Colonoscopy Findings in HIV-Infected Men and Women from an Urban U.S. Cohort Compared with Non-HIV-Infected Men and Women

Gastrointestinal manifestations of human immunodeficiency virus and coronavirus disease 2019: Understanding the intersecting regions between the two epidemics

In March 2020, the World Health Organization declared coronavirus disease (COVID-19) a pandemic. As of February 2021, there were 107 million COVID-19 cases worldwide. As a comparison, there are approximately 38 million people living with human immunodeficiency virus (PLHIV) worldwide. The coexistence of both epidemics, and the syndemic effect of both viruses could lead to a delirious impact both at individual and community levels. Many intersecting points were found between severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), the causative agent of COVID-19, and HIV; among which, gastrointestinal (GI) manifestations are the most notable. GI manifestations represent a common clinical presentation in both HIV and SARS-CoV-2. The emergence of GI symptoms as a result of SARS-CoV-2 infection provides a new dynamic to COVID-19 diagnosis, management, and infection control measures, and adds an additional diagnostic challenge in case of coinfection with HIV. The presence of GI manifestations in PLHIV during the COVID-19 pandemic could be referred to HIV enteropathy, presence of opportunistic infection, adverse effect of antiretrovirals, or coinfection with COVID-19. Thus, it is important to exclude SARS-CoV-2 in patients who present with new-onset GI manifestations, especially in PLHIV, to avoid the risk of disease transmission during endoscopic interventions. Structural similarities between both viruses adds a valuable intersecting point, which has mutual benefits in the management of both viruses. These similarities led to the hypothesis that antiretrovirals such as lopinavir/Rironavir have a role in the management of COVID-19, which was the target of our search strategy using the available evidence. These similarities may also facilitate the development of an efficient HIV vaccine in the future using the advances in COVID-19 vaccine development.

Prevalence and Clinical Features of Sessile Serrated Polyps: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Sessile serrated polyps (SSPs) could account for a substantial proportion of colorectal cancers. We aimed to increase clarity on SSP prevalence and clinical features.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of MEDLINE, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane databases for original studies published in English since 2000. We included studies of different populations (United States general or similar), interventions (colonoscopy, autopsy), comparisons (world regions, alternative polyp definitions, adenoma), outcomes (prevalence, clinical features), and study designs (cross-sectional). Random-effects regression was used for meta-analysis where possible.

RESULTS

We identified 74 relevant colonoscopy studies. SSP prevalence varied by world region, from 2.6% in Asia (95% confidence interval [CI], 0-5.9) to 10.5% in Australia (95% CI, 2.8-18.2). Prevalence values did not differ significantly between the United States and Europe (P = .51); the pooled prevalence was 4.6% (95% CI, 3.4-5.8), and SSPs accounted for 9.4% of polyps with malignant potential (95% CI, 6.6-12.3). The mean prevalence was higher when assessed through high-performance examinations (9.1%; 95% CI, 4.0-14.2; P = .04) and with an alternative definition of clinically relevant serrated polyps (12.3%; 95% CI, 9.3-15.4; P < .001). Increases in prevalence with age were not statistically significant, and prevalence did not differ significantly by sex. Compared with adenomas, a higher proportion of SSPs were solitary (69.0%; 95% CI, 45.9-92.1; P = .08), with diameters of 10 mm or more (19.3%; 95% CI, 12.4-26.2; P = .13) and were proximal (71.5%; 95% CI, 63.5-79.5; P = .008). The mean ages for detection of SSP without dysplasia, with any or low-grade dysplasia, and with high-grade dysplasia were 60.8 years, 65.6 years, and 70.2 years, respectively. The range for proportions of SSPs with dysplasia was 3.7%-42.9% across studies, possibly reflecting different study populations.

CONCLUSIONS

In a systematic review, we found that SSPs are relatively uncommon compared with adenoma. More research is needed on appropriate diagnostic criteria, variations in detection, and long-term risk.

Confounders in Adenoma Detection at Initial Screening Colonoscopy: A Factor in the Assessment of Racial Disparities as a Risk for Colon Cancer

Background and Aims

The incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer is persistently highest in Black/African-Americans in the United States. While access to care, barriers to screening, and poverty might explain these findings, there is increased interest in examining biological factors that impact the colonic environment. Our group is examining biologic factors that contribute to disparities in development of adenomas prospectively. In preparation for this and to characterize a potential patient population, we conducted a retrospective review of initial screening colonoscopies in a cohort of patients.

Methods

A retrospective review was performed on initial average risk screening colonoscopies on patients (age 45-75 years) during 2012 at three institutions. Descriptive statistics and multivariable logistic regression models were used to examine the relationship between potential risk factors and the detection of adenomas.

Results

Of the 2225 initial screening colonoscopies 1495 (67.2%) were performed on Black/African-Americans and 566 (25.4%) on Caucasians. Multivariable logistic regression revealed that older age, male sex, current smoking and teaching gastroenterologists were associated with higher detection of adenomas and these were less prevalent among Black/African-Americas except for age. Neither race, ethnicity, BMI, diabetes mellitus, HIV nor insurance were associated with adenoma detection.

Conclusion

In this sample, there was no association between race and adenoma detection. While this may be due to a lower prevalence of risk factors for adenomas in this sample, our findings were confounded by a lower detection rate by consultant gastroenterologists at one institution. The study allowed us to rectify the problem and characterize patients for future trials.