A novel method for determining the difficulty of colonoscopic polypectomy

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopists are now expected to perform polypectomy routinely. Colonic polypectomy varies in difficulty, depending on polyp morphology, size, location and access. The measurement of the degree of difficulty of polypectomy, based on polyp characteristics, has not previously been described.

OBJECTIVE

To define the level of difficulty of polypectomy.

METHODS

Consensus by nine endoscopists regarding parameters that determine the complexity of a polyp was achieved through the Delphi method. The endoscopists then assigned a polyp complexity level to each possible combination of parameters. A scoring system to measure the difficulty level of a polyp was developed and validated by two different expert endoscopists.

RESULTS

Through two Delphi rounds, four factors for determining the complexity of a polypectomy were identified: size (S), morphology (M), site (S) and access (A). A scoring system was established, based on size (1-9 points), morphology (1-3 points), site (1-2 points) and access (1-3 points). Four polyp levels (with increasing level of complexity) were identified based on the range of scores obtained: level I (4-5), level II (6-9), level III (10-12) and level IV (>12). There was a high degree of interrater reliability for the polyp scores (interclass correlation coefficient of 0.93) and levels (κ=0.888).

CONCLUSIONS

The scoring system is feasible and reliable. Defining polyp complexity levels may be useful for planning training, competency assessment and certification in colonoscopic polypectomy. This may allow for more efficient service delivery and referral pathways.

Bowel preparation for colonoscopy: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guideline

BACKGROUND AND AIM

This Guideline is an official statement of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE). It addresses the choice amongst regimens available for cleansing the colon in preparation for colonoscopy.

METHODS

This Guideline is based on a targeted literature search to evaluate the evidence supporting the use of bowel preparation for colonoscopy. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system was adopted to define the strength of recommendation and the quality of evidence.

RESULTS

The main recommendations are as follows. (1) The ESGE recommends a low-fiber diet on the day preceding colonoscopy (weak recommendation, moderate quality evidence). (2) The ESGE recommends a split regimen of 4 L of polyethylene glycol (PEG) solution (or a same-day regimen in the case of afternoon colonoscopy) for routine bowel preparation. A split regimen (or same-day regimen in the case of afternoon colonoscopy) of 2 L PEG plus ascorbate or of sodium picosulphate plus magnesium citrate may be valid alternatives, in particular for elective outpatient colonoscopy (strong recommendation, high quality evidence). In patients with renal failure, PEG is the only recommended bowel preparation. The delay between the last dose of bowel preparation and colonoscopy should be minimized and no longer than 4 hours (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence). (3) The ESGE advises against the routine use of sodium phosphate for bowel preparation because of safety concerns (strong recommendation, low quality evidence).

Predictive factors for initial treatment response after circumferential radiofrequency ablation for Barrett's esophagus with early neoplasia: a prospective multicenter study

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is safe and effective for the eradication of neoplastic Barrett's esophagus; however, occasionally there is minimal regression after initial circumferential balloon-based RFA (c-RFA). This study aimed to identify predictive factors for a poor response 3 months after c-RFA, and to relate the percentage regression at 3 months to the final treatment outcome.

METHODS

We included consecutive patients from 14 centers who underwent c-RFA for high grade dysplasia at worst. Patient and treatment characteristics were registered prospectively. "Poor initial response" was defined as < 50 % regression of the Barrett's esophagus 3 months after c-RFA, graded by two expert endoscopists using endoscopic images. Predictors of initial response were identified through logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

There were 278 patients included (median Barrett's segment C4M6). In poor initial responders (n = 36; 13 %), complete response for neoplasia (CR-neoplasia) was ultimately achieved in 86 % (vs. 98 % in good responders; P < 0.01) and complete response for intestinal metaplasia (CR-IM) in 66 % (vs. 95 %; P < 0.01). Poor responders required 13 months treatment (vs. 7 months; P < 0.01) for a median of four RFA sessions (vs. three; P < 0.01). We identified four independent baseline predictors of poor response: active reflux esophagitis (odds ratio [OR] 37.4; 95 % confidence interval [CI] 3.2 - 433.2); endoscopic resection scar regeneration with Barrett's epithelium (OR 4.7; 95 %CI 1.1 - 20.0); esophageal narrowing pre-RFA (OR 3.9; 95 %CI 1.0 - 15.1); and years of neoplasia pre-RFA (OR 1.2; 95 %CI 1.0 - 1.4).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with a poor initial response to c-RFA have a lower ultimate success rate for CR-neoplasia/CR-IM, require more treatment sessions, and a longer treatment period. A poor initial response to c-RFA occurs more frequently in patients who regenerate their endoscopic resection scar with Barrett's epithelium, and those with ongoing reflux esophagitis, neoplasia in Barrett's esophagus for a longer time, or a narrow esophagus.

Management of precancerous conditions and lesions in the stomach (MAPS): guideline from the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE), European Helicobacter Study Group (EHSG), European Society of Pathology (ESP), and the Sociedade Portuguesa de Endoscopia Digestiva (SPED)

Atrophic gastritis, intestinal metaplasia, and epithelial dysplasia of the stomach are common and are associated with an increased risk for gastric cancer. In the absence of guidelines, there is wide disparity in the management of patients with these premalignant conditions. The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE), the European Helicobacter Study Group (EHSG), the European Society of Pathology (ESP) and the Sociedade Portuguesa de Endoscopia Digestiva (SPED) have therefore combined efforts to develop evidence-based guidelines on the management of patients with precancerous conditions and lesions of the stomach (termed MAPS). A multidisciplinary group of 63 experts from 24 countries developed these recommendations by means of repeat online voting and a meeting in June 2011 in Porto, Portugal. The recommendations emphasize the increased cancer risk in patients with gastric atrophy and metaplasia, and the need for adequate staging in the case of high grade dysplasia, and they focus on treatment and surveillance indications and methods.

Endoscopy and antiplatelet agents. European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline

With the increasing use of antiplatelet agents (APA), their management during the periendoscopic period has become a more common and more difficult problem. The increase in use is due to the availability of new drugs and the widespread use of drug-eluting coronary stents. Acute coronary syndromes can occur when APA therapy is withheld for noncardiovascular interventions. Guidelines about APA management during the periendoscopic period are traditionally based on assessments of the procedure-related risk of bleeding and the risk of thrombosis if APA are stopped. New data allow better assessment of these risks, of the necessary duration of APA discontinuation before endoscopy, of the use of alternative procedures (mostly for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography [ERCP]), and of endoscopic methods that can be used to prevent bleeding (following colonic polypectomy). This guideline makes graded, evidence-based, recommendations for the management of APA for all currently performed endoscopic procedures. A short summary and two tables are included for quick reference.

The recognition and endoscopic treatment of early gastric and colonic cancer

As the prognosis of both gastric and colonic cancer remains poor, the challenge is to detect lesions at an early and treatable stage. The benefit of early detection is not only improved survival, but also that patients may be treated with endoscopic mucosal resection, a low-cost, low-morbidity and low-mortality alternative to surgery. In spite of the increasing use of endoscopy in the West, we are not detecting as many early cancers as in Japan. This chapter will discuss the possible reasons for this discrepancy and give a practical guide to 'Japanese endoscopy techniques'. Finally, we have compiled a comprehensive review of the indications, techniques and complications of endoscopic mucosal resection. Throughout the chapter, controversies have been highlighted to give an insight into the limits of our knowledge and stimulate future research.

Assessment of colorectal lesions using magnifying colonoscopy and mucosal dye spraying: can significant lesions be distinguished?

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Assessing the nature of lesions at the time of colonoscopy is important, and magnifying colonoscopy allows examination of mucosal crypt patterns. In this study, we assessed mucosal crypt patterns to see whether we could predict the histological findings.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This retrospective study of total colonoscopy using magnifying colonoscopy involved 4445 patients between December 1993 and July 1998 at the National Cancer Center Hospital East. The mucosal crypt patterns of 3438 lesions were observed under magnifying colonoscopy with 0.2% indigo carmine solution, and classified according to a modified Kudo classification (type I to V). After endoscopic or surgical resection (3291 cases and 147 cases, respectively), histopathological examination was performed.

RESULTS

The diagnostic accuracy of magnifying endoscopy for non-neoplastic lesions was 75% (117/157), for adenomatous polyps it was 94% (3006/3186), and for invasive carcinomas it was 85 % (81/95).

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of magnifying colonoscopy and dye spraying is helpful in determining the nature of colonic lesions as non-neoplastic, adenomas, or invasive carcinomas. Therefore it may be possible to determine, at the time of colonoscopy, which lesions require no treatment, which can be removed endoscopically, and which should be removed by surgery.

Prevalence of Helicobacter pylori infection and related upper gastrointestinal lesions in patients with inflammatory bowel diseases. A cross-sectional study with matching

BACKGROUND

Although a reduced prevalence of Helicobacter pylori infection has been observed in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients, the clinical significance of H. pylori infection in this setting remains unknown. The aim of this study was, therefore, to evaluate the prevalence of H. pylori infection in a large series of IBD patients and the frequency of gastroduodenal lesions in those who agreed to undergo upper GI endoscopy.

METHODS

Two hundred and sixteen consecutive IBD patients (123 with Crohn's disease (CD) and 93 with ulcerative colitis (UC)) had their anti-H. pylori IgG titres measured. Two hundred and sixteen blood donors matched for age, sex, place of birth in Italy, and socioeconomic status served as controls. All patients were offered the possibility of undergoing endoscopy with antral and corpus biopsies regardless of their H. pylori status.

RESULTS

The overall seroprevalence of H. pylori infection was 48% in IBD patients versus 59% in the control group (P < 0.05), with a significantly lower frequency in CD versus UC patients (41% versus 56%). After adjustment for age, education, and socioeconomic status CD remained associated with a significantly lower risk of H. pylori infection. Previous therapy with sulphasalazine but not with 5-aminosalicylic acid or with steroids/immunosuppressants was associated with a reduced risk of H. pylori infection both in CD and UC patients. One hundred and eighty-nine patients (110 with CD and 79 with UC) underwent endoscopy; the prevalence of peptic ulcer was similar in both groups (5.5% in CD and 5.1% in UC patients); however, 11 more CD patients had gastroduodenal ulcers that were interpreted as CD-related; 7 of these patients had never had foregut symptoms. Two CD patients had granulomatous gastritis at histology, and another 16 patients with CD had H. pylori-negative gastritis.

CONCLUSIONS

IBD patients have a reduced prevalence of H. pylori infection as compared with matched healthy controls; this appears mostly attributable to a reduced frequency of H. pylori colonization in CD patients. Previous use of sulphasalazine is associated with a reduced risk of infection both in CD and UC patients. Of CD patients 10% have a gastroduodenal localization of their disease, which is often asymptomatic. Of CD patients 15% also have H. pylori-negative gastritis at histology.