A prospective study of colonoscopy practice in the UK today: are we adequately prepared for national colorectal cancer screening tomorrow?

Training in basic gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures: a European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and European Society of Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Nurses and Associates (ESGENA) Position Statement

This ESGE Position Statement provides structured and evidence-based guidance on the essential requirements and processes involved in training in basic gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopic procedures. The document outlines definitions; competencies required, and means to their assessment and maintenance; the structure and requirements of training programs; patient safety and medicolegal issues. 1:  ESGE and ESGENA define basic endoscopic procedures as those procedures that are commonly indicated, generally accessible, and expected to be mastered (technically and cognitively) by the end of any core training program in gastrointestinal endoscopy. 2:  ESGE and ESGENA consider the following as basic endoscopic procedures: diagnostic upper and lower GI endoscopy, as well as a limited range of interventions such as: tissue acquisition via cold biopsy forceps, polypectomy for lesions ≤ 10 mm, hemostasis techniques, enteral feeding tube placement, foreign body retrieval, dilation of simple esophageal strictures, and India ink tattooing of lesion location. 3:  ESGE and ESGENA recommend that training in GI endoscopy should be subject to stringent formal requirements that ensure all ESGE key performance indicators (KPIs) are met. 4:  Training in basic endoscopic procedures is a complex process and includes the development and acquisition of cognitive, technical/motor, and integrative skills. Therefore, ESGE and ESGENA recommend the use of validated tools to track the development of skills and assess competence. 5:  ESGE and ESGENA recommend incorporating a multimodal approach to evaluating competence in basic GI endoscopic procedures, including procedural thresholds and the measurement and documentation of established ESGE KPIs. 7:  ESGE and ESGENA recommend the continuous monitoring of ESGE KPIs during GI endoscopy training to ensure the trainee's maintenance of competence. 9:  ESGE and ESGENA recommend that GI endoscopy training units fulfil the ESGE KPIs for endoscopy units and, furthermore, be capable of providing the dedicated personnel, infrastructure, and sufficient case volume required for successful training within a structured training program. 10:  ESGE and ESGENA recommend that trainers in basic GI endoscopic procedures should be endoscopists with formal educational training in the teaching of endoscopy, which allows them to successfully and safely teach trainees.

British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines on sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopy

Over 2.5 million gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures are carried out in the United Kingdom (UK) every year. Procedures are carried out with local anaesthetic r with sedation. Sedation is commonly used for gastrointestinal endoscopy, but the type and amount of sedation administered is influenced by the complexity and nature of the procedure and patient factors. The elective and emergency nature of endoscopy procedures and local resources also have a significant impact on the delivery of sedation. In the UK, the vast majority of sedated procedures are carried out using benzodiazepines, with or without opiates, whereas deeper sedation using propofol or general anaesthetic requires the involvement of an anaesthetic team. Patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy need to have good understanding of the options for sedation, including the option for no sedation and alternatives, balancing the intended aims of the procedure and reducing the risk of complications. These guidelines were commissioned by the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) Endoscopy Committee with input from major stakeholders, to provide a detailed update, incorporating recent advances in sedation for gastrointestinal endoscopy.This guideline covers aspects from pre-assessment of the elective 'well' patient to patients with significant comorbidity requiring emergency procedures. Types of sedation are discussed, procedure and room requirements and the recovery period, providing guidance to enhance safety and minimise complications. These guidelines are intended to inform practising clinicians and all staff involved in the delivery of gastrointestinal endoscopy with an expectation that this guideline will be revised in 5-years' time.

Provider-reported use of butylscopolamine in gastrointestinal endoscopy in Germany

Introduction The anti-cholinergic agent hyoscine-N-butylbromide (HBB) is used in gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy to decrease motility and facilitate endoscopic procedures. Data from clinical studies to support this practice is limited especially for therapeutic procedures. Likewise, patterns of use among endoscopist are largely unclear. This study sought to assess usage of HBB among German-speaking endoscopists. Material and Methods We conducted an anonymous online survey among endoscopists in German-speaking countries. Results A total of 207 physicians participated in the survey. The majority (76.9%) were experienced endoscopists and 92.3% of respondents use HBB at least occasionally during procedures. The reported median stated frequency of HBB use varied greatly between different types of procedures and increased with the complexity of the procedure being performed. HBB was rarely used in diagnostic esophagogastroduodenoscopies (EGD) (median stated frequency 1% of procedures), while use frequency was significantly higher in EGD with endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) (10%; p=0.002) and EGD with endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) (20%; p<0.001). Similarly, use frequency during diagnostic colonoscopy was lower (5%) compared to colonoscopy with EMR (20%, p=0.005) or ESD (42.5%, p<0.001). The highest use frequency was reported for ERCP (50%). The most frequently stated reason to use HBB was facilitation of the procedure (80.6%) followed by increasing diagnostic yield (58.3%). Conclusion German-speaking endoscopists commonly use HBB, most frequently to facilitate complex therapeutic procedures. Given there is almost no data supporting HBB use in therapeutic endoscopy, we suggest that more research is needed to evaluate benefits and risks of this practice.

Screening and Colonoscopy Quality Measures: Ethnic Disparities and Impact on Patients' Outcome

Background

Recent reports have confirmed the improving trends in colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and outcomes. Still, disparities in incidence and mortality in CRC continue to persist between major ethnic groups despite the provision of widespread screening and improved care. We aimed to outline, from an endoscopic point of view, ethnic disparities in major endoscopic measures concerned with CRC screening and detection and track their impact on patients' outcomes.

Methods

We reviewed electronic reports of patients referred for colonoscopy procedures over 20 years. We compared demographic, clinical, and endoscopic findings between major ethnic population groups in Israel. In addition, trends of screening utilization, bowel preparation, and polyp detection rates were tracked, and the incidence of CRC diagnosis was followed.

Results

A total of 51307 patients had undergone colonoscopies, of whom 16% were Arabs, and 84% were Jewish. The procedures performed for CRC screening throughout the study period were significantly lower in Arabs (5% vs. 13.1%; P < 0.0001). In parallel, for most of the follow-up period, the Arab patients had higher rates of inadequate bowel preparation (overall: 19.9% vs. 12%; P < 0.001) and a lower polyp detection rate (16.7% vs. 22.5%; P < 0.0001). Expectedly, the incidence of CRC has steadily decreased in the Jewish group, while an adverse pattern of increasing incidence was documented in the Arab patient during the follow-up period.

Conclusion

Characterized by lower screening utilization and poor bowel preparation, the incidence of CRC development in Arab patients is increasing, while improving trends of CRC were observed in their Jewish counterparts.

Global Trends of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Anesthesia/Sedation: A Bibliometric Study (from 2001 to 2022)

Background

Gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy becomes more and more common now in order to diagnose and treat GI diseases, and anesthesia/sedation plays an important role. We aim to discuss the developmental trends and evaluate the research hotspots using bibliometric methods for GI endoscopy anesthesia/sedation in the past two decades.

Methods

The original and review articles published from 2001 to December 2022 related to GI endoscopy anesthesia/sedation were extracted from the Web of Science database. Four different softwares (CiteSpace, VOSviewer, and Bibliometrix, Online Analysis Platform of Literature Metrology (Bibliometric)) were used for this comprehensive analysis.

Results

According to our retrieval strategy, we found a total of 3154 related literatures. Original research articles were 2855, and reviews were 299. There has been a substantial increase in the research on GI endoscopy anesthesia/sedation in recent 22 years. These publications have been cited 66,418 times, with a mean of 21.04 citations per publication. The US maintained a leading position in global research, with the largest number of publications (29.94%), and China ranked second (19.92%). Keyword burst and concurrence showed that conscious sedation, colonoscopy and midazolam were the most frequently occurring keywords.

Conclusion

Our research found that GI endoscopy anesthesia/sedation was in a period of rapid development and demonstrated the improvement of medical instruments and surgical options that had significantly contributed to the field of GI endoscopy anesthesia/sedation. The US dominates this field, and the selection and dosage of sedative regimens have always been the foci of disease research to improve comfort and safety, while adverse events and risks arouse attention gradually. In the past 20 years, hotspots mainly focus on upper gastrointestinal endoscopy, gastroscopy, and esophagogastroduodenoscopy. These data would provide future directions for clinicians and researchers regarding GI endoscopy anesthesia/sedation.

Quality in colonoscopy: time to ensure national standards are implemented?

Background

High-quality colonoscopy is crucial to ensure complete mucosal visualisation and to maximise detection of pathology. Previous audits showing variable quality have prompted national and international colonoscopy improvement programmes, including the development of quality assurance standards and key performance indicators (KPIs). The most widely used marker of mucosal visualisation is the adenoma detection rate (ADR), however, histological confirmation is required to calculate this. We explored the relationship between core colonoscopy KPIs.

Methods

Data were collected from colonoscopists in eight hospitals in North East England over a 6-month period, as part of a quality improvement study. Procedural information was collected including number of colonoscopies, caecal intubation rate (CIR), ADR and polyp detection rate (PDR). Associations between KPIs and colonoscopy performance were analysed.

Results

9265 colonoscopies performed by 118 endoscopists were included. Mean ADR and PDR per endoscopist were 16.6% (range 0-36.3, SD 7.4) and 27.2% (range 0-57.5, SD 9.3), respectively. Mean number of colonoscopies conducted in 6 months was 78.5 (range 4-334, SD 61). Mean CIR was 91.2% (range 55.5-100, SD 6.6). Total number of colonoscopies and ADR>15% were significantly associated (p=0.04). Undertaking fewer colonoscopies and using hyoscine butylbromide less frequently was significantly associated with ADR<15%. CIR, endoscopist grade, % male patients, mean patient age and CIR were not significantly related to ADR<15%. In adjusted analyses, factors which affected ADR were PDR and mean patient age.

Conclusion

Colonoscopists who perform fewer than the nationally stipulated minimum of 100 procedures per year had significantly lower ADRs. This study demonstrates that PDR can be used as a marker of ADR; providing age is also considered.

Fatal outcomes of endoscopy: an analysis from the coroner's point of view

Background and study aims  This study was designed to provide a profound analysis of fatalities associated with endoscopic procedures. Methods  Protocols of all autopsies performed within 20 years in a large Department of Forensic Medicine were retrospectively analyzed to identify all fatalities directly related to an endoscopic procedure. Data were further specified focusing on the type of endoscopy and the final cause of death. Results  Of 22,615 autopsies performed between January 2000 and September 2019, 86 deaths were identified as complications of an endoscopic procedure. The average age of these 86 patients was 70.9 years (66.4 (range, 26-89) in males (n = 35) and 74.1 years (range, 22-94) in females (n = 51)). Endoscopic procedures included 29 endoscopic retrograde cholangeopancreatographies (ERCPs), 27 colonoscopies, 18 percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube placements, six gastroscopies, two upper endosopic ultrasonographies, and four transesophageal echocardiographies. ERCPs, colonoscopy and PEG procedures together accounted for 74 of 86 (86 %) endoscopy-related deaths. Focusing on the single procedures, post-ERCP pancreatitis (14/29, 48 %), colonoscopy-associated perforation (24/27, 89 %), and peritonitis after PEG placement (16/18, 88 %) were the most common causes of death. Conclusions  Even in the thought-to-be-safe and screening endoscopic procedures fatalities do occur. This study gives an overview of endoscopy-related fatalities, stressing the role of ERCP, colonoscopy, and PEG.

Three-dimensional reconstruction of computed tomography colonography discloses anatomic features associated with colonoscopy failure

Objectives:

Three-dimensional virtual reality (3D VR) permits precise reconstruction of computed tomography (CT) images, and these allow precise measurements of colonic anatomical parameters. Colonoscopy proves challenging in a subset of patients, and thus CT colonoscopy (CTC) is often required to visualize the entire colon. The aim of the study was to determine whether 3D reconstructions of the colon could help identify and quantify the key anatomical features leading to colonoscopy failure.

Design:

Retrospective observational study.

Methods:

Using 3D VR technology, we reconstructed and compared the length of various colonic segments and number of bends and colonic width in 10 cases of CTC in technically failed prior colonoscopies to 10 cases of CTC performed for non-technically failure indications.

Results:

We found significant elongation of the sigmoid colon (71 ± 23 cm versus 35 ± 9; p = 0.01) and of pancolonic length (216 ± 38 cm versus 158 ± 20 cm; p = 0.001) in cases of technically failed colonoscopy. There was also a significant increase in the number of colonic angles (17.7 ± 3.2 versus 12.7 ± 2.4; p = 0.008) in failed colonoscopy cases.

Conclusion:

Increased sigmoid and pancolonic length and more colonic bends are novel factors associated with technical failure of colonoscopy.

Clinical Characteristics and Main Findings of Colonoscopy in Tripoli Central Hospital: A Cross-Sectional Study of 1858 Patients

Introduction Colonoscopy is used to detect colorectal abnormalities, including inflammatory bowel disease, polyps, cancers, and other colorectal lesions. We aimed to analyze the demographic and clinical characteristics, main findings, and indications of patients who underwent colonoscopy in the Surgery department of Tripoli Central Hospital in Libya. Methods The study data were retrospectively extracted from the medical in and out-patient records of individuals who underwent colonoscopy procedures between December 2009 and December 2016 in the general surgery department of Tripoli General Hospital. Results A total of 1858 patients underwent colonoscopy during the study period with a mean age of 51.7 ± 18.5 years. Hematochezia was the most common patient complaint (530; 28.5%), followed by constipation (354; 19.1%), and weight loss (178; 9.6%), respectively. Seven-hundred sixty-five (765; 41.2%) participants completed the procedure, 420 (22.6%) did not, and 673 (36.2%) participants failed the colonoscopy. The most common reasons for procedure failure were failed preparation (609; 55.7%), followed by patient intolerance (251; 23.0%), and obstructive lesions (229; 21.0%). The most common finding was colonic masses, followed by polyps (29.0% and 20.8%, respectively). Conclusion This study describes the characteristics of colonoscopy patients in the largest surgical center in Libya over seven years. Hematochezia and chronic constipation were the most common complaints among the participants with reported complaints. Half of the colonoscopy procedures are incomplete or failed due to the lack of patient preparation. Colonic masses and polyps were the most common among the reported colonoscopic findings. Future research to increase the quality of colonoscopy service and patient preparations in Libya is required.

JAG consensus statements for training and certification in flexible sigmoidoscopy

Introduction

Joint Advisory Group (JAG) certification in endoscopy is awarded when trainees attain minimum competency standards for independent practice. A national evidence-based review was undertaken to update standards for training and certification in flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS).

Methods

A modified Delphi process was conducted between 2019 and 2020 with multisociety representation from experts and trainees. Following literature review and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations appraisal, recommendation statements on FS training and certification were formulated and subjected to anonymous voting to obtain consensus. Accepted statements were peer-reviewed by national stakeholders for incorporation into the JAG FS certification pathway.

Results

In total, 41 recommendation statements were generated under the domains of: definition of competence (13), acquisition of competence (17), assessment of competence (7) and postcertification support (4). The consensus process led to revised criteria for colonoscopy certification, comprising: (A) achieving key performance indicators defined within British Society of Gastroenterology standards (ie, rectal retroversion >90%, polyp retrieval rate >90%, patient comfort <10% with moderate-severe discomfort); (B) minimum procedure count ≥175; (C) performing 15+ procedures over the preceding 3 months; (D) attendance of the JAG Basic Skills in Lower gastrointestinal Endoscopy course; (E) satisfying requirements for formative direct observation of procedural skill (DOPS) and direct observation of polypectomy skill (SMSA level 1); (F) evidence of reflective practice as documented on the JAG Endoscopy Training System reflection tool and (G) successful performance in summative DOPS.

Conclusion

The UK standards for training and certification in FS have been updated to support training, uphold standards in FS and polypectomy, and provide support to the newly independent practitioner.

What Is Known about Midazolam? A Bibliometric Approach of the Literature

Midazolam is a drug with actions towards the central nervous system producing sedative and anticonvulsants effects, used for sedation and seizures treatments. A better understanding about its effects in the different scenarios presented in the literature could be helpful to gather information regarding its clinical indications, pharmacological interactions, and adverse events. From this perspective, the aim of this study was to analyze the global research about midazolam mapping, specifically the knowledge of the 100 most-cited papers about this research field. For this, a search was executed on the Web of Science-Core Collection database using bibliometric methodological tools. The search strategy retrieved 34,799 articles. A total of 170 articles were evaluated, with 70 articles being excluded for not meeting the inclusion criteria. The 100 most-cited articles rendered 42,480 citations on WoS-CC, ranging from 253 to 1744. Non-systematic review was the most published study type, mainly from North America, during the period of 1992 to 2002. The most frequent keywords were midazolam and pharmacokinetics. Regarding the authors, Thummel and Kunze were the ones with the greatest number of papers included. Our findings showed the global research trends about midazolam, mainly related to its different effects and uses throughout the time.

Colon capsule endoscopy following incomplete colonoscopy in routine clinical settings

BACKGROUND

Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) was introduced in our department on two indications; following incomplete colonoscopy as an alternative to CT colonography, and in patients with a history of incomplete colonoscopy as an alternative to anesthesia-assisted (AA) colonoscopy. We aimed to compare the quality of CCE, defined by completion rate and polyp detection rate (PDR), with that of CT colonography and AA colonoscopy, respectively.

METHODS

Patients referred for CCE from May 2020 until November 2021 were consecutively included in this prospective cohort study. Demographics, indication and CCE outcomes were registered from the electronic patient record. Completion rate and PDR in CCE as an alternative to CT colonography were compared with those of a historical cohort undergoing CT colonography following incomplete colonoscopy. Completion rate and PDR in CCE as an alternative to AA colonoscopy were compared with those of a time true parallel cohort undergoing AA colonoscopy.

RESULTS

In 65 patients undergoing CCE, 36 (57%) were referred as an alternative to CT colonography. The completion rate in this group was 44% compared to 96% in CT colonography (p < 0.001). The PDR in complete CCE in this group was 75% in CCE compared to 20% in CT colonography (p < 0.001). The remaining 27 (43%) of the sample were referred for CCE as an alternative to AA colonoscopy. The completion rate in this group was 33% compared to 100% in AA colonoscopy (p < 0.001). The PDR in complete CCE in this group was 78% in CCE compared to 35% in AA colonoscopy (p = 0.013).

CONCLUSIONS

The completion rate of CCE following incomplete colonoscopy is inferior to that of CT colonography and AA colonoscopy. The PDR of CCE was high, indicating an acceptable sensitivity in complete investigations, but in our settings the completion rate of CCE on this indication is unacceptably low.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT04307901 (ClinicalTrials.gov, March 13, 2020).

[Quality Assurance of Screening Colonoscopy in Austria and Europe]

Die Vorsorgekoloskopie als effizientes Tool zur Reduktion von Kolorektalkarzinominzidenz und -mortalität ist nur dann effektiv, wenn sie unter hohen Qualitätsstandards durchgeführt wurde. Die European Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy gibt hierbei Key Performance Measures, wie die Adenomentdeckungsrate, die Zökumerreichsrate und die Rate an adäquater Vorbereitungsqualität, vor, auf die beim Screening geachtet werden sollten. Das „Qualitätszertifikat Darmkrebsvorsorge“, das als Qualitätssicherungsprogramm auf freiwilliger Basis von der Österreichischen Gesellschaft für Gastroenterologie und Hepatologie gemeinsam mit dem Dachverband der österreichischen Sozialversicherungsträger und der Österreichischen Krebshilfe für Endoskopiker:innen in ganz Österreich ins Leben gerufen wurde, überprüft diese Qualitätsparameter. Es wird ein Darmkrebsscreening auf höchsten Standards angestrebt, um somit die besten Outcomes für Patient:innen zu erzielen. Auch europaweit ist das Interesse an einer qualitätsgesicherten Vorsorgekoloskopie groß: Viele Länder, wie z. B. die Niederlande, Norwegen und das Vereinigte Königreich haben Programme, um die Qualität des Screenings zu überwachen und zu verbessern.

Choice of injection time of conscious sedation and its impact on pain control in colonoscopy

Purpose

The aim of this study was to identify the effect of different injection times on pain during colonoscopy procedure.

Methods

In this retrospective study, the data of patients who underwent colonoscopy from June 2020 to September 2020 were assessed to investigate the effect of different injection time of sedative drugs (midazolam and dezocine). The primary endpoint was evaluating the pain intensity of the patients using visual analogue scale (VAS) immediately after colonoscopy .

Results

A total of 152 patients were eligible for this study. Of them, 76 received midazolam and dezocine injection 1 min prior to the colonoscopy procedure (the 1 Min group) and the other 76 patients received the injection 3 min prior to the procedure (the 3 Min group). The vital signs of all patients were stable except for one patient who was diagnosed with inflammatory bowel disease in the 3 Min group. A transient drop in blood pressure for this patient was observed during colonoscopy but returned to normal after general treatment. The two groups had similar rates of cecal intubation (84.21% vs. 90.97%, P = 0.22), addition of sedative drugs during procedure (2.63% vs. 5.26%, P = 0.68), and adequate bowel preparation (Boston Bowel Preparation Scale ≥6, 61.84% vs. 61.84%, P = 1.0). However, patients in the 3 Min group had significantly lower VAS than those in the 1 Min group [0 (0, 1) vs. 1 (0, 2), P = 0.041].

Conclusion

The timing of drug injection during conscious sedation may affect pain control during colonoscopy, with 3 min prior to the procedure showing lower VAS.

Normal gastrointestinal mucosa at biopsy and subsequent cancer risk: nationwide population-based, sibling-controlled cohort study

Background

While individuals with normal gastrointestinal (GI) mucosa on endoscopy have a lower risk of colorectal cancer, risks of other cancers remain unexplored.

Methods

Through Sweden’s 28 pathology departments, we identified 415,092 individuals with a first GI biopsy with histologically normal mucosa during 1965–2016 and no prior cancer. These individuals were compared to 1,939,215 matched reference individuals from the general population. Follow-up began 6 months after biopsy, and incident cancer data were retrieved from the Swedish Cancer Register. Flexible parametric model was applied to estimate cumulative incidences and hazard ratios (HRs) for cancers. We also used full siblings (n = 441,534) as a secondary comparison group.

Results

During a median follow-up of 10.9 years, 40,935 individuals with normal mucosa (incidence rate: 82.74 per 10,000 person-years) and 177,350 reference individuals (incidence rate: 75.26) developed cancer. Restricting the data to individuals where follow-up revealed no cancer in the first 6 months, we still observed an increased risk of any cancer in those with a histologically normal mucosa (average HR = 1.07; 95%CI = 1.06–1.09). Although the HR for any and specific cancers decreased shortly after biopsy, we observed a long-term excess risk of any cancer, with an HR of 1.08 (95%CI = 1.05–1.12) and a cumulative incidence difference of 0.93% (95%CI = 0.61%-1.25%) at 30 years after biopsy. An elevated risk of gastric cancer, lung cancer, and hematological malignancy (including lymphoproliferative malignancy) was also observed at 20 or 30 years since biopsy. Sibling analyses confirmed the above findings.

Conclusion

Individuals with a histologically normal mucosa at biopsy and where follow-up revealed no cancer in the first 6 months, may still be at increased risk of cancer, although excess risks are small.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-09992-5.

Normal Gastrointestinal Mucosa at Biopsy and Overall Mortality: Nationwide Population-Based Cohort Study

Background

Normal gastrointestinal (GI) mucosa on endoscopy has been linked to a lower risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) but its association to overall death is unknown.

Methods

We identified 466,987 individuals with a first GI biopsy 1965–2016 with normal mucosa (60.6% upper GI and 39.4% lower GI) through all Swedish pathology departments (n = 28). They were individually matched to 2,321,217 reference individuals without a GI biopsy and also compared to 505,076 full siblings. Flexible parametric models were applied to estimate hazard ratio (HRs) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) for death.

Results

During a median follow-up of ~11 years, 85,859 (18.39%) of individuals with normal mucosa and 377,653 (16.27%) of reference individuals died. This corresponded to incidence rates of 147.56/10,000 vs 127.90/10,000 person-years respectively (rate difference: 19.66/10,000 person-years), with the multivariable-adjusted HR of 1.21 (95% CI: 1.20–1.22). Excess mortality was seen for both upper and lower biopsy with normal mucosa. Particularly higher HRs for death were seen in males, individuals biopsied when aged <40 years, those without a prior record of GI disease, and those with high education. Mortality risk was most increased in the first five years after biopsy (HR = 1.34; 95% CI: 1.32–1.36) but decreased thereafter. Having a GI biopsy with normal mucosa was associated with excess mortality from cardiovascular (CVD)disease (HR = 1.02; 95% CI: 1.01–1.03), cancer (HR = 1.58; 95% CI: 1.56–1.61), GI disease (HR = 1.65; 95% CI: 1.58–1.71), and other causes (HR = 1.10; 95% CI: 1.08–1.11). Sibling comparisons yielded similar results.

Conclusion

Compared with individuals without a GI biopsy, those with a normal GI biopsy due to clinical symptoms had a higher mortality particularly in the first five years after biopsy, and especially from GI disease and cancer.

UK endoscopy workload and workforce patterns: is there potential to increase capacity? A BSG analysis of the National Endoscopy Database

Background

The lack of comprehensive national data on endoscopy activity and workforce hampers strategic planning. The National Endoscopy Database (NED) provides a unique opportunity to address this in the UK. We evaluated NED to inform service planning, exploring opportunities to expand capacity to meet service demands.

Design

Data on all procedures between 1 March 2019 and 29 February 2020 were extracted from NED. Endoscopy activity and endoscopist workforce were analysed.

Results

1 639 640 procedures were analysed (oesophagogastroduodenoscopy (OGD) 693 663, colonoscopy 586 464, flexible sigmoidoscopy 335 439 and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography 23 074) from 407 sites by 4990 endoscopists. 89% of procedures were performed in NHS sites. 17% took place each weekday, 10% on Saturdays and 6% on Sundays. Training procedures accounted for 6% of total activity, over 99% of which took place in NHS sites. Median patient age was younger in the independent sector (IS) (51 vs 60 years, p<0.001). 74% of endoscopists were male. Gastroenterologists and surgeons each comprised one-third of the endoscopist workforce; non-medical endoscopists (NMEs) comprised 12% yet undertook 23% of procedures. Approximately half of endoscopists performing OGD (52%) or colonoscopies (48%) did not meet minimum annual procedure numbers.

Conclusion

This comprehensive analysis reveals endoscopy workload and workforce patterns for the first time across both the NHS and the IS in all four UK nations. Half of all endoscopists perform fewer than the recommended minimum annual procedure numbers: a national strategy to address this, along with expansion of the NME workforce, would increase endoscopy capacity, which could be used to exploit latent weekend capacity.

Colonoscopy surveillance following adenoma removal to reduce the risk of colorectal cancer: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Colonoscopy surveillance is recommended for some patients post polypectomy. The 2002 UK surveillance guidelines classify post-polypectomy patients into low, intermediate and high risk, and recommend different strategies for each classification. Limited evidence supports these guidelines.

OBJECTIVES

To examine, for each risk group, long-term colorectal cancer incidence by baseline characteristics and the number of surveillance visits; the effects of interval length on detection rates of advanced adenomas and colorectal cancer at first surveillance; and the cost-effectiveness of surveillance compared with no surveillance.

DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study and economic evaluation.

SETTING

Seventeen NHS hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with a colonoscopy and at least one adenoma at baseline.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Long-term colorectal cancer incidence after baseline and detection rates of advanced adenomas and colorectal cancer at first surveillance.

DATA SOURCES

Hospital databases, NHS Digital, the Office for National Statistics, National Services Scotland and Public Health England.

METHODS

Cox regression was used to compare colorectal cancer incidence in the presence and absence of surveillance and to identify colorectal cancer risk factors. Risk factors were used to stratify risk groups into higher- and lower-risk subgroups. We examined detection rates of advanced adenomas and colorectal cancer at first surveillance by interval length. Cost-effectiveness of surveillance compared with no surveillance was evaluated in terms of incremental costs per colorectal cancer prevented and per quality-adjusted life-year gained.

RESULTS

Our study included 28,972 patients, of whom 14,401 (50%), 11,852 (41%) and 2719 (9%) were classed as low, intermediate and high risk, respectively. The median follow-up time was 9.3 years. Colorectal cancer incidence was 140, 221 and 366 per 100,000 person-years among low-, intermediate- and high-risk patients, respectively. Attendance at one surveillance visit was associated with reduced colorectal cancer incidence among low-, intermediate- and high-risk patients [hazard ratios were 0.56 (95% confidence interval 0.39 to 0.80), 0.59 (95% confidence interval 0.43 to 0.81) and 0.49 (95% confidence interval 0.29 to 0.82), respectively]. Compared with the general population, colorectal cancer incidence without surveillance was similar among low-risk patients and higher among high-risk patients [standardised incidence ratios were 0.86 (95% confidence interval 0.73 to 1.02) and 1.91 (95% confidence interval 1.39 to 2.56), respectively]. For intermediate-risk patients, standardised incidence ratios differed for the lower- (0.70, 95% confidence interval 0.48 to 0.99) and higher-risk (1.46, 95% confidence interval 1.19 to 1.78) subgroups. In each risk group, incremental costs per colorectal cancer prevented and per quality-adjusted life-year gained with surveillance were lower for the higher-risk subgroup than for the lower-risk subgroup. Incremental costs per quality-adjusted life-year gained were lowest for the higher-risk subgroup of high-risk patients at £7821.

LIMITATIONS

The observational design means that we cannot assume that surveillance caused the reductions in cancer incidence. The fact that some cancer staging data were missing places uncertainty on our cost-effectiveness estimates.

CONCLUSIONS

Surveillance was associated with reduced colorectal cancer incidence in all risk groups. However, in low-risk patients and the lower-risk subgroup of intermediate-risk patients, colorectal cancer incidence was no higher than in the general population without surveillance, indicating that surveillance might not be necessary. Surveillance was most cost-effective for the higher-risk subgroup of high-risk patients.

FUTURE WORK

Studies should examine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of post-polypectomy surveillance without prior classification of patients into risk groups.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial is registered as ISRCTN15213649.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 26. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

ScotCap - A large observational cohort study

AIM

The aim of this work was to evaluate the performance of colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) in a lower gastrointestinal diagnostic care pathway.

METHOD

This large multicentre prospective clinical evaluation recruited symptomatic patients (patients requiring investigation of symptoms suggestive of colorectal pathology) and surveillance patients (patients due to undergo surveillance colonoscopy). Patients aged 18 years or over were invited to participate and undergo CCE by a secondary-care clinician if they met the referral criteria for a colonoscopy. The primary outcome was the test completion rate (visualization of the whole colon and rectum). We also measured the need for further tests after CCE.

RESULTS

A total of 733 patients were invited to take part in this evaluation, with 509 patients undergoing CCE. Of these, 316 were symptomatic patients and 193 were surveillance patients. Two hundred and twenty-eight of the 316 symptomatic patients (72%) and 137 of the 193 surveillance patients (71%) had a complete test. It was found that 118/316 (37%) of symptomatic patients required no further test following CCE, while 103/316 (33%) and 81/316 (26%) required a colonoscopy and flexible sigmoidoscopy, respectively. Fifty-three of the 193 surveillance patients (28%) required no further test following CCE, while 104/193 (54%) and 30/193 (16%) required a colonoscopy and flexible sigmoidoscopy, respectively. No patient in this evaluation was diagnosed with colorectal cancer. Two patients experienced serious adverse events - one capsule retention with obstruction and one hospital admission with dehydration due to the bowel preparation.

CONCLUSION

CCE is a safe, well-tolerated diagnostic test which can reduce the proportion of patients requiring colonoscopy, but the test completion rate needs to be improved to match that of lower gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Polypectomy for Diminutive and Small Colorectal Polyps

Diminutive and small colorectal polyps are common findings during colonoscopies, and rarely contain dysplastic elements and progress to colorectal cancer. With improving technology and the advent of artificial intelligence, detection rates of small or diminutive polyps and adenomas are rising, resulting in increasing costs associated with colonoscopy. Incomplete resection rates are an outcome of interest because it correlates with interval colorectal cancer. More effort is warranted to standardize training programs and sensitize endoscopists to the importance of personal performance as a quality metric of colonoscopy. This article reviews indications, methods, and recent developments in polypectomy for small and diminutive polyps.

Overview of the Pediatric Endoscopy Quality Improvement Network Quality Standards and Indicators for Pediatric Endoscopy: A Joint NASPGHAN/ESPGHAN Guideline

INTRODUCTION

Pediatric-specific quality standards for endoscopy are needed to define best practices, while measurement of associated indicators is critical to guide quality improvement. The international Pediatric Endoscopy Quality Improvement Network (PEnQuIN) working group was assembled to develop and define quality standards and indicators for pediatric gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures through a rigorous guideline consensus process.

METHODS

The Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument guided PEnQuIN members, recruited from 31 centers of various practice types representing 11 countries, in generating and refining proposed quality standards and indicators. Consensus was sought via an iterative online Delphi process, and finalized at an in-person conference. Quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were rated according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach.

RESULTS

Forty-nine quality standards and 47 indicators reached consensus, encompassing pediatric endoscopy facilities, procedures, endoscopists, and the patient experience. The evidence base for PEnQuIN standards and indicators was largely adult-based and observational, and downgraded for indirectness, imprecision, and study limitations to "very low" quality, resulting in "conditional" recommendations for most standards (45/49).

CONCLUSIONS

The PEnQuIN guideline development process establishes international agreement on clinically meaningful metrics that can be used to promote safety and quality in endoscopic care for children. Through PEnQuIN, pediatric endoscopists and endoscopy services now have a framework for auditing, providing feedback, and ultimately, benchmarking performance. Expansion of evidence and prospective validation of PEnQuIN standards and indicators as predictors of clinically relevant outcomes and high-quality pediatric endoscopic care is now a research priority.

The challenge of quantifying screening colonoscopy quality: Development and psychometric properties of the Colonoscopy Quality Score instrument

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS

Colonoscopy quality is measured by the degree in which the examination increases the likelihood of obtaining adequate results on health. Our aim was to develop an instrument for evaluating the quality of screening colonoscopies, taking into account the performance of endoscopists and endoscopy units.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Mixed methodology was employed. The first stage (qualitative) consisted of a Medline search, from which a group of experts developed the quality score items. The second stage (quantitative) utilized a modified Delphi technique to reach consensus (3 rounds). We evaluated the psychometric properties of the instrument (reliability and construct validity) in elective screening colonoscopies (in patients ≥ 50 years of age), performed within the January-April 2017 time frame.

RESULTS

A final instrument with 8 items was produced: (1) the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale score; (2) cecal intubation rate; (3) colonoscopy withdrawal time; (4) image documentation; (5) adenoma detection rate; (6) endoscopic surveillance planning; (7) perforation rate, and (8) continuous improvement programs. The instrument was evaluated in 323 colonoscopies performed by 31 endoscopists and found to be one-dimensional and reliable (Cronbach's alpha 0.76). Performance was compared between endoscopists (center 1) and an expert endoscopist from another center (center 2): Boston Bowel Preparation Scale score 8.3 vs. 7.36 (P < .001), cecal intubation rate 93.5 vs. 96%, colonoscopy withdrawal time 14.8 vs. 8.4 min (P < .001), and adenoma detection rate 34 vs. 52.2% (P < .001), respectively.

CONCLUSION

The Colonoscopy Quality Score is a reliable and valid instrument for evaluating screening colonoscopy quality. Its results could be adapted to the usual endoscopic report to adjust monitorization frequency post-colonoscopy.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Magnetic Resonance Enterography in the Evaluation of Colonic Abnormalities in Crohn's Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

To Evaluate the diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance enterography (MRE) for detecting colonic involvement of Crohn's disease (CD).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic search of the electronic bibliographic databases was conducted. The inclusion criteria of published original articles were: (1) Utilized MRE to evaluate colon; (2) Patients with documented CD by colonoscopy; (3) Provided crude data of diagnostic performance in the large bowel; (4) Performed segmental evaluation. The colorectal segments were defined as the right colon, transverse colon, left colon, and rectum. A hierarchical bivariate method was used for analysis.

RESULTS

Eleven articles (12 populations and 987 patients) were included. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of the studies were 69% (95% CI: 0.52-0.82) and 95% (95% CI:0.92-0.97), respectively (AUC = 0.95). The pooled positive and negative likelihood ratios were 14 (95% CI:7.5-26.3) and 0.31 (95% CI:0.19-0.51), respectively. Regarding segments, the left colon had the highest sensitivity (60%) and lowest specificity (92%), while the transverse colon showed lowest sensitivity (49%) and highest specificity (95%). Comparing the age groups, MRE sensitivity and specificity was 80% and 95%, versus 62% and 94%, in pediatrics and adults respectively.

CONCLUSION

MRE has a high specificity to detect colon pathologies in CD, while the sensitivity is low. Therefore, the test has a high value to rule in CD, while negative results are not sufficient to rule it out. Meanwhile, considering the higher sensitivity rate of the test in pediatrics, it has the potential to be used as a first-line investigation.

The Newcastle ENDOPREM™: a validated patient reported experience measure for gastrointestinal endoscopy

Objectives

Measuring patient experience of gastrointestinal (GI) procedures is a key component of evaluation of quality of care. Current measures of patient experience within GI endoscopy are largely clinician derived and measured; however, these do not fully represent the experiences of patients themselves. It is important to measure the entirety of experience and not just experience directly during the procedure. We aimed to develop a patient-reported experience measure (PREM) for GI procedures.

Design

Phase 1: semi-structured interviews were conducted in patients who had recently undergone GI endoscopy or CT colonography (CTC) (included as a comparator). Thematic analysis identified the aspects of experience important to patients. Phase 2: a question bank was developed from phase 1 findings, and iteratively refined through rounds of cognitive interviews with patients who had undergone GI procedures, resulting in a pilot PREM. Phase 3: patients who had attended for GI endoscopy or CTC were invited to complete the PREM. Psychometric properties were investigated. Phase 4 involved item reduction and refinement.

Results

Phase 1: interviews with 35 patients identified six overarching themes: anxiety, expectations, information & communication, embarrassment & dignity, choice & control and comfort. Phase 2: cognitive interviews refined questionnaire items and response options. Phase 3: the PREM was distributed to 1650 patients with 799 completing (48%). Psychometric properties were found to be robust. Phase 4: final questionnaire refined including 54 questions assessing patient experience across five temporal procedural stages.

Conclusion

This manuscript gives an overview of the development and validation of the Newcastle ENDOPREM™, which assesses all aspects of the GI procedure experience from the patient perspective. It may be used to measure patient experience in clinical care and, in research, to compare patients’ experiences of different endoscopic interventions.

A Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial of an Endoscopist Audit and Feedback Report for Colonoscopy

INTRODUCTION

Variation in endoscopist performance contributes to poor-quality colonoscopy. Audit and feedback (A/F) can be used to improve physician performance, particularly among lower performing physicians. In this large pragmatic randomized controlled trial, we compared A/F to improve endoscopists' colonoscopy performance to usual practice.

METHODS

Endoscopists practicing in Ontario, Canada, in 2014 were randomly assigned in October 2015 (index date) to receive (intervention group, n = 417) or not receive (control group, n = 416) an A/F report generated centrally using health administrative data. Colonoscopy performance was measured in both groups over two 12-month periods: prereport and postreport (relative to the index date). The primary outcome was polypectomy rate (PR). Secondary outcomes were cecal intubation rate, bowel preparation, and premature repeat after normal colonoscopy. A post hoc analysis used adenoma detection rate as the outcome. Outcomes were compared between groups for all endoscopists and for lower performing endoscopists using Poisson regression analyses under a difference-in-difference framework.

RESULTS

Among all endoscopists, PR did not significantly improve from prereport to postreport periods for those receiving the intervention (relative rate [RR], intervention vs control: 1.07 vs 1.05, P = 0.09). Among lower performing endoscopists, PR improved significantly (RR, intervention vs control 1.34 vs 1.11, P = 0.02) in the intervention group compared with controls. In this subgroup, adenoma detection rate also improved but not significantly (RR, intervention vs control 1.12 vs 1.04, P = 0.12). There was no significant improvement in secondary outcomes between the intervention and control groups.

DISCUSSION

A/F reports for colonoscopy improve performance in lower performing endoscopists (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02595775).

Endoscopy in patients on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy: British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guideline update

This is a collaboration between the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE), and is a scheduled update of their 2016 guideline on endoscopy in patients on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy. The guideline development committee included representatives from the British Society of Haematology, the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society, and two patient representatives from the charities Anticoagulation UK and Thrombosis UK, as well as gastroenterologists. The process conformed to AGREE II principles, and the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were derived using GRADE methodology. Prior to submission for publication, consultation was made with all member societies of ESGE, including BSG. Evidence-based revisions have been made to the risk categories for endoscopic procedures, and to the categories for risks of thrombosis. In particular a more detailed risk analysis for atrial fibrillation has been employed, and the recommendations for direct oral anticoagulants have been strengthened in light of trial data published since the previous version. A section has been added on the management of patients presenting with acute GI haemorrhage. Important patient considerations are highlighted. Recommendations are based on the risk balance between thrombosis and haemorrhage in given situations.

Endoscopy in patients on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy: British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guideline update

This is a collaboration between the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE), and is a scheduled update of their 2016 guideline on endoscopy in patients on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy. The guideline development committee included representatives from the British Society of Haematology, the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society, and two patient representatives from the charities Anticoagulation UK and Thrombosis UK, as well as gastroenterologists. The process conformed to AGREE II principles and the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were derived using GRADE methodology. Prior to submission for publication, consultation was made with all member societies of ESGE, including BSG. Evidence-based revisions have been made to the risk categories for endoscopic procedures, and to the categories for risks of thrombosis. In particular a more detailed risk analysis for atrial fibrillation has been employed, and the recommendations for direct oral anticoagulants have been strengthened in light of trial data published since the previous version. A section has been added on the management of patients presenting with acute GI haemorrhage. Important patient considerations are highlighted. Recommendations are based on the risk balance between thrombosis and haemorrhage in given situations.

The challenge of quantifying screening colonoscopy quality: Development and psychometric properties of the Colonoscopy Quality Score instrument

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS

Colonoscopy quality is measured by the degree in which the examination increases the likelihood of obtaining adequate results on health. Our aim was to develop an instrument for evaluating the quality of screening colonoscopies, taking into account the performance of endoscopists and endoscopy units.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Mixed methodology was employed. The first stage (qualitative) consisted of a Medline search, from which a group of experts developed the quality score items. The second stage (quantitative) utilized a modified Delphi technique to reach consensus (3 rounds). We evaluated the psychometric properties of the instrument (reliability and construct validity) in elective screening colonoscopies (in patients≥50 years of age), performed within the January-April 2017 time frame.

RESULTS

A final instrument with 8 items was produced: 1) the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale score; 2) cecal intubation rate; 3) colonoscopy withdrawal time; 4) image documentation; 5) adenoma detection rate; 6) endoscopic surveillance planning; 7) perforation rate, and 8) continuous improvement programs. The instrument was evaluated in 323 colonoscopies performed by 31 endoscopists and found to be one-dimensional and reliable (Cronbach's alpha 0.76). Performance was compared between endoscopists (center 1) and an expert endoscopist from another center (center 2): Boston Bowel Preparation Scale score 8.3 vs. 7.36 (P<.001), cecal intubation rate 93.5 vs. 96%, colonoscopy withdrawal time 14.8 vs. 8.4min (P<.001), and adenoma detection rate 34 vs. 52.2% (P<.001), respectively.

CONCLUSION

The Colonoscopy Quality Score is a reliable and valid instrument for evaluating screening colonoscopy quality. Its results could be adapted to the usual endoscopic report to adjust monitorization frequency post-colonoscopy.

Weekend and evening planned colonoscopy activity: a safe and effective way to meet demands

Background and study aims  Colonoscopy is the "gold standard" investigation for assessment of the large bowel that detects and prevents colorectal cancer, as well as non-neoplastic conditions. The Joint Advisory Group (JAG) on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy recommends monitoring key performance indicators such as cecal intubation rate (CIR) and adenoma detection rate (ADR). We aimed to investigate the quality of colonoscopies carried out during evening and Saturday lists in our unit and compare them against JAG standards of quality for colonoscopies. Patients and methods  We retrospectively collected and analyzed demographical and procedure-related data for non-screening colonoscopies performed between January 2016 and November 2018. Evenings and Saturdays were defined as the out-of-hour (OOH) period. We compared the outcomes of the procedures done in these against the working hours of the weekdays. We also wanted to explore whether the outcomes were different among certain endoscopists. Other factors that could affect the KPIs, such as endoscopist experience and bowel preparation, were also analyzed. Results  There were a total of 17634 colonoscopies carried out; 56.9 % of the patients (n = 10041) < 70 years old. Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) of weekday, evening, and Saturday colonoscopies regarding the CIR and ADR met the JAG standards as they were above 93 % and 24 %, respectively. Advanced colonoscopists had better KPIs when compared to the non-advanced colonoscopists, with CIR at 97.6 % vs. 93.2 % and ADR at 40.8 % vs. 26 %, respectively. Conclusions  JAG standards were maintained during colonoscopies done on weekdays, evenings, and Saturdays. Advanced colonoscopists had higher CIR and ADRs.

Accreditation of digestive endoscopy services: a method of quality assuring?

INTRODUCTION

Accreditation is one method of assuring quality, but the evidence base in support of service accreditation is mixed. More recent experiences indicate that accreditation may accelerate improvements.

AREAS COVERED

Our aim is focused on endoscopy service accreditation and we conducted a literature search using Medline (via Pubmed) and the Cochrane Center Register of Controlled Trials up to January 2020.

EXPERT OPINION

Worldwide numerous centers fail to meet important quality indicators as suggested by international guidelines. Accreditation can provide means for detecting many problems and correcting them by implementing agreed standards.

[Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Antithrombotic Agents in Patients Undergoing Gastrointestinal Endoscopy]

Antithrombotic agents, including antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants, are increasingly used in South Korea. The management of patients using antithrombotic agents and requiring gastrointestinal endoscopy is an important clinical challenge. Although clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the management of patients receiving antithrombotic agents and undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy have been developed in the Unites States, Europe, and Asia Pacific region, it is uncertain whether these guidelines can be adopted in South Korea. After reviewing current CPGs, we identified unmet needs and recognized significant discrepancies in the clinical practice among regions. This is the first CPG in Korea providing information that may assist endoscopists in the management of patients on antithrombotic agents who require diagnostic or elective therapeutic endoscopy. This guideline was developed through the adaptation process as an evidence-based method, with four guidelines retrieved by systematic review. Eligible guidelines were evaluated according to the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II process, and 13 statements were established using a grading system. This guideline was reviewed by external experts before an official. It will be revised as necessary to cover changes in technology, evidence, or other aspects of clinical practice.

Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Antithrombotic Agents in Patients Undergoing Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

Antithrombotic agents, including antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants, are increasingly used in South Korea. The management of patients using antithrombotic agents and requiring gastrointestinal endoscopy is an important clinical challenge. Although clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the management of patients receiving antithrombotic agents and undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy have been developed in the Unites States, Europe, and Asia Pacific region, it is uncertain whether these guidelines can be adopted in South Korea. After reviewing current CPGs, we identified unmet needs and recognized significant discrepancies in the clinical practice among regions. This is the first CPG in Korea providing information that may assist endoscopists in the management of patients on antithrombotic agents who require diagnostic or elective therapeutic endoscopy. This guideline was developed through the adaptation process as an evidence-based method, with four guidelines retrieved by systematic review. Eligible guidelines were evaluated according to the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II process, and 13 statements were established using a grading system. This guideline was reviewed by external experts before an official. It will be revised as necessary to cover changes in technology, evidence, or other aspects of clinical practice.

Exploration of colonic looping patterns in undisturbed cadaveric specimens

INTRODUCTION

This study examines sex differences in the disposition of the sigmoid and transverse segments of the colon in undisturbed cadaveric abdomens and relates these findings to the anecdotal observation that colonoscopy is more challenging in females through the formation of tortuous bowel loops.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred and twenty two undisturbed cadaveric abdomens were inspected. Three distinct configuration grades were separately assigned to the sigmoid and transverse segments of the colon on the basis of the pattern of the bowel loops observed in situ. Pearson's chi-squared test was used to analyze sex differences in bowel loop configuration and Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was calculated to identify co-occurrence of configuration grades in the subjects.

RESULTS

For the transverse segment, females had higher configuration grades corresponding to longer bowel loops with greater redundancy, compared to males (p = .000047). There was no sex difference in the sigmoid segment grade (p = .21636). Sigmoid and transverse segment grades were highly correlated in the subjects (coefficient = 0.9994).

CONCLUSION

Sex differences in the configuration grades of the sigmoid or transverse colonic segments may be a significant contributing factor to increased difficulty of colonoscopy in females.

Report of the First Training the Colonoscopy Trainers Courses Held in India

Background and Aim Training the colonoscopy trainers (TCT) courses have become widespread in the United Kingdom and elsewhere but have never taken place in India. This is an account of the first such course delivered in India with an attempt to demonstrate its impact on the training knowledge and abilities of the delegates.

Materials and Methods Twelve independent colonoscopists, all with a training remit, underwent a structured 2-day TCT course. They were asked retrospectively to self-assess their knowledge and training skills across a number of metrics using a 1–10 scale, before and after attending the course.

Statistical Analysis Scores were analyzed by the Wilcoxon’s two-tail test

Results Delegates training knowledge and skills improved significantly across all seven metrics (p < 0.01 for all).

Conclusion The TCT is highly suitable in the Indian endoscopic environment and very effective in improving the training knowledge and skills of even experienced colonoscopists.

Extension Mechanism of a Flexible End for Colonoscopy

Introduction

The significance of the distal tip extension mechanism (DTEM) arises when the insertion tube of the colonoscope is no longer able to move further inside the colon, and when a longer insertion tube is needed. The main focus of this research is to investigate the development of a novel distal tip extension mechanism (DTEM).

Methods

To characterize the performance of the DTEM, the ability of the DTEM to extend the distal tip of the colonoscope 16 cm is investigated. To determine the maximum number of turns that the extension knob needs to make in order to move the distal tip 16 cm, the DTEM is used to displace the distal tip in different colon configurations using the silicon tube of a colonoscopy training model (CTM). The experimentally collected data was presented and discussed to characterize the performance of the DTEM.

Results

The results showed that the DTEM is able to extend the distal tip 16 cm while the colon is in various configurations. Additionally, the impact of implanting the DTEM on the flexibility of the insertion tube was determined.

Discussion

The results of this research suggest that the DTEM will be an effective tool to help colonoscopists performing better colonoscopies.

ARE OBESITY AND ADENOMA DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATED AS COLORECTAL CANCER PRECURSORS?

BACKGROUND

One of the most important concerns on health is the increased rates of obesity in population and the speed in which this number is increasing. This number translates a serious public health problem, since it also increases the risk of several other diseases associated with obesity resulting in significant morbidity and mortality. Among them, it seems to be connected to several neoplasms, such as colorectal carcinoma.

AIM

To evaluate the impact of obesity as a risk factor for colorectal carcinoma through the detection of adenoma, and to discuss the mechanisms that could establish a link between obesity and neoplasm.

METHODS

Patients who underwent colonoscopy were included. Personal and anthropometric data, clinical history, and results of the tests were analyzed in order to verify the correlation of BMI and the presence of adenomatous polyps.

RESULTS

A total of 142 patients were studied, which a mean age of 62 years. Of the patients, 74 (52.1%) were men and 68 (47.9%) were. Obesity was identified in 16.2% of the patients. Polyps were found in 61 (42.9%), mostly smaller than 1 cm. Obese individuals were 1.56 times more likely to present colorectal adenoma than patients with normal weight.

CONCLUSION

This study, although showing the greater presence of colorectal adenomas in obese individuals, did not show a significant difference in the occurrence of pre-malignant lesions.

Impacts of age and sedation on cardiocerebrovascular adverse events after diagnostic GI endoscopy: a nationwide population-based study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Data are limited regarding the impact of age and sedation on cardiocerebrovascular disease (CCD) adverse events after GI endoscopy. We investigated the incidence of and risk factors for CCD adverse events after diagnostic GI endoscopy and the impact of age and sedation on these unfavorable outcomes.

METHODS

In this nationwide population-based study, the incidence of and risk factors for newly diagnosed CCD within 14 days after diagnostic endoscopy were analyzed using Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service data from January to December 2015.

RESULTS

Among 1,943,150 subjects, CCD adverse events occurred in approximately 2.23% within 14 days after endoscopy. According to the performance of sedation during endoscopy (60.1% nonsedation vs 39.9% sedation, midazolam alone [96.4%]), the incidence rates of CCD adverse events (per 10,000 persons) were 275.8 versus 302.8 for EGD, 116.9 versus 143.8 for colonoscopy, and 230.4 versus 243.2 for EGD + colonoscopy, respectively. On multivariate analysis, older age (70-99 years) and sedation were independent risk factors for CCD adverse events. Regarding CCD risk stratified by age and sedation, older age had a significant impact on CCD adverse events in individuals who underwent EGD only or EGD + colonoscopy, but sedation did not. However, both older age and sedation had considerable influence on CCD adverse events in individuals who underwent colonoscopy only. Sedation during endoscopy was significantly associated with minor but not major CCD adverse events. CCD adverse events were significantly higher for inpatients.

CONCLUSION

CCD adverse events after diagnostic endoscopy were significantly frequent in individuals with older age (70-99 years) and/or sedation during endoscopy. Stratification by age and sedation shows that the impact of these 2 factors on CCD adverse events differs according to endoscopy type.

Diagnosis and management of iatrogenic endoscopic perforations: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Position Statement - Update 2020

1:  ESGE recommends that each center implements a written policy regarding the management of iatrogenic perforations, including the definition of procedures that carry a higher risk of this complication. This policy should be shared with the radiologists and surgeons at each center. 2 : ESGE recommends that in the case of an endoscopically identified perforation, the endoscopist reports its size and location, with an image, and statement of the endoscopic treatment that has been applied. 3:  ESGE recommends that symptoms or signs suggestive of iatrogenic perforation after an endoscopic procedure should be rapidly and carefully evaluated and documented with a computed tomography (CT) scan. 4 : ESGE recommends that endoscopic closure should be considered depending on the type of the iatrogenic perforation, its size, and the endoscopist expertise available at the center. Switch to carbon dioxide (CO2) endoscopic insufflation, diversion of digestive luminal content, and decompression of tension pneumoperitoneum or pneumothorax should also be performed. 5 : ESGE recommends that after endoscopic closure of an iatrogenic perforation, further management should be based on the estimated success of the endoscopic closure and on the general clinical condition of the patient. In the case of no or failed endoscopic closure of an iatrogenic perforation, and in patients whose clinical condition is deteriorating, hospitalization and surgical consultation are recommended.

Impact of a national basic skills in colonoscopy course on trainee performance: An interrupted time series analysis

BACKGROUND

The Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy basic skills in colonoscopy (BSC) course was introduced in 2009 to improve colonoscopy training within the United Kingdom, but its impact on trainee performance is unknown.

AIM

To assess whether attendance of the BSC could improve colonoscopy performance.

METHODS

Trainees awarded colonoscopy certification between 2011-2016 were stratified into 3 groups according to pre-course procedure count (< 70, 70-140 and > 140). Study outcomes, comprising the unassisted caecal intubation rate (CIR) and the performance indicator of colonic intubation (PICI), were studied over the 50 procedures pre and post- course. Interrupted time series analyses were performed to detect step-change changes attributable to the course.

RESULTS

A total of 369 trainees with pre-course procedure counts of < 70 (n = 118), 70-140 (n = 121) and > 140 (n = 130) were included. Over the 50 pre-course procedures, significant linear improvements in CIR were found, with average increases of 4.2, 3.6 and 1.7 percentage points (pp) per 10 procedures performed in the < 70, 70-140 and > 140 groups respectively (all P < 0.001). The < 70 procedures group saw a significant step-change improvement in CIR, increasing from 46% in the last pre-course procedure, to 51% in the first procedure post-course (P = 0.005). The CIR step-change was not significant in the 70-140 (68% to 71%; P = 0.239) or > 140 (86% to 87%; P = 0.354) groups. For PICI, significant step-change improvements were seen in all three groups, with average increases of 5.6 pp (P < 0.001), 5.4 pp (P = 0.003) and 3.9 pp (P = 0.014) respectively.

CONCLUSION

Attendance of the BSC was associated with a significant step-change improvement in PICI, regardless of prior procedural experience. However, CIR data suggest that the optimal timing of course attendance appears to be at earlier stages of training (< 70 procedures).

Findings on Colonoscopy after Diverticulitis: A Multicenter Review

Diverticular disease is a common problem where patients with diverticulosis have a 1–4 per cent risk of acute diverticulitis. Current guidelines recommend a colonoscopy after.the resolution of acute diverticulitis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the yield of significant findings on colonoscopy after an episode of diverticulitis. This is a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent colonoscopy after an episode of diverticulitis between November 2005 and August 2017 at three major teaching hospitals. Advanced adenomas were defined as adenomas ≥1 cm, serrated adenomas, and tubulovillous or villous adenomas. A total of 584 patients (298 males; 51%) underwent colonoscopy for a history of diverticulitis after resolution of acute symptoms. Colonoscopy was complete in 488 patients (84%). Among these 488 patients, 446 had diverticular disease, 31 had advanced adenomas, and four had adenocarcinomas. Colonoscopies were incomplete in 96 patients (16%). Forty-six of those patients underwent surgery. The overall incidence of advanced adenomas and adenocarcinomas was 32 (5.4%) and nine (1.5%), respectively. In our study, the prevalence of advanced adenomas and adenocarcinomas was relatively high compared with the average risk individuals. Our findings support that patients after an episode of diverticulitis should continue to get a colonoscopy.

Management of antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy in endoscopy: A review of literature

Endoscopic procedures hold a basal risk of bleeding that depends on the type of procedure and patients’ comorbidities. Moreover, they are often performed in patients taking antiplatelet and anticoagulants agents, increasing the potential risk of intraprocedural and delayed bleeding. Even if the interruption of antithrombotic therapies is undoubtful effective in reducing the risk of bleeding, the thromboembolic risk that follows their suspension should not be underestimated. Therefore, it is fundamental for each endoscopist to be aware of the bleeding risk for every procedure, in order to measure the risk-benefit ratio for each patient. Moreover, knowledge of the proper management of antithrombotic agents before endoscopy, as well as the adequate timing for their resumption is essential.

This review aims to analyze current evidence from literature assessing, for each procedure, the basal risk of bleeding and the risk of bleeding in patients taking antithrombotic therapy, as well as to review the recommendation of American society for gastrointestinal endoscopy, European society of gastrointestinal endoscopy, British society of gastroenterology, Asian pacific association of gastroenterology and Asian pacific society for digestive endoscopy guidelines for the management of antithrombotic agents in urgent and elective endoscopic procedures.

Mortality and Rate of Hospitalization in a Colonoscopy Screening Program From a Randomized Health Services Study

BACKGROUND & AIMS

It is difficult to quantify adverse events related to screening colonoscopy due to lack of valid and adequately powered comparison groups. We compared mortality and rate of unplanned hospitalizations among subjects who underwent screening colonoscopies within the Polish Colonoscopy Screening Program (PCSP) vs unscreened matched controls in Poland.

METHODS

Persons 55-64 years old living in the area covered by the PCSP from 2012 through 2015 were assigned in a (1:1) to a group invited for screening colonoscopy (n = 338,477) or a matched group that would be invited 5 years later (controls, n = 338,557). All subjects in the screening group were assigned proposed screening colonoscopy dates (actual dates when invitees confirmed or rescheduled colonoscopy) and those in the control group were assigned virtual dates corresponding to the matched individuals from the screening group. In the screening group, 55,390 subjects (16.4%) underwent screening colonoscopy. Mortality and hospitalization data were obtained from National Registries. We compared mortality and rate of hospitalization between the groups for defined intervals before and after colonoscopy date. Hospitalizations were divided into related and unrelated to colonoscopy based on ICD codes by 3 specialists. Our primary aim was to compare mortality and hospitalization 6 weeks before and 30 days following the actual or virtual date of colonoscopy in the screening or control group.

RESULTS

In the intent to treat analysis, overall there were no significant differences in mortality between the colonoscopy group and control group (0.22% vs 0.22%; risk difference less than .01%; 95% CI, decrease of 0.02% to 0.02%; P = .913). The overall rate of unplanned hospitalization was significantly higher for the colonoscopy group (2.39% vs 2.31% for the control group; risk difference, 0.08%; 95% CI, 0.01%-0.15%; P=.026) for the entire observation period. This was due to the higher rate of hospitalizations after screening (1.10% vs 1.01% for the control group; risk difference, 0.09%; 95% CI, 0.04%-0.14%; P < .001) including higher proportion of hospitalizations that were assessed as related to colonoscopy (0.24% vs 0.22% for the control group; risk difference, 0.02%; 95% CI, 0.00%-0.05%; P = .046). In the per-protocol analysis, the overall rate of hospitalizations did not differ significantly between control and screening colonoscopy groups (1.87% vs 1.90%; P=.709). However, screening colonoscopy did increase rates of related hospitalizations after the date of screening (from 0.14% to 0.31%; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

In an analysis of data from the PCSP, we found high-quality evidence that colonoscopy as a screening intervention does not increase mortality before or after colonoscopy. However, it may be associated with a small but significant increase in unplanned hospitalizations, especially after the colonoscopy is completed.

The importance of colonoscopy bowel preparation for the detection of colorectal lesions and colorectal cancer prevention

Background and study aims  Colonoscopy for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening has reduced CRC incidence and mortality and improved prognosis. Optimal bowel preparation and high-quality endoscopic technique facilitate early CRC detection. This review provides a narrative on the clinical importance of bowel preparation for colonoscopy and highlights available bowel preparations. Methods  A PubMed search was conducted through June 2019 to identify studies evaluating clinical outcomes, efficacy, safety, and tolerability associated with bowel preparation for CRC screening-related colonoscopy. Results  Selecting the optimal bowel preparation regimen is based on considerations of efficacy, safety, and tolerability, in conjunction with individual patient characteristics and preferences. Available bowel preparations include high-volume (4 L) and low-volume (2 L and 1 L), polyethylene glycol (PEG) solutions, sodium sulfate, sodium picosulfate/magnesium oxide plus anhydrous citric acid, sodium phosphate tablets, and the over-the-counter preparations magnesium citrate and PEG-3350. These preparations may be administered as a single dose on the same day or evening before, or as two doses administered the same day or evening before/morning of colonoscopy. Ingesting at least half the bowel preparation on the day of colonoscopy (split-dosing) is associated with higher adequate bowel preparation quality versus evening-before dosing (odds ratio [OR], 2.5; 95 % confidence interval [CI], 1.9-3.4). Conclusions  High-quality bowel preparation is integral for optimal CRC screening/surveillance by colonoscopy. Over the last 30 years, patients and providers have gained more options for bowel preparation, including low-volume agents with enhanced tolerability and cleansing quality that are equivalent to 4 L preparations. Split-dosing is preferred for achieving a high-quality preparation.

A Prospective Multicenter Study Evaluating Endoscopy Competence Among Gastroenterology Trainees in the Era of the Next Accreditation System

PURPOSE

The Next Accreditation System requires training programs to demonstrate competence among trainees. Within gastroenterology (GI), there are limited data describing learning curves and structured assessment of competence in esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and colonoscopy. In this study, the authors aimed to demonstrate the feasibility of a centralized feedback system to assess endoscopy learning curves among GI trainees in EGD and colonoscopy.

METHOD

During academic year 2016-2017, the authors performed a prospective multicenter cohort study, inviting participants from multiple GI training programs. Trainee technical and cognitive skills were assessed using a validated competence assessment tool. An integrated, comprehensive data collection and reporting system was created to apply cumulative sum analysis to generate learning curves that were shared with program directors and trainees on a quarterly basis.

RESULTS

Out of 183 fellowships invited, 129 trainees from 12 GI fellowships participated, with an overall trainee participation rate of 72.1% (93/129); the highest participation level was among first-year trainees (90.9%; 80/88), and the lowest was among third-year trainees (51.2%; 27/53). In all, 1,385 EGDs and 1,293 colonoscopies were assessed. On aggregate learning curve analysis, third-year trainees achieved competence in overall technical and cognitive skills, while first- and second-year trainees demonstrated the need for ongoing supervision and training in the majority of technical and cognitive skills.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated the feasibility of using a centralized feedback system for the evaluation and documentation of trainee performance in EGD and colonoscopy. Furthermore, third-year trainees achieved competence in both endoscopic procedures, validating the effectiveness of current training programs.

Effect of Short Message Service Use on Bowel Preparation Quality in Patients Undergoing Colonoscopy

This study aimed to determine the effect of SMS use on the bowel preparation quality and satisfaction in patients who underwent colonoscopy. This study was conducted as an experimental-control study with 200 patients who had received colonoscopy in the endoscopy unit of a university hospital in Eastern Thrace of Turkey between December 1, 2016, and June 30, 2017. All patients received a standard bowel preparation. The SMS was sent in addition to the standard bowel preparation to patients in an SMS group. In the SMS group, patients were informed about the standard bowel preparation practices via SMS 3 days before colonoscopy. "Patient identification," "bowel preparation quality," and "patient satisfaction" forms were used for data collection. Chi-square and independent sample t tests were used in data analysis. The average age of the participants was 57.57 ± 12.37 years, and it was determined that most of the participants were male (64.5%) and had colonoscopy experience (55%). The bowel preparation quality was significantly higher in the SMS group than in the no-SMS group (p = .044), and most patients (91%) were "very satisfied" with being informed via SMS. Sending SMS about bowel preparation practices to colonoscopy patients improves bowel preparation quality and patient satisfaction. Integrating SMS into standard care may help patients manage the bowel preparation process.

Patient experience of gastrointestinal endoscopy: informing the development of the Newcastle ENDOPREM™

BACKGROUND

Measuring patient experience is important for evaluating the quality of patient care, identifying aspects requiring improvement and optimising patient outcomes. Patient Reported Experience Measures (PREMs) should, ideally, be patient derived, however no such PREMs for gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy exist. This study explored the experiences of patients undergoing GI endoscopy and CT colonography (CTC) in order to: identify aspects of care important to them; determine whether the same themes are relevant across investigative modalities; develop the framework for a GI endoscopy PREM.

METHODS

Patients aged ≥18 years who had undergone oesophagogastroduodenoscopy (OGD), colonoscopy or CTC for symptoms or surveillance (but not within the national bowel cancer screening programme) in one hospital were invited to participate in semi-structured interviews. Recruitment continued until data saturation. Inductive thematic analysis was undertaken.

RESULTS

35 patients were interviewed (15 OGD, 10 colonoscopy, 10 CTC). Most patients described their experience chronologically, and five 'procedural stages' were evident: before attending for the test; preparing for the test; at the hospital, before the test; during the test; after the test. Six themes were identified: anxiety; expectations; choice & control; communication & information; comfort; embarrassment & dignity. These were present for all three procedures but not all procedure stages. Some themes were inter-related (eg, expectations & anxiety; communication & anxiety).

CONCLUSION

We identified six key themes encapsulating patient experience of GI procedures and these themes were evident for all procedures and across multiple procedure stages. These findings will be used to inform the development of the Newcastle ENDOPREM™.