5/1/2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic was performed. Results: More than half of participants (71.0%) rescheduled their colonoscopy within the next 8 months. Indication for colonoscopy being 'surveillance following adenoma', colonoscopy ordered by primary care provider rather than gastroenterologist, and dyslipidemia were independently associated with rescheduling colonoscopy. Higher body mass index, indication for colonoscopy being simply 'screening for CRC,' and stool testing were associated with not rescheduling. Diagnoses associated with colorectal cancer risk such as adenomas, personal or family history of colorectal cancer, and inflammatory bowel disease were not associated with rescheduling, nor were other comorbidities associated with increased COVID-19 severity. 4.5% (19/420) opted for stool fecal immunochemical test or Cologuard testing. Conclusions: Most patients rescheduled their colonoscopy despite the risk of virus exposure, suggesting that concern of missed colorectal cancer diagnosis outweighed coronavirus concerns. Patient trust in referring providers may be important for rescheduling, and colonoscopy indications were independently associated with rescheduling status. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims. Intestinal ultrasound (IUS) is considered a nonirradiating, noninvasive, well-tolerated, and valuable tool for objectively assessing Crohn's disease (CD) activity. However, there is no widely accepted intestinal ultrasound scoring system. This study is aimed at evaluating the efficacy of IUS key parameters, the International Bowel Ultrasound Activity Score (IBUS-SAS), and IBUS-SAS combined with blood inflammatory markers in assessing CD activity. Methods. 40 CD patients were reviewed in this retrospective study and were divided into the moderate-severe group (n = 25) and nonmoderate-severe group (n = 15) based on a simplified endoscopic score of Crohn's disease (SES-CD). Double-balloon enteroscopy/colonoscopy were reviewed by three gastroenterologists. A transabdominal ultrasound was performed by two ultrasound specialists. Blood inflammatory markers were measured from morning samples. Results. In evaluating moderate to severe CD patients, (1) IBUS-SAS had a good predictive effect with an area-under-the-curve (AUC) of 0.855 (P < 0.001); (2) IUS key parameters (including BWT, CDS, BWS, and I-fat) yielded good predictive effects with AUC of 0.811, 0.731, 0.724, and 0.747, respectively (P < 0.001); (3) blood inflammatory markers (including ESR, CRP, PLR, MLR, and NLR) also had good predictive effects with AUC of 0.771, 0.837, 0.728, 0.743, and 0.775, respectively (P < 0.001); (4) IBUS-SAS combined with ESR and CRP exerted the best predictive effect with the highest AUC of 0.912 (95% CI: 0.823-1.000), and the sensitivity and specificity were 88.0% and 80.0%, respectively (P < 0.001). Conclusion. IBUS-SAS combined with ESR and CRP is a more efficient tool than IBUS-SAS alone or inflammatory markers alone in evaluating CD patients with moderate to severe disease activity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Little is known about patient or provider experience and perceptions of stopping surveillance among older adults with a history of colon polyps. While guidelines recommend ceasing routine colorectal cancer screening in adults > 75 years and those with limited life expectancy, guidance for ceasing surveillance colonoscopy in those with prior colon polyps suggests individualizing recommendations. Objective: Identify processes, experiences, and gaps around individualizing decisions to stop or continue surveillance colonoscopy for older adults and areas for improvement. Design: Phenomenological qualitative study design using recorded semi-structured interviews from May 2020 through March 2021. Participants: 15 patients aged ≥ 65 in polyp surveillance, 12 primary care providers (PCPs), and 13 gastroenterologists (GIs). Approach: Data were analyzed using a mixed deductive (directed content analysis) and inductive (grounded theory) approach to identify themes related to stopping or continuing surveillance colonoscopies. Key Results: Analysis resulted in 24 themes and were clustered into three main categories: health and clinical considerations; communication and roles; and system-level processes or structures. Overall, the study found support for discussions around age 75–80 on stopping surveillance colonoscopy with considerations for health and life expectancy and that PCPs should take a primary role. However, systems and processes for scheduling surveillance colonoscopies largely bypass PCPs which reduces opportunities to both individualize recommendations and facilitate patients' decision-making. Conclusions: This study identified gaps in processes to implement current guidelines for individualizing surveillance colonoscopy as adults grow older, including opportunities to discuss stopping. Increasing the role of PCPs in polyp surveillance as patients grow older provides more opportunities for individualized recommendations, so patients can consider their own preferences, ask questions, and make a more informed choice for themselves. Changing existing systems and processes and creating supportive tools for shared decision-making specific to older adults with polyps would improve how surveillance colonoscopy is individualized in this population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The risk of colorectal cancer occurring during surveillance colonoscopies in carriers of pathogenic variants in mismatch repair genes has attracted much attention. 36964717 6 Ahadova A, Seppälä TT, Engel C, Gallon R. The "unnatural" history of colorectal cancer in Lynch syndrome: Lessons from colonoscopy surveillance. Even many macroscopic MSI-H cancers diagnosed through annual colonoscopies may have been so deleted if a three-year window were implemented, meaning potentially it is not the careful colonoscopy with advanced detection techniques (high definition, narrow band imaging) but our clever immune systems that mostly have done the trick. [Extracted from the article]

Introduction: Endoscopic procedures place a great deal of muscular strain on providers, especially over the span of their careers. In this study we quantitatively analyzed the effects of patient factors such as age, body mass index, and sex on the ergonomics of endoscopists performing colonoscopies. Methods: Surface electromyography (sEMG) was used to measure ergonomic strain of physicians while performing colonoscopies in several key muscle groups. The percent of the maximum voluntary contraction (%MVC) was used as a measure of muscular strain. Data was then analyzed based on the patient characteristics above. Results: Endoscopists performing colonoscopies on female patients (n = 47) experienced significantly higher ergonomic strain in their right trapezius and right posterior forearm muscle groups when compared to colonoscopies performed on males (n = 35) (%MVC R-trapezius: Male: 8.2; Female: 8.9; p = 0.048); (%MVC R-posterior forearm: Male: 10.4; Female: 11.6; p = 0.0006). Operators experienced greater strain in the same muscle groups when performing colonoscopies on patients with BMI ≤ 25 (n = 25) when compared to patients with BMI > 25 (n = 57) (%MVC R-trapezius: BMI < 25: 9.7; BMI ≥ 25: 8.2; p = 0.0002); (%MVC R-posterior forearm: BMI < 25: 11.9; BMI ≥ 25: 10.8; p = 0.0001). Conclusion: Physicians experienced greater ergonomic strain when performing colonoscopies on female patients and on patients with a BMI < 25. We believe that these factors potentially impact the tortuosity of the colon and therefore influence the difficulty of navigating the endoscope. These results may aid physicians in gauging the anticipated difficulty of colonoscopies based on patient factors. Increased awareness of their posturing and ergonomics during challenging cases will alleviate musculoskeletal injuries in the long run. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVES:The effectiveness of fecal immunochemical test (FIT) screening for colorectal cancer depends on timely colonoscopy follow-up of positive tests, although limited data exist regarding effective system-level strategies for improving follow-up rates. METHODS:Using a mixed-methods design (qualitative and quantitative), we first identified system-level strategies that were implemented for improving timely follow-up after a positive FIT test in a large community-based setting between 2006 and 2016. We then evaluated changes in time to colonoscopy among FIT-positive patients across 3 periods during the study interval, controlling for screening participant age, sex, race/ethnicity, comorbidity, FIT date, and previous screening history. RESULTS:Implemented strategies over the study period included setting a goal of colonoscopy follow-up within 30 days of a positive FIT, tracking FIT-positive patients, early telephone contact to directly schedule follow-up colonoscopies, assigning the responsibility for follow-up tracking and scheduling to gastroenterology departments (vs primary care), and increasing colonoscopy capacity. Among 160,051 patients who had a positive FIT between 2006 and 2016, 126,420 (79%) had a follow-up colonoscopy within 180 days, including 67% in 2006-2008, 79% in 2009-2012, and 83% in 2013-2016 (P < 0.001). Follow-up within 180 days in 2016 varied moderately across service areas, between 72% (95% CI 70-75) and 88% (95% CI 86-91), but there were no obvious differences in the pattern of strategies implemented in higher- vs lower-performing service areas. CONCLUSIONS:The implementation of system-level strategies coincided with substantial improvements in timely colonoscopy follow-up after a positive FIT. Intervention studies are needed to identify the most effective strategies for promoting timely follow-up.

A study published in the journal Endoscopy explores the feasibility of a nurse-run training course for junior surgeons and gastroenterologists in Denmark. The course, led by experienced nurse endoscopists, consisted of 10 days of training, including simulation exercises and observation of nurse endoscopists performing colonoscopies. Trainees were taught colonoscope retraction and insertion techniques, as well as pathology and patient education. Evaluation of participants was conducted using standardized assessment tools, and preliminary results indicated that participants were enthusiastic about the training and found it beneficial. The study suggests that nurse-endoscopist-facilitated training programs can provide an efficient learning opportunity for junior doctors. [Extracted from the article]

Background and Aims: Performing colonoscopy can be technically challenging in female patients. Female patients may prefer having a female endoscopist. This preference, coupled with the fact that there are fewer female endoscopists, may result in gender differences in colonoscopy practice. We hypothesized that the duration of female colonoscopy is longer and that female endoscopists perform a higher proportion of female colonoscopy than male colleagues. We explored the potential revenue implications of gender differences in screening colonoscopy. Methods: We analyzed procedure time and gender differences in 16,573 screening colonoscopies performed by 27 male and 7 female endoscopists over a three-year period in one large academic practice. We modeled the potential revenue impacts of differences in procedure duration, proportion of female colonoscopy and the frequency of detected adenomas. Results: We found that screening colonoscopy takes 8.8% more time to complete in female patients compared to male patients for all endoscopists (p < 0.001), and that female endoscopists perform an average of 71.2% female exams compared to male endoscopists, who perform an average of 50.8% female exams (p < 0.001). Female patients had a lower detection adenoma rate (ADR), reducing the frequency of polypectomy and reimbursement in an RVU model. The observed gender differences could account for an estimated 9.6% revenue loss per 8-h session for a female gastroenterologist performing screening colonoscopy compared to a male counterpart. Conclusion: Longer colonoscopy duration in females, increased proportion of female colonoscopies for female endoscopists and lower ADR in females may contribute to the gender gap in physician pay in gastroenterology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Many interventions have been attempted to improve adenoma detection rate (ADR) and sessile serrated lesion detection rate (SDR), and one of these interventions is educational training to recognize polyp characteristics. This study aimed to investigate the change in polyp detection rates of endoscopists before and after comprehensive training through the Gangnam‐Real Time Optical Diagnosis (Gangnam‐READI) program. Methods: Fifteen gastroenterologists participated in a 1‐year comprehensive training program that consisted of ex vivo and in vivo training that encompasses knowledge and skills in endoscopic characterization of colonic polyps using the Workgroup serrAted polypS and Polyposis (WASP) classification. We evaluated the impact of the training program by comparing the overall and individual ADR and SDR 6 months before and after the training. Results: Overall, 18,280 polyps (9337 adenomas and 855 sessile serrated lesion) were collected. The optical diagnosis training had no significant impact on the difference in ADR after training compared to before training (47.7% vs. 46.5%, P = 0.608). A tendency for a decrease in ADR variance was noted among the endoscopists after training (74.9 vs. 32.7, P = 0.121). The overall pre‐training period SDR was 4.5% and showed a statistically significant increase to 5.6%, 8.0%, and 7.1% in the first and second half of the training period, and post‐training period, respectively (P = 0.003). The optical diagnosis training did not decrease variance in SDR (8.9 vs. 8.8, P = 0.985). Conclusion: Comprehensive optical diagnosis training with WASP classification has a significant impact on increasing the overall SDR of expert endoscopists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Clinically significant serrated polyp detection rate (CSSDR) and proximal serrated polyp detection rate (PSDR) have been suggested as the potential quality benchmarks for colonoscopy (CSSDR = 7% and PSDR = 11%) in comparison to the established benchmark adenoma detection rate (ADR). Another emerging milestone is the detection rate of lateral spreading lesions (LSLs). Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate CSSDR, PSDR, ADR, and LSL detection rates among gastrointestinal (GI) fellows performing a colonoscopy. A secondary aim was to evaluate patient factors associated with the detection rates of these lesions. Design and Methods: A retrospective review of 799 colonoscopy reports was performed. GI fellow details, demographic data, and pathology found on colonoscopy were collected. Multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the factors associated with CSSDR, PSDR, ADR, and LSL detection rates. A p value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: For our patient population, the median age was 58 years; 396 (49.8%) were male and 386 (48.6%) were African American. The 15 GI fellows ranged from first (F1), second (F2), or third (F3) year of training. We found an overall CSSDR of 4.4%, PSDR of 10.5%, ADR of 42.1%, and LSL detection rate of 3.2%. Female gender was associated with CSSDR, while only age was associated with PSDR. GI fellow level of training was associated with LSL detection rate, with the odds of detecting them expected to be four times higher in F2/F3s than F1s. Conclusion: Although GI fellows demonstrated an above-recommended ADR and nearly reached target PSDR, they failed to achieve target CSSDR. Future studies investigating a benchmark for LSL detection rate are needed to quantify if GI fellows are detecting these lesions at adequate rates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Main recommendations: 1. ESGE/ESGAR recommend computed tomographic colonography (CTC) as the radiological examination of choice for the diagnosis of colorectal neoplasia. Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. ESGE/ESGAR do not recommend barium enema in this setting. Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 2. ESGE/ESGAR recommend CTC, preferably the same or next day, if colonoscopy is incomplete. The timing depends on an interdisciplinary decision including endoscopic and radiological factors. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. ESGE/ESGAR suggests that, in centers with expertise in and availability of colon capsule endoscopy (CCE), CCE preferably the same or the next day may be considered if colonoscopy is incomplete. Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 3. When colonoscopy is contraindicated or not possible, ESGE/ESGAR recommend CTC as an acceptable and equally sensitive alternative for patients with alarm symptoms. Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. Because of lack of direct evidence, ESGE/ESGAR do not recommend CCE in this situation. Very low quality evidence. ESGE/ESGAR recommend CTC as an acceptable alternative to colonoscopy for patients with non-alarm symptoms. Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. In centers with availability, ESGE/ESGAR suggests that CCE may be considered in patients with non-alarm symptoms. Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 4. Where there is no organized fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based population colorectal screening program, ESGE/ESGAR recommend CTC as an option for colorectal cancer screening, providing the screenee is adequately informed about test characteristics, benefits, and risks, and depending on local service- and patient-related factors. Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. ESGE/ESGAR do not suggest CCE as a first-line screening test for colorectal cancer. Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 5. ESGE/ESGAR recommend CTC in the case of a positive fecal occult blood test (FOBT) or FIT with incomplete or unfeasible colonoscopy, within organized population screening programs. Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. ESGE/ESGAR also suggest the use of CCE in this setting based on availability. Weak recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 6. ESGE/ESGAR suggest CTC with intravenous contrast medium injection for surveillance after curative-intent resection of colorectal cancer only in patients in whom colonoscopy is contraindicated or unfeasible. Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. There is insufficient evidence to recommend CCE in this setting. Very low quality evidence. 7. ESGE/ESGAR suggest CTC in patients with high risk polyps undergoing surveillance after polypectomy only when colonoscopy is unfeasible. Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. There is insufficient evidence to recommend CCE in post-polypectomy surveillance. Very low quality evidence. 8. ESGE/ESGAR recommend against CTC in patients with acute colonic inflammation and in those who have recently undergone colorectal surgery, pending a multidisciplinary evaluation. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 9. ESGE/ESGAR recommend referral for endoscopic polypectomy in patients with at least one polyp ≥6 mm detected at CTC or CCE. Follow-up CTC may be clinically considered for 6–9-mm CTC-detected lesions if patients do not undergo polypectomy because of patient choice, comorbidity, and/or low risk profile for advanced neoplasia. Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. Source and scope This is an update of the 2014–15 Guideline of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and the European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR). It addresses the clinical indications for the use of imaging alternatives to standard colonoscopy. A targeted literature search was performed to evaluate the evidence supporting the use of computed tomographic colonography (CTC) or colon capsule endoscopy (CCE). The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system was adopted to define the strength of recommendations and the quality of evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Inpatient colonoscopy bowel preparation (ICBP) is frequently inadequate and can lead to adverse events, delayed or repeated procedures, and negative patient outcomes. Guidelines to overcome the complex factors in this setting are not well established. Our aims were to use health systems engineering principles to comprehensively evaluate the ICBP process, create an ICBP protocol, increase adequate ICBP, and decrease length of stay. Our goal was to provide adaptable tools for other institutions and procedural specialties.Methods: Patients admitted to our tertiary care academic hospital that underwent inpatient colonoscopy between July 3, 2017 to June 8, 2018 were included. Our multi-disciplinary team created a protocol employing health systems engineering techniques (i.e., process mapping, cause-effect diagrams, and plan-do-study-act cycles). We collected demographic and colonoscopy data. Our outcome measures were adequate preparation and length of stay. We compared pre-intervention (120 ICBP) vs. post-intervention (129 ICBP) outcomes using generalized linear regression models. Our new ICBP protocol included: split-dose 6-L polyethylene glycol-electrolyte solution, a gastroenterology electronic note template, and an education plan for patients, nurses, and physicians.Results: The percent of adequate ICBPs significantly increased with the intervention from 61% pre-intervention to 74% post-intervention (adjusted odds ratio of 1.87, p value = 0.023). The median length of stay decreased by approximately 25%, from 4 days pre-intervention to 3 days post-intervention (p value  = 0.11).Conclusions: By addressing issues at patient, provider, and system levels with health systems engineering principles, we addressed patient safety and quality of care provided by improving rates of adequate ICBP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Colorectal cancer leads to significant morbidity and mortality. Early detection and treatment are essential. Screening using fecal occult blood tests has increased significantly, but adherence to colonoscopy follow-up is suboptimal, increasing CRC mortality risk. The aim of this study was to identify barriers to colonoscopy following a positive FOBT at the level of the patient, physician, organization and policymakers. Methods: This mixed methods study was conducted at two health care organizations in Israel. The study included retrospective analyses of 45,281 50–74 year-old members with positive fecal immunochemical tests from 2010 to 2014, and a survey of 772 patients with a positive test during 2015, with and without follow-up. The qualitative part of the study included focus groups with primary physicians and gastroenterologists and in-depth interviews with opinion leaders in healthcare. Results: Patient lack of comprehension regarding the test was the strongest predictor of non-adherence to follow-up. Older age, Arab ethnicity, and lower socio economic status significantly reduced adherence. We found no correlation with gender, marital status, patient activation, waiting time for appointments or distance from gastroenterology clinics. Primary care physicians underestimate non-adherence rates. They feel responsible for patient follow-up, but express lack of time and skills that will allow them to ensure adherence among their patients. Gastroenterologists do not consider fecal occult blood an effective tool for CRC detection, and believe that all patients should undergo colonoscopy. Opinion leaders in the healthcare field do not prioritize the issue of follow-up after a positive screening test for colorectal cancer, although they understand the importance. Conclusions: We identified important barriers that need to be addressed to improve the effectiveness of the screening program. Targeted interventions for populations at risk for non-adherence, specifically for those with low literacy levels, and better explanation of the need for follow-up as a routine need to be set in place. Lack of agreement between screening recommendations and gastroenterologist opinion, and lack of awareness among healthcare authority figures negatively impact the screening program need to be addressed at the organizational and national level. Trial registration: This study was approved by the IRB in both participating organizations (Meuhedet Health Care Institutional Review Board #02–2–5-15, Maccabi Healthcare Institutional Review Board BBI-0025-16). Participant consent was waived by both IRB's. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To better determine the relationship between spatial access to colonoscopy and colorectal cancer (CRC) outcomes, our objective was to examine the agreement of the classic, enhanced, and variable two‐step floating catchment area (2SFCA) methods in evaluating spatial access to colonoscopy and to compare the predictive validity of each method related to late‐stage CRC. 2SFCA methods simultaneously consider supply/demand of services and impedance (ie, travel time). Data Sources: Colonoscopy provider locations were obtained from the South Carolina Ambulatory Surgery Database. ZIP code tabulation area (ZCTA) level population estimates and area‐level poverty level were obtained from the American Community Survey. Rurality was determined by the United States Department of Agriculture's Rural‐Urban Commuting Area codes. Individual‐level CRC data were obtained from the South Carolina Central Cancer Registry. Study Design: Using the classic, enhanced, and variable 2SFCA methods, we calculated ZCTA‐level spatial access to colonoscopy. We assessed agreement between the three methods by calculating Spearman's rank coefficients and weighted Kappas (Κ). Global and Local Moran's I were used to assess spatial clustering of accessibility scores across 2SFCA methods. We performed multilevel logistic regression analyses to examine the association between spatial accessibility to colonoscopy, area‐ and individual‐level factors, and late‐stage CRC. Principal Findings: We found strong agreement (Weighted Κ = 0.82; 95% CI = 0.79‐0.86) and identified similar clustering patterns with the classic and enhanced 2SFCA methods. There was negligible agreement among the classic/enhanced 2SFCA and the variable 2SFCA. Across all 2SFCA methods, regression models showed that spatial access to colonoscopy, rurality, and poverty level were not associated with greater odds of late‐stage CRC, though Black race was associated with late‐stage CRC across all models. Conclusions: None of the 2SFCA methods showed an association with late‐stage CRC. Future studies should explore which elements (spatial or nonspatial) of access to care have the greatest impact on CRC outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of screening colonoscopy is to reduce the burden of colorectal cancer (CRC), one of the most common causes of cancer-related death in the world. They hypothesized that the duration of a typical colonoscopy in a female patient is longer and that female endoscopists are more likely to perform colonoscopies on females than their male colleagues. Prioritizing a financial compensation model governing colonoscopies that adjusts for providers managing female patients could have unpredicted and unwanted consequences such as adding unnecessary colonoscopies in women and disincentivizing male colonoscopies, while the latter group is at higher risk for developing CRC. [Extracted from the article]

Introduction  There is a lack of data and consensus about the practices and policies regarding performing colonoscopy in India. We surveyed gastroenterologists to assess their practices and policies of performing colonoscopy. Methodology  A questionnaire was presented to gastroenterologists all over India regarding their preference of bowel preparation and method of sedation, completeness of cecal and ileal intubation rates, preferences for inflation, use of carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide, and complications faced. Results  Of the 350 surveys, 307 had completely responded (88%). Only 18% of the centers were conducting more than 100 colonoscopies a month and 46% denied following a colon cancer screening policy. Two bottles of liquid polyethylene glycol were the most preferred preparation. A total of 21% did not prefer any sedation at all. Nitrous oxide was used by only 5.6% of doctors. Ileal intubation rate was >96% in 34% of centers and cecal intubation rate >96% in 58% of centers. Air was used for inflation by 58%, while 39% used CO 2. A total of 40% of the respondents believe CO 2 inflation would improve cecal intubation rate, while 9.4% believed otherwise. While one third found CO 2 inflation unnecessary and 14% not cost-effective, three fourths were still interested in setting up a CO 2 facility. Reasons for not using nitrous oxide were practical/administrative difficulty (46.6%), side effects (20%), and cost (16%). Still more than half surveyed would consider using Entonox in future. Perforation was the most noted complication faced by respondents. Conclusions  This survey of real-world clinical practices will help to formulate practice guideline regarding colonoscopy in India. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the discussion on teaching endoscopy effectively being a formidable responsibility for the gastroenterologists. Topics include endoscopy learners revealing the importance of the learning environment, coaching, feedback, and professionalism; and recent randomized controlled trial demonstrating the fellow participation in colonoscopy increasing adenoma detection rates.

Background and Aim: Intubation of the terminal ileum (TI) demonstrates a complete colonoscopy, but its clinical value during screening exams is unknown. We aimed to determine whether TI intubation during screening colonoscopy is associated with colonoscopy quality measures or identifies subclinical pathology. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study examining average‐risk screening colonoscopies performed at an academic health system between July 2016 and October 2017. Data were extracted from an internal colonoscopy quality registry and the electronic health record. Appropriate statistical tests were used for group comparisons, to correlate TI intubation rate (TIIR) with measures of colonoscopy quality and to examine factors associated with the likelihood of TI intubation. Results: There were 7799 colonoscopies performed with adequate prep quality by 28 gastroenterologists. Most patients were female (56.4%) with a median age of 58. The median TIIR was 37.0%, with significant variability among physicians (2–93%). The detection rates for all polyps, adenomas, and sessile serrated polyps were 62.1%, 45.5%, and 7.2%, respectively, and none correlated with TIIR. Intubation of the TI was associated with significantly longer withdrawal times. In a random 10% sample of cases with TI intubation, no clinically significant pathology was found. Conclusions: There is wide variability in TIIR among endoscopists. Except to provide photodocumentation of exam extent when other images may be difficult to obtain, the lack of correlation between TI intubation and meaningful clinical outcomes together with the associated time costs suggest routine TI intubation during screening colonoscopy may not be warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Polyps are a common finding on colonoscopy procedures. After completing polypectomy, patients are to be followed up with endoscopy. The purpose of the study was to assess the adherence of gastroenterologists to international post-polypectomy guidelines. Methods: Israeli gastroenterologists answered a questionnaire, consisting of 30 items, regarding the recommendation for post-polypectomy surveillance following colonoscopy. Results: One hundred and twelve gastroenterologists, representing 23% of the total number of Israeli gastroenterologists, participated in this study, by responding to the web-based questionnaire (mean age is 47 ± 10 years, males, 74 (66%)). From the total responses, 57.4% were compatible with the updated European post-polypectomy guidelines. The recommendations appeared remarkably inappropriate when applied to polyps that were identified as having low-risk tubular adenoma, tubular adenoma with high-grade dysplasia, and small serrated adenoma. In 37.2% of questionnaires, the recommended time to follow-up colonoscopy was shorter than currently stated in the guidelines. The appropriate polypectomy technique was chosen by 62% of the responses. Gastroenterologists younger than 45 years of age adhered more strongly to the international guidelines, particularly in cases of piecemeal polypectomy or high-risk adenoma polypectomy. Conclusions: Gastroenterologists follow the clinical guidelines for post-polypectomy surveillance intervals partially. 57.4% of the recommendations were compatible with the guidelines, whereas 37% of the recommendations were for shorter interval. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Many communities face a shortage of qualified endoscopists. Training physician assistants (PAs) to perform colonoscopies can expand the availability of colorectal cancer screening. This study examined screening colonoscopy metrics and quality indicators among gastroenterologists, supervised PAs, and gastroenterology fellows. Methods: Consecutive patients undergoing average-risk screening colonoscopy were stratified into one of three groups by endoscopist type. Procedure and pathology reports were reviewed for the technical performance and quality metrics of the providers. Results: PAs performed comparably to gastroenterologists in technical performance and quality metrics, and demonstrated higher cecal intubation rates than their gastroenterologist colleagues. Comparisons of attending physicians and PAs grouped by years of experience also did not show notable differences in performance. Conclusions: In a supervised practice, PAs performed on par with their gastroenterology colleagues on established colonoscopy quality indicators. Following proper training, PAs can be employed in the provision of screening colonoscopy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This pilot project aimed to assess whether the Direct Access Colonoscopy Clinic is an effective and safe model to reduce the time from a positive faecal occult blood test referral to a gastroenterologist‐performed colonoscopy, and its effect on meeting the 120‐day recommendation. Design: Before/after clinical practice and patient file audit. Setting: Broken Hill Health Service. Participants: De‐identified data from all positive faecal occult blood test colonoscopies performed in the Broken Hill Health Service in October 2016‐January 2017 (Pre‐Direct Access Colonoscopy Clinic) and October 2017‐January 2018 (Post‐Direct Access Colonoscopy Clinic). Main outcome measures: Variables included referral date, indication, initial appointment date, colonoscopy date, colonoscopy finding, bowel preparation and adverse events. Colonoscopies indicated by positive faecal occult blood test results were the focus. Results: The nurse‐consulted Direct Access Colonoscopy Clinic cohort (n = 22) had a significant 139‐day reduction from positive faecal occult blood test referral to colonoscopy compared to the Pre‐Direct Access Colonoscopy Clinic cohort. All Direct Access Colonoscopy Clinic patients met the new 120‐day recommendation for wait‐time from referral to colonoscopy. Following the introduction of the Direct Access Colonoscopy Clinic, no immediate adverse events were documented for patients using either the conventional or Direct Access Colonoscopy Clinic pathways. Conclusions: The Direct Access Colonoscopy Clinic offers a safe and effective intervention that reduces wait‐time to colonoscopy in eligible patients with positive faecal occult blood test within the recommended 120 days. Further research is recommended, but Direct Access Colonoscopy Clinic has the potential to improve timely access to colonoscopy services and outcomes for all positive faecal occult blood test patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Little research exists on what predicts individual return to screening after a false-positive faecal immunochemical test in a population bowel screening programme. We aimed to quantify the impact of false-positive faecal immunochemical test in the first round of screening on re-attendance in BowelScreen, the National Bowel Screening Programme in Ireland. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted. False-positivity was defined as a positive faecal immunochemical test with subsequent colonoscopy showing no evidence of malignancy or surveillance requirement. In those with a false-positive faecal immunochemical test, logistic regression was used to predict repeat participation in the second round. Results: Of 196,149 individuals who attended the first screening round, 108,075 were eligible and re-invited in the second round, and 93,971 accepted the invitation (86.9%). Second round uptake was higher in faecal immunochemical test-negative individuals compared with those having false-positive results (87.5% vs. 73.1%; p < 0.001). Older age (odds ratio (OR) 0.75; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.60–0.94), computed tomography colonography (unsuitability/failed colonoscopy) (OR 0.40; 95% CI 0.21–0.73), and longer duration from screening invitation to faecal immunochemical test result (OR 0.991; 95% CI 0.9872–0.995) were predictors of non-re-attendance in the next screening round. Conclusion: There is a significant reduction in re-attendance rates for individuals with false-positive faecal immunochemical test results. The letter sent following a negative colonoscopy is being reviewed to ensure that it provides adequate encouragement to re-attend. There are roles for screening promotion and for Gastroenterologists and Advanced Nurse Practitioners to emphasize the importance of regular faecal immunochemical tests after a negative colonoscopy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Optimal management of pediatric endoscopy requires a multidisciplinary approach. In most hospitals, endoscopy in pediatric patients is performed by conventional gastroenterologists and only a few centers have specialized pediatric gastroenterologists. This is due to the fact that the number of pediatric gastroenterologists is limited and not all of them are experienced in endoscopic techniques. However, there are also some pediatric centers offering a high-quality and high-volume endoscopy service provided by very experienced pediatric gastroenterologists. Up to now, the literature on pediatric endoscopy is rather sparse. In this article, we describe current knowledge and practice of endoscopic procedures in pediatric patients, which should be relevant for both the adult and pediatric gastroenterologists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Lege Artis Medicine (LAM) is the property of LifeTime Media Kft. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)