Complications during colonoscopy: prevention, diagnosis, and management

Case report on severe splenic injury following colonoscopy with disproportionately stable presentation: A rural hospital perspective

INTRODUCTION

Detection of splenic injury following routine colonoscopy is slowly on the rise. Mostly presenting as left upper abdominal or shoulder tip pain along with a sharp fall in haemoglobin level and hemodynamic instability, sometimes the presentation and initial workup may be vague and falsely reassuring.

CASE PRESENTATION

This is demonstrated in the case of a 72 year old male who presented with vague but severe left lower abdominal pain following colonoscopy, during which one caecal polyp was removed and no intraoperative complications were reported. On emergency presentation, abdominal examination was not particularly concerning with only mild left lower tenderness and minimal guarding. Vital signs remained largely normal and blood counts were reasonable. Close to being discharged, patient demonstrated brief hypotension post ambulation which was easily reversed with a fluid bolus. Upon surgical review, a high index of suspicion prompted further investigation which revealed an unsuspected complication necessitating urgent laparotomy and splenectomy.

DISCUSSION

Splenic injury is slowly becoming an increasingly reported complication following colonoscopy. While many cases present with typical features, others may only display subtle signs of deterioration, and warrant a high degree of suspicion.

CONCLUSION

Rural doctors should be aware of and able to recognise this potentially fatal complication to ensure timely successful management.

Safe, efficient, and effective screening colonoscopy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Colorectal cancer continues to be one of the most common causes of cancer-related death. Widespread dissemination of screening colonoscopy in the United States has led to a significant reduction in the incidence and mortality. Here we review current literature with an aim to highlight recent improvements in the safety, efficiency, and effectiveness of screening colonoscopy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Colon capsule endoscopy is an emerging noninvasive method to capture images of colonic mucosa for select patients with appreciable sensitivity for polyp detection. Recent literature supports the use of the novel oral anticoagulant apixaban over other anticoagulants to reduce the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding related to colonoscopy. Cold snare polypectomy for smaller lesions and prophylactic clipping following resection of large polyps in the proximal colon may reduce the rate of delayed bleeding. Novel methods and devices for improving bowel preparation continue to emerge. Mechanical attachment devices and artificial intelligence represent recent innovations to improve polyp detection.

SUMMARY

Clinicians should be aware of relevant data and literature that continue to improve the quality and safety of screening colonoscopy and incorporate these findings into their clinical practice.

Endoscopic clipping in non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding treatment

Since the earliest reports, advanced clipping systems have been developed, and it is possible to choose among many models with different structural and technical features. The main drawback of through-the-scope clips is their small size, which allows the compression of limited amounts of tissue needed for large-size vessel treatment. Therefore, the over-the-scope clip system was realized, allowing a larger and stronger mechanical compression of large tissue areas, with excellent results in achieving a definitive hemostasis in difficult cases. Many studies have analyzed the indications and efficacy of two-pronged endoclips and have shown good results for initial and permanent hemostasis. The aim of this review was to provide updated information on indications, positioning techniques, and results of clip application for endoscopic treatment of upper gastrointestinal non-variceal bleeding lesions.

Ascorbic Acid to Prevent Postpolypectomy Bleeding in the Colon: A Randomized Controlled Trial

INTRODUCTION

It has been reported that vitamin C replacement can quickly reverse nonspecific bleeding in surgical patients with normal coagulation parameters. We evaluated the effect of intravenous ascorbic acid administration for prevention of postpolypectomy bleeding in large polyps of the colon.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with large polyps with heads larger than 10 mm, stalk diameter larger than 5 mm, and a length larger than 10 mm were included in this randomized controlled clinical trial. In the study group, the first 500 mg intravenous dose of vitamin C diluted in normal saline was administered 2 h before colonoscopic resection of polyps and the second and third similar doses were administered on days 2 and 3 of polypectomy, respectively. The control group received normal saline in a similar fashion. The resection of polyps was performed in snare and cut-blend mode. Early and late postoperative bleeding were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

A total of 153 polyps were resected by endoscopic polypectomy. Early bleeding was observed in 7.2% of the patients, which was significantly lower in the vitamin C group (2.6% vs 11.8%, P = 0.03). Late bleeding was observed in 6.5% of the patients with a trend lower in the vitamin C group (2.6% vs 10.5%, P = 0.057). The proportion of postprocedural bleeding was significantly higher in the vitamin C group (5% vs 20%, P = 0.007). Hazard ratios of early and postprocedural bleeding were 78% and 76% lower in the vitamin C group compared to the control group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Intravenous ascorbic acid infusion could reduce postpolypectomy bleeding.

Conservative Treatment of Splenic Haematoma After Colonoscopy: A Case Report

Colonoscopy is a routine procedure performed worldwide, nevertheless, a small risk of splenic injury, often under-estimated, is still present. As a matter of fact, the diagnosis may be delayed, leading to a rising risk of morbidity and mortality. This paper describes a case of conservative treatment of colonoscopy-associated splenic injury.

A 57-year-old woman presented with worsening pain in the upper left abdominal quadrant; she had radiation therapy to the ipsilateral subscapular region, and a diagnostic colonoscopy 18 hours earlier.

The computed tomography (CT) scan revealed splenic laceration without signs of hemoperitoneum. Because of the hemodynamic stability of the patient, successful conservative treatment and serial controls of the blood and hemodynamic parameters were adopted.

Even if rare splenic injury during colonoscopy is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. A high degree of clinical suspicion is essential to achieve a prompt diagnosis as well as an early surgical evaluation.

The nonoperative approach is usually taken in patients with no intraperitoneal bleeding, a closed subcapsular haematoma and a stable hemodynamic status.

Splenic trauma from colonoscopy: A case series

•

There are 170 cases of post colonoscopy splenic injury reported in the literature.

•

Management should be dictated by the patient’s clinical status and adhere to traumatic blunt splenic injury guidelines.

•

Awareness of risk factors and post-procedure vigilance leads to prompt detection and intervention for this rare complication.

Introduction

Splenic trauma is quite rare after colonoscopy and can be overlooked as a complication when a patient presents with severe abdominal pain. It can be difficult to diagnose without appropriate imaging, but it should be considered as part of the differential in a patient arriving for evaluation of left upper quadrant abdominal pain.

Presentation of case

In this case series, we discuss four patients who presented to our institution with splenic trauma specifically after colonoscopy. These patients were diagnosed with splenic trauma utilizing computed tomography (CT) scans of the abdomen and pelvis. They were all immediately transferred to our surgical intensive care unit (SICU) for close monitoring and serial hemoglobin checks. Two of the four patients had decreasing hemoglobin levels and were monitored until they underwent interventional radiology (IR) angiography and angioembolization. The other two patients had significant transfusion requirements and ultimately went to the operating room for an open splenectomy. All four of these patients did well after their interventions, although one of them required longer hospitalization while on the ventilator secondary to Haemophilus infection.

Discussion

This case series recognizes that there is potential for quite severe splenic trauma after colonoscopy. While one of the four patients did have a history of prior splenic trauma, the other three had no history of trauma.

Conclusion

These cases demonstrate that this complication should be managed similarly to traumatic splenic injury unrelated to colonoscopy, and that non-operative treatment remain a possibility. Certainly, non-operative management requires a SICU and IR capabilities to be successful. If the patient becomes unstable, they should undergo the appropriate operative intervention.

Prospective Comparative Analysis of the Incidence of Vasovagal Reaction and the Effect of Rectal Submucosal Lidocaine Injection in Stapled Hemorrhoidopexy: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Purpose

This study was performed to evaluate the incidence of vasovagal reactions (VVRs) and the efficacy of lidocaine injection for prevention.

Methods

One hundred seventeen patients diagnosed with hemorrhoids and scheduled to undergo a stapled hemorrhoidopexy (SH) were randomly divided according to submucosal injection to the rectum: lidocaine group (n = 53, lidocaine injected just before full closure of the stapler) and control group (n = 58). Outcomes included baseline patient characteristics (American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification, body mass index, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and previous VVR history), vital signs during the operation, incidence of VVRs (hypotension, bradycardia, dizziness, diaphoresis, and nausea/vomiting), and postoperative complications (pain, bleeding, and urinary retention).

Results

Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. The number of patients with lower abdominal pain after firing the stapler and incidence of dizziness were lower for the lidocaine group than for the control group (9.4% vs. 25.9%, P = 0.017; 0% vs. 8.6%, P = 0.035, respectively). However, there were no significant between-group differences in incidence of nausea and diaphoresis (0% vs. 3.4%, P = 0.172) and syncope (1.9% vs. 3.4%, P = 0.612). Fewer patients in the lidocaine group complained of postoperative pain (41.5% vs. 58.6%, P = 0.072), and these patients used analgesics less frequently than those in the control group (28.3% vs. 36.2%, P = 0.374).

Conclusion

Patients who received a submucosal lidocaine injection prior to SH experienced less lower abdominal pain and dizziness compared with those who received standard treatment. A larger, more detailed prospective study is needed for further analysis.

Faecal immunochemical tests to triage patients with lower abdominal symptoms for suspected colorectal cancer referrals in primary care: a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer in the UK. Presenting symptoms that can be associated with CRC usually have another explanation. Faecal immunochemical tests (FITs) detect blood that is not visible to the naked eye and may help to select patients who are likely to benefit from further investigation.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of FITs [OC-Sensor (Eiken Chemical Co./MAST Diagnostics, Tokyo, Japan), HM-JACKarc (Kyowa Medex/Alpha Laboratories Ltd, Tokyo, Japan), FOB Gold (Sentinel/Sysmex, Sentinel Diagnostics, Milan, Italy), RIDASCREEN Hb or RIDASCREEN Hb/Hp complex (R-Biopharm, Darmstadt, Germany)] for primary care triage of people with low-risk symptoms.

METHODS

Twenty-four resources were searched to March 2016. Review methods followed published guidelines. Summary estimates were calculated using a bivariate model or a random-effects logistic regression model. The cost-effectiveness analysis considered long-term costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) that were associated with different faecal occult blood tests and direct colonoscopy referral. Modelling comprised a diagnostic decision model, a Markov model for long-term costs and QALYs that were associated with CRC treatment and progression, and a Markov model for QALYs that were associated with no CRC.

RESULTS

We included 10 studies. Using a single sample and 10 µg Hb/g faeces threshold, sensitivity estimates for OC-Sensor [92.1%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 86.9% to 95.3%] and HM-JACKarc (100%, 95% CI 71.5% to 100%) indicated that both may be useful to rule out CRC. Specificity estimates were 85.8% (95% CI 78.3% to 91.0%) and 76.6% (95% CI 72.6% to 80.3%). Triage using FITs could rule out CRC and avoid colonoscopy in approximately 75% of symptomatic patients. Data from our systematic review suggest that 22.5-93% of patients with a positive FIT and no CRC have other significant bowel pathologies. The results of the base-case analysis suggested minimal difference in QALYs between all of the strategies; no triage (referral straight to colonoscopy) is the most expensive. Faecal immunochemical testing was cost-effective (cheaper and more, or only slightly less, effective) compared with no triage. Faecal immunochemical testing was more effective and costly than guaiac faecal occult blood testing, but remained cost-effective at a threshold incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £30,000. The results of scenario analyses did not differ substantively from the base-case. Results were better for faecal immunochemical testing when accuracy of the guaiac faecal occult blood test (gFOBT) was based on studies that were more representative of the correct population.

LIMITATIONS

Only one included study evaluated faecal immunochemical testing in primary care; however, all of the other studies evaluated faecal immunochemical testing at the point of referral. Further, validation data for the Faecal haemoglobin, Age and Sex Test (FAST) score, which includes faecal immunochemical testing, showed no significant difference in performance between primary and secondary care. There were insufficient data to adequately assess FOB Gold, RIDASCREEN Hb or RIDASCREEN Hb/Hp complex. No study compared FIT assays, or FIT assays versus gFOBT; all of the data included in this assessment refer to the clinical effectiveness of individual FIT methods and not their comparative effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

Faecal immunochemical testing is likely to be a clinically effective and cost-effective strategy for triaging people who are presenting, in primary care settings, with lower abdominal symptoms and who are at low risk for CRC. Further research is required to confirm the effectiveness of faecal immunochemical testing in primary care practice and to compare the performance of different FIT assays.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016037723.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

2017 WSES guidelines for the management of iatrogenic colonoscopy perforation

Iatrogenic colonoscopy perforation (ICP) is a severe complication that can occur during both diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. Although 45–60% of ICPs are diagnosed by the endoscopist while performing the colonoscopy, many ICPs are not immediately recognized but are instead suspected on the basis of clinical signs and symptoms that occur after the endoscopic procedure. There are three main therapeutic options for ICPs: endoscopic repair, conservative therapy, and surgery. The therapeutic approach must vary based on the setting of the diagnosis (intra- or post-colonoscopy), the type of ICP, the characteristics and general status of the patient, the operator’s level of experience, and surgical device availability.

Although ICPs have been the focus of numerous publications, no guidelines have been created to standardize the management of ICPs. The aim of this article is to present the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) guidelines for the management of ICP, which are intended to be used as a tool to promote global standards of care in case of ICP. These guidelines are not meant to substitute providers’ clinical judgment for individual patients, and they may need to be modified based on the medical team’s level of experience and the availability of local resources.

Diagnostic Colonoscopy Leading to Perforated Appendicitis: A Case Report and Systematic Literature Review

Introduction. Intestinal perforation is a known complication after colonoscopy. However, appendiceal involvement with inflammation and perforation is extremely rare and only 37 cases of postcolonoscopy appendicitis have been reported so far. We describe a case of perforated appendicitis 24 hours after colonoscopy that was treated successfully in our Department. Case Report. A 60-year-old female patient underwent a colonoscopy during the investigation of nontypical abdominal pain without pathologic findings. 24 hours after the examination she presented gradually increased right lower quadrant abdominal pain and a CT scan was performed, showing an inflammation of the appendiceal area with free peritoneal air. Through laparotomy, perforated appendicitis was diagnosed and an appendectomy was performed. The patient was discharged on the tenth postoperative day in good health condition. Discussion. The characteristics of all cases reported in the literature are described, including our case. Perforated appendicitis soon after a colonoscopy is a rare, but serious complication; therefore, it is crucial to be included in the differential diagnosis of postcolonoscopy acute abdominal pain.

Transmural Colonic Infarction after Routine Colonoscopy in a Young Patient without Risk Factors

Colonoscopy is one of the most widely used procedures in medical practice for the diagnosis and treatment of many benign and malignant diseases of the colorectal tract. Colonscopy has become the reference procedure for screening and surveillance of colorectal cancer. The overall rate of adverse events is estimated to be about 2.8 per 1,000 procedures, while complications requiring hospitalization are about 1.9 per 1,000 colonoscopies. Mortality from all causes and colonoscopy-specific mortality are estimated to be 0.07 and 0.007%, respectively. An exceptional fearsome postcolonoscopy complication is colon ischemia (CI); only few cases have been reported worldwide. We present the case of a 43-year-old woman who presented to the emergency department complaining of abdominal pain; fever and rectal bleeding appeared 12 h after a voluntary 'screening' colonoscopy. She had no risk factors for CI. Her laboratory tests showed alterations in inflammatory markers and a computed tomography scan showed a circumferential thickening in the left colon and free fluid in the abdomen. After 12 h of observation and conservative therapy, the clinical state of the patient worsened with the rising of signs of peritonitis. Laparoscopy showed that colon infarction extended from the distal third of the transverse colon to the proximal rectum. Laparotomy, resection of the pathological colon and terminal colostomy were performed. The specimen examined confirmed an extended ischemic colitis and transmural infarction on the antimesocolic side, in the absence of a vasculitis. The patient underwent recanalization after 8 months. CI after colonoscopy is a rare and alarming complication that must be known and taken into account in the differential diagnosis of symptomatic cases after colonoscopy, particularly in patients with known risk factors. The diagnosis is mainly based on clinical data, imaging and especially endoscopy. Treatment is almost always conservative but, in some cases in which the pathological process appears irreversible, surgery becomes mandatory.