Search

BACKGROUND AND AIMS Primary care providers (PCPs) play a critical role in colon cancer screening by initiating referrals to gastroenterologists for colonoscopy, but little is known about their role in pre-colonoscopy bowel preparation selection and pre-colonoscopy follow-up care. This study aimed to better understand coordination of care between PCPs and gastroenterologists as well as the current availability of "open-access" screening colonoscopy. METHODS A multiple-choice survey was developed to assess PCPs' experiences with open-access colonoscopy, their involvement in the pre-colonoscopy process, and follow-up after colonoscopy. The survey was distributed electronically to a nationally representative sample of PCPs, via the American College of Physicians (ACP) Research Center's Internal Medicine Insider Research Panel. RESULTS Of 442 PCPs invited to participate, 210 responded (response rate, 210/442, 48%), and 29 were ineligible (spent

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is characterized by chronic intermittent abdominal pain and associated diarrhea (IBS-D), constipation (IBS-C), or both. IBS can significantly impact patient function and quality of life. The diagnosis of IBS is based on the presence of characteristic symptoms, the exclusion of concerning features, and selected tests to exclude organic diseases that can mimic IBS. The pathophysiology of IBS remains incompletely understood, and new contributing factors have been identified over the past decade. Altered gut immune activation, intestinal permeability, and the intestinal and colonic microbiome may be important factors. Poorly absorbed carbohydrates have been implicated in triggering IBS symptoms. Increasing evidence supports the benefit of a diet low in fermentable oligosaccharides, disaccharides, monosaccharides, and polyols (FODMAPs). Although there are several randomized controlled trials of probiotics in IBS, they are typically poorly designed and have not consistently demonstrated efficacy. Until recently, there were few effective treatments for IBS-D. Data from recent clinical trials support the use of rifaximin, eluxadoline, and peppermint oil. Options for the treatment of IBS-C include lubiprostone and linaclotide.

Risk factors for Barrett's esophagus include gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptoms, age, abdominal obesity, and tobacco use. We aimed to develop a tool using these factors to predict the presence of Barrett's esophagus.Male colorectal cancer (CRC) screenees were recruited to undergo upper endoscopy, identifying newly diagnosed cases of Barrett's esophagus. Logistic regression models predicting Barrett's esophagus using GERD symptoms alone and together with abdominal obesity, tobacco use, and age were compared.Barrett's esophagus was found in 70 (8.5%) of 822 CRC screenees. Mutually adjusting for other covariates, Barrett's esophagus was associated with weekly GERD (odds ratio (OR)=2.33, 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.34, 4.05), age (OR per 10 years=1.53, 95% CI=1.05, 2.25), waist-to-hip ratio (OR per 0.10=1.44, 95% CI=0.898, 2.32) and pack-years of cigarette use (OR per 10 pack-years=1.09, 95% CI=1.04, 1.14). A model including those four factors had a greater area under the receiver operating characteristics curve than did a model based on GERD frequency and duration alone (0.72 vs. 0.61, P0.001), and it had a net reclassification improvement index of 19-25%.The prevalence of Barrett's esophagus was substantial in our population of older overweight men. A model based on GERD, age, abdominal obesity, and cigarette use more accurately classified the presence of Barrett's esophagus than did a model based on GERD alone. Following validation of the tool in another population, its use in clinical practice might improve the efficiency of screening for Barrett's esophagus.

Objectives No previous study has concurrently assessed the associations between meat intake, meat-cooking methods and doneness levels, meat mutagens (heterocyclic amines (HCAs) and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons), heme iron, and nitrite from meat and colorectal adenoma in asymptomatic women undergoing colonoscopy. Methods Of the 807 eligible women in a cross-sectional multicenter colonoscopy screening study, 158 prevalent colorectal adenoma cases and 649 controls satisfactorily completed the validated food frequency and meat questionnaires. Using an established meat mutagen database and new heme iron and nitrite databases, we comprehensively investigated the components of meat that may be involved in carcinogenesis. Using logistic regression, we estimated odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) within quartiles of meat-related variables. Results Red meat was associated positively with colorectal adenoma (OR fourth vs. first quartile = 2.02; 95% CI = 1.06-3.83; P trend = 0.38). Intake of pan-fried meat (OR = 1.72; 95% CI = 0.96-3.07; P trend = 0.01) and the HCA: 2-amino-3,8-dimethylimidazo[4,5-f]quinoxaline (MeIQx) (OR = 1.90; 95% CI = 1.05-3.42; P trend = 0.07) were also associated with an increased risk of colorectal adenoma. The new databases yielded lower estimates of heme iron and nitrite than previous assessment methods, although the two methods were highly correlated for both exposures. Although not statistically significant, there were positive associations between iron and heme iron from meat and colorectal adenoma. Conclusions In asymptomatic women undergoing colonoscopy, colorectal adenomas were associated with high intake of red meat, pan-fried meat, and the HCA MeIQx. Other meat-related exposures require further investigation.

An increased knowledge regarding the predictors of rebleeding after endoscopic therapy for bleeding ulcers should improve clinical management and outcomes. The aim of this systematic review was to identify the strongest and most consistent predictors of rebleeding to assist in the development of tools to stratify and appropriately manage patients after endoscopic therapy.Bibliographic database searches for prospective studies assessing rebleeding after endoscopic therapy for bleeding ulcers were performed. Relevant studies were identified, and data were abstracted in a duplicate and independent fashion. The primary outcomes sought were significant independent predictors of rebleeding by multivariable analyses inor =2 studies.Ten articles met the prespecified inclusion criteria. The pooled rate of rebleeding after endoscopic therapy was 16.4%. The independent pre-endoscopic predictors of rebleeding were hemodynamic instability (significant in 5 of 5 studies; summary odds ratio [OR] 2.75, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.99-3.51) and comorbid illness (significant in 2 of 7 studies; insufficient data to calculate summary OR or report OR range). The independent endoscopic predictors of rebleeding were active bleeding at endoscopy (significant in 5 of 8 studies; summary OR 1.93, 95% CI 1.30-2.55), large ulcer size (significant in 4 of 5 studies; summary OR 2.01, 95% CI 1.21-2.80), posterior duodenal ulcer (significant in 2 of 3 studies; insufficient data to calculate summary OR or report OR range), and lesser gastric curvature ulcer (significant in 2 of 2 studies; insufficient data to calculate summary OR or report OR range).The independent predictors of recurrent hemorrhage after endoscopic therapy, particularly those that are the strongest and most consistent in the literature, may be used to select patients who are most likely to benefit from aggressive post-hemostasis care, including intensive care unit (ICU) observation and second-look endoscopy. Prospective studies designed to formally assess the relative utilities of these factors in predicting rebleeding and dictating management are needed.

This article provides a systematic review of the frequency and severity of adverse gastrointestinal (GI) events among patients using meloxicam, a cyclooxygenase (COX)-2-selective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID). A MEDLINE search of English language articles from 1990-1998, a manual search of citations from primary trials and review articles, and a manual search of proceedings from international gastroenterology meetings were conducted. Randomized clinical trials comparing the frequency of GI adverse events for meloxicam versus non-COX-2-selective NSAIDs were selected. Specific data about the frequency of dyspepsia; perforations, ulcers, and bleeds (PUBs); and withdrawal of medication because of adverse GI events was also extracted. From a pool of 62 potentially relevant citations, 12 randomized trials were identified. All trials concerning symptomatic GI adverse events used the World Health Organization's Adverse Reaction Terminology List (WHO-ARTL) to code adverse events. Patients using meloxicam had fewer GI adverse events compared with non-COX-2-selective NSAIDs (odds ratio = 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59-0.69). Patients using meloxicam experienced less dyspepsia (odds ratio = 0.73; 95% CI, 0.64-0.84), fewer PUBs (odds ratio = 0.52; 95% CI, 0.28-0.96), and less frequent discontinuation of NSAID because of adverse GI events (odds ratio = 0.59; 95% CI, 0.52-0.67) compared with non-COX-2 selective NSAIDs. Meloxicam, a COX-2-selective NSAID, appears to cause fewer adverse GI events than standard, non-COX-2-selective NSAIDs. However, the generalizability of these data may be limited by the low dose of meloxicam used in most trials and the use of the WHO-ARTL to code adverse events.

Background & Aims: The use of nurse endoscopists to perform flexible sigmoidoscopy is expanding, increasing the availability of colorectal cancer screening. However, the effectiveness of this practice has not been studied in randomized trials. The aim of this trial was to examine the miss rate of polyps, the depth of sigmoidoscope insertion, and the incidence of complications during flexible sigmoidoscopy performed by nurse endoscopists and by gastroenterologists. Methods: Three hundred twenty-eight patients were randomized to undergo screening flexible sigmoidoscopy performed by a nurse endoscopist or by a gastroenterologist. Frequency of missed polyps was determined by repeat sigmoidoscopy, performed by a gastroenterologist blinded to the identity of the first endoscopist. Multiple logistic regression analysis identified characteristics associated with missed polyps. Results: Gastroenterologists and nurse endoscopists had equivalent miss rates for adenomatous polyps (20% vs. 21%, respectively; P = 0.91). No complications occurred in any patient. Gastroenterologists inserted the sigmoidoscope further than nurse endoscopists (61 vs. 55 cm, respectively; P < 0.00001). Polyp location in the descending colon (odds ratio, 4.1; 95% confidence interval, 1.7-10.3) was highly associated with missed polyps. Conclusions: No differences in detection of adenomatous polyps or frequency of complications were found. These data suggest that experienced nurse endoscopists may perform screening flexible sigmoidoscopy as safely and as effectively as gastroenterologists.

PHILIP SCHOENFELD,* GORDON GUYATT,‡ FRANK HAMILTON,§ LOREN LAINE,\ DEBORAH COOK,‡ DAVID BJORKMAN,¶ DAVID MORGAN,# and WALTER PETERSON** for the EVIDENCE BASED GASTEROENTEROLOGY STEERING GROUP *Division of Gastroenterology, National Naval Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland; ‡Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University School of Medicine, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada; §Digestive Diseases Program, Division of Digestive Diseases and Nutrition, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; \Division of Gastrointestinal and Liver Diseases, University of Southern California School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California; ¶Division of Gastroenterology, University of Utah Medical Center, Salt Lake City, Utah; #Division of Gastroenterology, McMaster University Medical Center, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada; and **University of Texas Southwestern Medical School and Medical Service, Dallas Veterans Administration Medical Center, Dallas, Texas

OBJECTIVE To develop a disease-specific QOL instrument (QOLRAD) addressing patient concerns in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and dyspepsia. Patients. 759 male (45%) and female (55%) patients with a mean age of 48.4 years (sd 15.2) were used in the psychometric evaluation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES A pilot version of QOLRAD, the Gastrointestinal Symptoms Rating Scale (GSRS) and the SF-36 were completed prior to endoscopy. Items with a high ceiling effect, items measuring a different construct, i.e. with a low squared multiple correlation (R 0.80) with another item were removed. A confirmatory factor analysis was also performed. RESULTS The final questionnaire included 25 items depicting problems with emotions, vitality, sleep, eating/drinking, and physical/social functioning. The internal consistency reliability was high (alpha value overall 0.97, dimensions 0.89-94). Construct validity, i.e. the associations between similar constructs in the QOLRAD, the SF-36 and the GSRS scores was confirmed. Pain and symptom severity were markers of impaired QOL. The impact on health-related QOL was similar across the functional gastrointestinal disorders with the exception of patients with a normal endoscopy, who did slightly worse. CONCLUSION The QOLRAD is a short and user-friendly instrument with excellent psychometric properties. Its responsiveness to change in (AVMC1) clinical trials is currently being explored.

Esophageal varices are a life threatening cause of gastrointestinal bleeding. Management includes both primary prevention of variceal bleeding and treatment of actively bleeding varices. Evidence from randomized controlled trials indicates that beta blockers and nitrates may prevent the initial episode of bleeding varices. Ample data from randomized controlled trials indicate that band ligation is more effective than scleropathy for the treatment of bleeding esophageal varices. Somatostatin may decrease rebleeding rates with or without endoscopic therapy. No effective treatment has been developed for the treatment of patients who fail endoscopic therapy.

PHILIP SCHOENFELD,* DEBORAH COOK,‡ FRANK HAMILTON,§ LOREN LAINE,6 DAVID MORGAN,¶ and WALTER PETERSON# for the EVIDENCE–BASED GASTROENTEROLOGY STEERING GROUP *Division of Gastroenterology, National Naval Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland; ‡Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario; §Digestive Diseases Program, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Division of Digestive Diseases and Nutrition, Bethesda, Maryland; 6Division of Gastrointestinal and Liver Diseases, University of Southern California Medical Center, Los Angeles, California; ¶Division of Gastroenterology, McMaster University Medical Center, Hamilton, Ontario; and #University of Texas Southwestern Medical School and Medical Service, Dallas Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Dallas, Texas

Objective: Using clinical practice guidelines, a registered nurse adjusted antireflux medications, evaluated esophageal biopsy reports, determined the interval between surveillance endoscopies, and provided education for patients with Barrett’s esophagus. No previous reports have assessed the effectiveness or patient satisfaction associated with registered nurse-provided primary care. Because estimates of the incidence of dysplasia and adenocarcinoma vary widely, we also prospectively followed a cohort of patients with Barrett’s esophagus. Methods: Charts were reviewed to determine the frequency of variation from guidelines, the annual incidence of dysplasia and adenocarcinoma, and frequency of reflux symptoms. Patients were mailed a questionnaire to assess satisfaction with their medical care and with the nurse. Results: Variation by the nurse from the guidelines on surveillance endoscopy (1.9%) and the treatment of reflux (1.3%) was rare. Most patients were very satisfied (score of 6 on 0–6-point Likert scale) with overall medical care (88%), and patient education (76%), and most patients did not think that increased physician involvement would improve their care (93%). Ninety-seven percent of patients had control of reflux symptoms. Two patients with long segment Barrett’s esophagus (n = 67) developed high grade dysplasia over 323 patient-yr of follow-up (1 of 162 patient-yr for an annual incidence of 0.6%). No patients with short segment Barrett’s esophagus (n = 56) developed high grade dysplasia or adenocarcinoma over 172 patient-years of follow-up. Conclusion: The registered nurse in our clinical setting effectively administered clinical practice guidelines for the management of Barrett’s esophagus without clinically significant morbidity or patient dissatisfaction. Before these results can be generalized to other settings, further studies will need to be performed.

Top of pageAbstract OBJECTIVES: In 2006, the American College of Gastroenterology (ACG)/the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) Taskforce on Quality in Endoscopy published quality indicators for the major gastrointestinal procedures. Our primary aim was to use the published literature to assess current endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) intraprocedural performance and compare it to the targets set by the ACG/ASGE taskforce. Our secondary aim was to determine whether performance varies across different health-care settings (academic and community), study designs (prospective and retrospective), and trainee participation. METHODS: A PubMed and EMBASE literature search from 1/1/2006 to 2/1/2013 was conducted. Articles were selected based on title, abstract, full text, and reporting of success rates for the intraprocedural quality indicators. Success rates, represented as numerical proportions, were collected from each study. For each success rate, a standard error and a 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated. A random-effects meta-analysis model was used to weight each study, and a cumulative, weighted success rate (or effect size) for each indicator was determined. Random-effects meta-regression was then used to examine the impact of study setting, design, and trainee involvement on each quality indicator. RESULTS: A total of 8,005 articles were initially retrieved. Following the application of predefined criteria, 52 articles remained. The cumulative, weighted bile duct cannulation success rate was 89.3% (95% CI 0.866–0.919); pancreatic duct cannulation was 85.0% (95% CI 0.813–0.886); precut utilization rate was 10.5% (95% CI 0.087–0.123); common bile duct stone extraction rate was 88.3% (95% CI 0.825–0.941); and the rate of successful biliary stenting below the common bile duct bifurcation was 97.5% (95% CI 0.967–0.984). Subgroup analysis with meta-regression showed no statistically significant differences between academic and community settings, prospective and retrospective study designs, and trainee participation on success across bile duct cannulation, precut utilization, and common bile duct stone extraction (insufficient observations/variance for pancreatic duct cannulation and biliary stent placement). CONCLUSIONS: ERCP intraprocedural quality is in good standing. On the basis of this analysis, the two targets that could be potentially revised are precut utilization and biliary stenting. This analysis was confined to the published literature and therefore, in general, reflects the ERCP performance of institutions, primarily academic, that are conducting clinical research. Thus, it is difficult to generalize this performance assessment to the broader ERCP community as a whole.

Background and aims Folate has been implicated as a potential aetiological factor for colorectal cancer. Previous research has not adequately exploited concentrations of folate in normal colonic mucosal biopsies to examine the issue. Methods Logistic regression models were used to estimate ORs and 95% CIs of adenoma according to the tissue concentration of folate using asymptomatic average-risk women (40–70 years) in a colorectal cancer screening study. Of the 1593 eligible women who were offered enrolment, 1483 (93%) participated. Colonoscopy was complete to the caecum in 98.7% (1463/1483) of the subjects, and normal colonic tissue biopsies were obtained from 813 (56%) of these, of whom 170 had at least one adenoma. Results A marginal reduction in risk for proximal adenomas (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.09) but not distal adenomas (OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.43 to 2.37) was observed among women in the highest quintile of tissue folate concentration. A significant reduction in risk for advanced adenoma was observed for women in the highest quintile of tissue folate concentration (OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.93). Defining the outcome as proximal adenomatous and/or hyperplastic polyps, statistically significant inverse associations with tissue concentrations of folate were also observed (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.95 for quintile 5 vs quintile 1). Conclusions These findings are consistent with the hypothesis that folate status of colonic mucosa is an exposure that is aetiologically important in determining the risk of particular molecular subtypes of colorectal cancer.

AIM: To investigate the endoscopic ampullectomy practices of expert biliary endoscopists. METHODS: An anonymous survey was mailed to 79 expert biliary endoscopists to assess ampullectomy practices. RESULTS: Forty six (58%) biliary endoscopists returned the questionnaire. Of these, 63% were in academia and in practice for an average of 16.4 years (± 8.6). Endoscopists performed an average of 1.1 (± 0.8) ampullectomies per month. Prior to ampullectomy, endoscopic ultrasound was “always” utilized by 67% of respondents vs “sometimes” in 31% of respondents. Empiric biliary sphincterotomy was not utilized uniformly, only 26% “always” and 37% “sometimes” performed it prior to resection. Fifty three percent reported “never” performing empiric pancreatic sphincterotomy prior to ampullectomy. Practitioners with high endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography volumes were the most likely to perform a pancreatic sphincterotomy (OR = 10.9; P = 0.09). Participants overwhelmingly favored “always” placing a prophylactic pancreatic stent, with 86% placing it after ampullectomy rather than prior to resection (23%). Argon plasma coagulation was the favored adjunct modality (83%) for removal of residual adenomatous tissue. Practitioners uniformly (100%) preferred follow-up examination to be within 6 mo post-ampullectomy. CONCLUSION: Among biliary experts, there is less variation in ampullectomy practices than is reflected in the literature.

To measure knowledge and acceptance of colon polyp surveillance guidelines among gastroenterologists.Gastroenterologists often perform surveillance colonoscopy sooner than recommended by guidelines. Lack of knowledge may be an important factor, but gastroenterologists could also simply disagree with guideline recommendations.A 24-item multiple-choice survey was developed from the 2003 multisociety colorectal cancer screening and surveillance guideline. The survey was distributed to practicing gastroenterologists preparing for the gastroenterology board recertification examination at 2 major national gastroenterology board review courses. For each question, subjects were given a clinical scenario and asked: (1) the guideline recommendation for the scenario; (2) their usual practice in the scenario; and, (3) if they definitely knew the recommendation or were simply guessing at the correct answer. If a respondent knew the recommendation but differed in their usual practice, this was considered disagreement with the recommendation.The survey was completed by 57.1% (116/203) of gastroenterologists preparing for 2004 recertification. Seventy-eight percent reported that they were familiar with the 2003 guideline, though only 57% reported that guidelines were "very influential" in their practice. Many did not correctly answer questions on the recommended interval for hyperplastic polyps (12%), 2 small adenomas (36%), 3 small adenomas (49%), and adenoma with high-grade dysplasia (41%). Of gastroenterologists who knew the guideline recommendations, up to 76% disagreed with the recommendations and chose to perform surveillance sooner than recommended.Though many gastroenterologists lack knowledge about guideline recommendations for colon polyp surveillance, even those who know the recommendations often ignore them and perform surveillance colonoscopy sooner than recommended.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend that all gastric ulcers (GUs) be biopsied extensively to exclude underlying malignancy. However, many gastroenterologists opt to also perform surveillance endoscopy (EGD) to document ulcer healing. The purpose of this study was to examine frequency of utilization of surveillance EGD in patients found to have GUs using a national endoscopic database. METHODS: The Clinical Outcomes Research Initiative (CORI) database was used to identify ambulatory patients diagnosed with a GU between 2001 and 2005. A surveillance EGD was defined as any EGD performed

Endoscopic sinus surgery, in which the surgeon views the nose and paranasal sinuses through a telescope, can potentially lead to loss of perspective of the patient's entire head. Preoperative computed tomographs are also taken at angles different from those encountered in the surgical setting. As a result, the appropriate angle and depth of instrument insertion can fail to be appreciated. In order to study those angles and depths in a setting that more closely resembles the clinical situation in the operating room, we have performed 15 cadaver dissections and measured 14 dimensions relevant to the endoscopic approach. We recommend that cadaver dissection be an important part of continued training in sinus surgery. We also recommend that a reference probe be placed along the floor of the nose and that endoscopic instruments be calibrated at 1-cm intervals so that the depth of insertion can be monitored by an observer or instructor.

Gastroenterologists' approach to surveillance for Barrett's esophagus is variable. We hypothesized that financial incentives and concerns over malpractice litigation influence gastroenterologists' usual practices regarding screening and surveillance.We surveyed gastroenterologists (N = 224) regarding their usual practice of screening or surveillance for Barrett's esophagus, belief in the efficacy of screening, knowledge of published guidelines, demographic factors, compensation structure, volume of endoscopies, and malpractice history. Practices were characterized as aggressive or conservative in the utilization of services compared with a published guideline.Twenty-one percent of attending gastroenterologists reported being identified as a defendant in at least one malpractice suit. Prior malpractice defendants had practiced gastroenterology longer and performed a higher volume of endoscopies, but had similar knowledge regarding published screening guidelines to those who had not been defendants. They were more likely to be aggressive rather than conservative in screening and surveillance for Barrett's esophagus (odds ratio [OR] 3.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1-12), and remained so after controlling for other factors. In particular, they were more likely to recommend screening for populations with a lower risk of development of cancer, and to perform more frequent surveillance for low-grade dysplasia. Other factors were not associated with aggressive practice, including compensation structure.History of at least one prior malpractice suit appears to be associated with the more aggressive use of endoscopic screening and surveillance for Barrett's esophagus, irrespective of physician belief regarding the efficacy of that strategy in reducing mortality. Hypervigilance and fear of future malpractice suits may drive this increased use.