Long-term colorectal-cancer mortality after adenoma removal

Publication trends and hotspots of colorectal adenoma during 2002-2022: a bibliometric and visualized analysis

Background

Prevention and treatment of colorectal adenoma (CRA) are great significant to reduce morbidity and mortality of colorectal cancer. Although there have been numerous studies on CRA recently, few publications utilized the bibliometrics to evaluate this field. The objective of current study was to provide a comprehensive analysis of the current state and frontier progress of CRA over the past 20 years.

Methods

The Web of Science Core Collection was utilized to extracted all studies of CRA during 2002-2022. Bibliometric tools including CiteSpace, VOSviewer, and the Online Analysis Platform of Literature Metrology were used for statistical analysis. CiteSpace and the Online Analysis Platform were used to evaluate the contributions of various countries/regions, institutions, authors, and journals in this field. Research hotspots and trends were identified through keywords and references analysis by VOSviewer and CiteSpace.

Results

2,268 publications from 2002 to 2022 in total were identified. The number of global publications in this field has increased annually. The USA was the most productive country, contributing nearly 30% of global publications. But in recent years, China's publications grew rapidly and had the highest citation strength. The most productive institutions was the National Cancer Institute. Baron JA from the USA was the most productive and the one of most co-cited authors. Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention had the highest number of publications and Gastroenterology was the most co-cited journals. Analysis of keywords clusters showed that "mechanism/pathophysiology", "risk factors and prevention", "colonoscopy screening and treatment", "metabolism", and "microbiota" were the major frontier topics and the main research directions.

Conclusions

CRA publications have shown a gradual upward trend in recent years, most of which have been published by developed countries. Developing countries should further focus on CRA research and transnational cooperation with developed countries in the future, in order to better improve the situation of the increasing morbidity and mortality of CRC. Baron JA was the most outstanding researcher in this field. More attention should be devoted to "pathogenesis of CRA", "less invasive diagnostic methods", "chemoprevention", and "screening and risk prediction of CRA including gut microbiome and metabolism", which will be frontiers in the future.

Colonoscopy in poorly prepped colons: a cost effectiveness analysis comparing standard of care to a new cleansing technology

Background

The objective of this Markov model lifetime cost-effectiveness analysis was to evaluate a new medical device technology which minimizes redo colonoscopies on the outcomes of cost, quality of life, and aversion of colorectal cancers (CRC).

Methods

A new technology (PureVu® System) which cleans inadequately prepped colons was evaluated using TreeAge 2019 software in patients who presented with inadequate prep in outpatient settings in the US. PureVu was compared to the standard of care (SOC). Peer reviewed literature was used to identify the CRC incidence cancers based on missing polyps. Costs for procedures were derived from 2019 Medicare and from estimated private payer reimbursements. Base case costs, sensitivity analysis and incremental cost effectiveness (ICE) were evaluated. The cost of PureVu was $750.

Results

Assuming a national average compliance rate of 60% for colonoscopy, the use of PureVu saved the healthcare system $833–$992/patient depending upon the insurer when compared to SOC. QALYs were also improved with PureVu mainly due to a lower incidence of CRCs. In sensitivity analysis, SOC becomes less expensive than PureVu when compliance to screening for CRC using colonoscopy is ≤ 28%. Also, in order for SOC to be less expensive than PureVu, the list price of PureVu would need to exceed $1753. In incremental cost effectiveness analysis, PureVu dominated SOC.

Conclusion

Using the PureVu System to improve bowel prep can save the healthcare system $3.1–$3.7 billion per year, while ensuring a similar quality of life and reducing the incidence of CRCs.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12962-021-00277-5.

Clinical Effectiveness of Submucosal Injection with Indigo Carmine Mixed Solution for Colon Endoscopic Mucosal Resection

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Submucosal injection with indigo carmine mixed solution can improve the delineation of colorectal neoplasia during endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). Thus, the aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of submucosal injection with indigo carmine mixed solution during EMR of colorectal neoplasia.

METHODS

This was a prospective, randomized, controlled study of a total of 212 neoplastic colon polyps (5-20 mm) subjected to EMR in a single tertiary university hospital. The patients were randomized into two groups according to whether or not indigo carmine mixed solution was used, and the complete resection rate (CRR) after EMR was evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 212 neoplastic polyps (normal saline group, 115; indigo carmine group, 97) were successfully removed by EMR. There was no significant difference in the CRR (92.8 vs. 89.6%, p = 0.414) or macroscopic delineation (86.0 vs. 93.8%, p = 0.118) between the two groups. In a separate analysis of sessile serrated adenomas/polyps (SSAs/Ps), macroscopic delineation was better in the indigo carmine group than the normal saline group (87.5 vs. 53.8%), albeit not significantly (p = 0.103). In univariate analyses, the CRR was significantly related to polyp location, polyp morphology, macroscopic delineation, and pathologic findings. In a multiple logistic regression analysis, macroscopic delineation (odds ratio (OR), 7.616, p = 0.001) and polyp pathology (OR, 8.621; p < 0.001) were significantly associated with the CRR.

CONCLUSIONS

Submucosal injection with indigo carmine mixed solution did not improve the CRR or macroscopic delineation of EMR of colorectal neoplasias.

Impact of bowel preparation type on the quality of colonoscopy: a multicenter community-based study

Background

High-quality bowel preparation is crucial for achieving the goals of colonoscopy. However, choosing a bowel preparation in clinical practice can be challenging because of the many formulations. This study aims to assess the impact the type of bowel preparation on the quality of colonoscopy in a community hospital setting.

Methods

A retrospective, observational study was conducted utilizing a colonoscopy screening/surveillance database in central Illinois during the period of January 1, 2010, to March 31, 2014. Patients without bowel preparation assessment were excluded from this study. Controlling for the confounders, generalized linear models were used to estimate the adjusted impact [odds ratio (OR)] of bowel preparation type on the quality of preparation (excellent, good, fair, and poor), and on the detection of advanced adenoma. The association between the time of withdrawal after insertion and the quality of preparation was also examined using a linear model.

Results

A total of 28,368 colonoscopies; half the patients were male, and the average age was 61±9 years. Polyethylene glycol (PEG) was used in the majority (70.2%) of bowel preparations, followed by sodium sulfate (21.4%), sodium phosphate (2.5%), magnesium sulfate (0.4%), and others. Compared with PEG, magnesium sulfate had a poorer quality of bowel preparations (OR=0.6, 95% CI 0.4–0.9; p<0.05), whereas the quality of bowel preparation was significantly improved by using sodium sulfate (OR=5.7, 95% CI 5.4–6.1; p<0.001) and sodium phosphate (OR=2.1, 95% CI 1.8–2.5; p<0.001). For those who had adequate bowel preparation, the better quality of preparation significantly increased the detection rate of advanced adenoma (5.0, 3.6, and 2.9% for excellent, good, and fair, respectively).

Conclusion

When possible, sodium sulfate–based preparations should be recommended in the community setting for colonoscopy because of their high quality of bowel preparation.