Search

(1) Background: Villous atrophy is an indication for small bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE). However, SBCE findings are not described uniformly and atrophic features are sometimes not recognized; (2) Methods: The Delphi technique was employed to reach agreement among a panel of SBCE experts. The nomenclature and definitions of SBCE lesions suggesting the presence of atrophy were decided in a core group of 10 experts. Four images of each lesion were chosen from a large SBCE database and agreement on the correspondence between the picture and the definition was evaluated using the Delphi method in a broadened group of 36 experts. All images corresponded to histologically proven mucosal atrophy; (3) Results: Four types of atrophic lesions were identified: mosaicism, scalloping, folds reduction, and granular mucosa. The core group succeeded in reaching agreement on the nomenclature and the descriptions of these items. Consensus in matching the agreed definitions for the proposed set of images was met for mosaicism (88.9% in the first round), scalloping (97.2% in the first round), and folds reduction (94.4% in the first round), but granular mucosa failed to achieve consensus (75.0% in the third round); (4) Conclusions: Consensus among SBCE experts on atrophic lesions was met for the first time. Mosaicism, scalloping, and folds reduction are the most reliable signs, while the description of granular mucosa remains uncertain.

Background and aims: The role of small bowel neoplasia (SBN) screening in asymptomatic patients with Lynch syndrome (LS) is uncertain. The aim of our study was to assess the effectiveness of screening by capsule endoscopy (CE) in these patients. Methods: This study was an observational, analytical, and retrospective single-center study within the PRED-IdF network. All consecutive asymptomatic patients older than 35 years-old with confirmed LS and no personal history of SBN who started the screening from 2010–2015 were included. The baseline screening and 24 months follow-up were performed by CE. The CE diagnostic yield (positive tumor or polyp) and accuracy, using the follow-up as gold standard, were evaluated. Results: A total of 150 patients underwent the SBN screening program and 135 (52.7 ± 11.2 years-old, 37.8% male) met the inclusion criteria. The baseline CE diagnostic yield was 4.4% (3 polyps, 3 tumors) and the proximal small bowel was the most common location ( n = 4, 66.7%). In total, 87 patients underwent follow-up and the diagnostic yield was 4.6%. Four patients were considered positive at follow-up (2 adenomas, 2 adenocarcinomas). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of CE were 60%, 100%, 100%, 96.9%, and 97%, respectively. Conclusions: CE is an accurate procedure for baseline screening of SBN in LS patients and may be efficient for follow-up procedures. However, the optimal starting age of screening and intervals of follow-up must be clarified.

Abstract Background Data collected in EHRs have been widely used to identifying specific conditions; however there is still a need for methods to define comorbidities and sources to identify comorbidities burden. We propose an approach to assess comorbidities burden for a specific disease using the literature and EHR data sources in the case of autoimmune diseases in celiac disease (CD). Methods We generated a restricted set of comorbidities using the literature (via the MeSH® co-occurrence file). We extracted the 15 most co-occurring autoimmune diseases of the CD. We used mappings of the comorbidities to EHR terminologies: ICD-10 (billing codes), ATC (drugs) and UMLS (clinical reports). Finally, we extracted the concepts from the different data sources. We evaluated our approach using the correlation between prevalence estimates in our cohort and co-occurrence ranking in the literature. Results We retrieved the comorbidities for 741 patients with CD. 18.1% of patients had at least one of the 15 studied autoimmune disorders. Overall, 79.3% of the mapped concepts were detected only in text, 5.3% only in ICD codes and/or drugs prescriptions, and 15.4% could be found in both sources. Prevalence in our cohort were correlated with literature (Spearman’s coefficient 0.789, p = 0.0005). The three most prevalent comorbidities were thyroiditis 12.6% (95% CI 10.1–14.9), type 1 diabetes 2.3% (95% CI 1.2–3.4) and dermatitis herpetiformis 2.0% (95% CI 1.0–3.0). Conclusion We introduced a process that leveraged the MeSH terminology to identify relevant autoimmune comorbidities of the CD and several data sources from EHRs to phenotype a large population of CD patients. We achieved prevalence estimates comparable to the literature.

Background: Despite colonoscopic screening, colorectal cancer (CRC) remains frequent in patients with Lynch syndrome (LS). The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of an optimized colorectal screening program within a French dedicated network. Methods: All LS patients followed at our institution were consecutively included in the Prédisposition au Cancer Colorectal-Ile de France (PRED-IdF) network. Patients were offered an optimized screening program allowing an adjustment of the interval between colonoscopies, depending on bowel preparation, chromoendoscopy achievement and adenoma detection. Colonoscopies were defined as optimal when all the screening criteria were respected. We compared colonoscopy quality and colonoscopy detection rate before and after PRED-IdF inclusion, including polyp detection rate (PDR), adenoma detection rate (ADR) and cancer detection rate (CDR). Results: Between January 2010 and January 2016, 144 LS patients were consecutively included (male/female = 50/94, mean age = 51 ± 13 years and mutations: MLH1 = 39%, MSH2 = 44%, MSH6 = 15%, PMS2 = 1%). A total of 564 colonoscopies were analyzed, 353 after inclusion and 211 before. After PRED-IdF inclusion, 98/144 (68%) patients had optimal screening colonoscopies versus 33/132 (25%) before ( p < 0.0005). The optimal colonoscopy rate was 304/353 (86%) after inclusion versus 87/211 (41%) before, ( p < 0.0001). PRED-IdF inclusion was associated with a reduction of CRC occurrence with a CDR of 1/353 (0.3%) after inclusion versus 6/211 (2.8%) before ( p = 0.012). ADR and PDR were 99/353 (28%) versus 60/211 (28.8%) ( p > 0.05) and 167/353 (48.1%) versus 90/211 (42.2%) ( p > 0.05), respectively after and before inclusion. Conclusions: An optimized colonoscopic surveillance program in LS patients seems to improve colonoscopic screening quality and might possibly decrease colorectal interval cancer occurrence. Long-term cohort studies are needed to confirm these results.

Background and study aims Over-the-scope clip (OTSC) has been recently used in management of gastrointestinal perforations, but data on it are still limited. The aim of this study was to compare management of iatrogenic perforations before and after the OTSC was available in our endoscopy unit. Patients and methods We conducted a monocentric retrospective study from June 2007 to June 2015. All iatrogenic gastrointestinal perforations detected during endoscopy were included. Two time periods were compared in terms of surgery and mortality rates: before use of OTSC (June 2007 to June 2011) and after OTSC became available (June 2011 to June 2015). Results During the first period, 24 perforations were recorded. Fifteen (62.5 %) were managed with surgery. The mortality rate was 8 %. During the second period, 16 perforations occurred. In 11 patients (68.7 %), an OTSC was used to close the perforation, with complete sealing of the perforation in 100 % of cases. However, 2 patients with sigmoid perforation had to undergo surgery due to right ureteral obstruction by the clip in 1 case and to presence of a localized peritonitis in the other. The surgery rate during this period was 12.5 % (2 /16), with a statistically significant difference compared to the first period (P = 0.002). There was no mortality in the second period versus 8 % in the first one (P = 0.23). Conclusions OTSC is effective for endoluminal closure of iatrogenic perforations and results in a significant decrease in surgery rate.