Implementation and Evaluation of a Large Community-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening Program.

CONTEXT: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening can significantly reduce incidence and mortality; however, screening rates are suboptimal. The lowest rates are among those with no usual source of care and the uninsured. OBJECTIVE: We describe the implementation and evaluation of a community-based CRC screening program from 2012 to 2015 designed to increase screening within a predominantly Hispanic US-Mexico border population. METHODS: The multicomponent, evidence-based program provided in-person, bilingual, culturally tailored health education facilitated by community health workers, no-cost primarily stool-based testing and diagnostic colonoscopy, and navigation. We recruited uninsured individuals due for CRC screening from clinics and community sites. An extensive qualitative and quantitative program process and outcome evaluation was conducted. RESULTS: In total, 20 118 individuals were approached, 8361 were eligible for screening; 74.8% completed screening and 74.6% completed diagnostic testing; 14 cancers were diagnosed. The mean age of participants was 56.8 years, and the majority were Hispanic, female, and of low socioeconomic status. The process evaluation gathered information that enabled effective program implementation and demonstrated effective staff training, compliance with processes, and high patient satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: This program used a population-based approach focusing on uninsured individuals and proved successful at achieving high fecal immunochemical test kit return rates and colonoscopy completion rates. Key factors related to its success included tailoring the intervention to our priority population, strong partnerships with community-based sites and clinics, expertise in clinical CRC screening, and an active community advisory board. This program can serve as a model for similar populations along the border to increase CRC screening rates among the underserved.

Disorders of Gut-brain Interaction on the US-Mexico Border: A Survey Using Rome IV Criteria.

BACKGROUND: Disorders of gut-brain interaction (DGBI) cause a substantial health burden. Herein we studied the prevalence and characteristics of DGBI and symptoms of bloating/distension in El Paso, Texas on the US-Mexico border, providing a unique opportunity to study the effects of acculturation. METHODS: Subjects from community centers completed the Rome IV questionnaire for DGBI, short acculturation scale for Hispanics questionnaire, and bloating/distention Pictograms. Data were presented as prevalence (95% CI) and compared using χ 2 . RESULTS: Of 216 participants, 197 (127 Hispanics, 90 with English acculturation) were included and 177 completed the Pictograms. Fifty-one [25.9% (20 to 32.6)] subjects fulfilled the criteria for at least one DGBI. Globus and functional dyspepsia were the most common upper DGBI, each in [3.0% (1.1 to 6.5)]. Unspecified functional bowel disorders [8.6% (5.1 to 13.5)], followed by functional abdominal bloating/distention [8.1% (4.7 to 12.9], and irritable bowel syndrome [6.1% (3.2 to 10.4] were the most common functional bowel disorder. Ninety-one (51.4%) reported bloating and/or distension with Pictograms; more frequently in those with DGBI (80.9% vs 40.8%, P < 0.001). Bloating and/or distension were reported by Pictograms in 30% of those not reporting it in the Rome IV Questionnaire. There were no differences based on acculturation or in Hispanics versus non-Hispanics. CONCLUSIONS: On the US-Mexico border, we found a lower prevalence of DGBI than in the US or Mexico. Functional abdominal bloating/distention was more prevalent on the US-Mexico border than in either country. Bloating/distension was more commonly reported with Pictograms than with verbal descriptors. There were no differences between Hispanics and non-Hispanics, suggesting shared environmental/acquired including dietary factors as the underlying mechanisms.

Colorectal neoplasia prevalence in a predominantly Hispanic community: Results from a colorectal cancer screening program in Texas.

BACKGROUND: A community-based, colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program for uninsured/underinsured individuals was successfully implemented in El Paso, Texas to increase CRC screening rates. Our aim was to determine the colorectal neoplasia prevalence among program participants and between screening groups. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed participant records from 2012 to 2017. Average-risk patients were first screened with a fecal immunochemical test (FIT) and included if positive. Above average-risk patients due to a family history of CRC were referred directly for screening colonoscopy. Patients were excluded if experiencing melena or hematochezia or had a personal history of colon polyps or CRC. RESULTS: Of the 638 screening colonoscopies performed, 59.4% were in FIT-positive subjects and 40.6% were in subjects with a family history of CRC. Patients were predominantly female (72.9%), aged 50-65 years (84.2%), Hispanic (97.9%), and born in Mexico (92.4%). Overall, the detection rate for polyps, adenomas, and advanced adenomas was 46.2%, 34.3%, and 11.1%, respectively. Fifteen patients had adenocarcinoma (2.4%). Compared with colonoscopies in patients with a family history, FIT-positive patients demonstrated a higher prevalence of polyps (PR 1.39, 95% CI 1.09-1.78), adenomas (PR 1.55, 95% CI 1.15-2.07), advanced adenomas (PR 3.04, 95% CI 1.67-5.56). CONCLUSIONS: This community-based CRC screening program in an enriched cohort of predominantly Mexican Americans was effective in identifying colorectal neoplasia and cancer. Additionally, there was an increased prevalence of colorectal neoplasia in average-risk, FIT-positive patients undergoing screening colonoscopy compared with above average-risk patients with a family history of CRC. Similar screening programs would likely benefit at-risk populations.

Fine Needle Biopsies of Solid Pancreatic Lesions: Tissue Acquisition Technique and Needle Design Do Not Impact Specimen Adequacy.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Data on adequacy of EUS guided biopsies using different tissue acquisition techniques and fine needle aspiration needle designs have been inconclusive. Data on newer fine needle biopsy (FNB) needles are scarce. This study compared the performance of 3 acquisition techniques and 2 fine needle biopsy designs in solid pancreatic lesions. METHODS: Single-center, randomized, pilot clinical trial (Trial registration number NCT03264092). Patients undergoing EUS biopsy of pancreatic lesions were randomized to 1 of 3 acquisition techniques (dry suction, wet suction, slow pull) and 1 of 2 22G FNB needle designs. The primary outcome was specimen cellularity. Secondary outcomes included blood contamination and number of passes needed for diagnosis. RESULTS: A total of 52 (35.3%), 49 (33.3%) and 46 (31.3%) specimens were obtained with slow pull, dry suction and wet suction, respectively. A total of 56 (38%) and 91 (62%) specimens were obtained with each needle, respectively. No difference in cellularity scores was identified by technique (3.28 vs 3.55 vs 2.94; p = 0.081) or needle type (3.45 vs 3.15; p = 0.19). The same was true for blood contamination and diagnostic pass. A diagnosis was reached after 3 passes in 51 patients (93%). Histological diagnosis was possible in 45 specimens (82%). No severe adverse events occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Cellularity of pancreatic specimens obtained with FNB needles via EUS was not influenced by technique and needle design. Three passes were enough to obtain a histological diagnosis in most patients. Larger clinical trials are required to validate the results of this study.

The role of oral simethicone on the adenoma detection rate and other quality indicators of screening colonoscopy: a randomized, controlled, observer-blinded clinical trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Combining simethicone (SIM) with a colon preparation agent has been shown to improve mucosal visibility during screening colonoscopy, but its effect on the adenoma detection rate (ADR) remains unclear. SIM is commonly used through the endoscope to eliminate bubbles during endoscopy. However, this practice recently has been associated with endoscope-transmitted infections. Our aims were to determine the role of SIM added to a polyethylene glycol preparation on the ADR, procedure times, colon preparation, and intraprocedural use of SIM. METHODS: This was a randomized, controlled, observer-blinded, clinical trial of patients undergoing screening colonoscopy. Patients with a high risk of colorectal cancer were excluded. Patients were randomly assigned to 2 different preparations: polyethylene glycol plus SIM or polyethylene glycol. Two endoscopists blinded to patient preparation regimens scored its quality by using the Boston Bowel Preparation scale (BBPS) and the bubble scale. Interobserver agreement was calculated. The polyp detection rate, ADR, intraprocedural use of SIM, cecal intubation time, and withdrawal time were recorded. For study purposes, cecal intubation time and withdrawal time were combined to determine the effective procedure time. RESULTS: No significant difference between the polyethylene glycol plus SIM and polyethylene glycol arms was seen regarding the ADR (33.3% vs 38.8%; P = .881) and effective procedure time (759.3 ± 253.1 seconds vs 800.2 ± 459.6 seconds; P = .373), respectively. Intraprocedural use of SIM as well as the bubble scale score were significantly lower in the polyethylene glycol plus SIM arm (1.6% vs 48.9%; P ≤ .05) and (0.1 vs 2.1; P ≤ .05), respectively. Conversely, no difference was found in the BBPS scores. The interobserver agreement for both scores was strong (bubble scale score kappa = .537; P < .05; BBPS score kappa = .184; P <.05). CONCLUSION: Adding SIM to a polyethylene glycol preparation did not improve the ADR or effective procedure time. Nevertheless, it resulted in lower bubble scale scores, and more importantly, in less intraprocedural use of SIM. This simple and inexpensive intervention may have the potential to reduce the risk of endoscope-transmitted infections. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03119168.).

Irritable Bowel Syndrome on the US Mexico Border: A Survey in an Indigent Population Using Rome III Criteria.

GOALS: To investigate the prevalence of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), and its association with health perception and health care-seeking behavior in this Mexican American population. BACKGROUND: The prevalence of IBS ranges from 3% to 20.4% in the United States and 4.4% to 16% in Mexico, based on Rome III and II criteria. However, its epidemiological profile in the US Mexico border is unknown. STUDY: We conducted a survey in a randomly selected indigent population (N=521) recruited into a colon cancer screening program (ACCION). The prevalence of IBS was estimated and a multivariable logistic regression was carried out to determine the associated risk factors. Results are summarized using odds ratio and 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: A total of 464 (89%) completed the survey (mean age, 56.7 y; female, 74.8%). Country of birth was Mexico in 90.5% and the United States in 8.2% and acculturation was more Spanish (94.8%) than English (5.2%). Overall, 5.6% (95% CI, 3.7-8.1) fulfilled criteria for IBS with a predominance among women (6.9%) versus men (1.7%) (P=0.03). On the basis of multivariable analysis, lower number of bowel movements/week (odds ratio, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.80-1.00), having a primary care physician: 4.09 (1.51-11.12), using herbal treatments: 2.76 (1.08-7.06) and a previous IBS diagnosis: 23.11 (3.44-155.45), were significantly associated with the presence of IBS. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of IBS on the US Mexico border is comparable with data obtained from studies in both countries. Consulting a primary care physician as an associated factor may reveal the high rate of health-care seeking in IBS patients, while herbal treatments may reflect a cultural influence.

A Prospective Randomized Study on the Risk of Bacteremia in Banding versus Sclerotherapy of Esophageal Varices.

BACKGROUND: Esophageal variceal banding may be less likely to cause bacteremia than sclerotherapy. The existing data about the frequency of bacteremia after esophageal variceal banding are conflicting, and few studies include both banding and sclerotherapy. AIMS: We conducted a prospective randomized controlled trial to compare the frequency of bacteremia after esophageal variceal banding and sclerotherapy. METHODS: Over a 2-year period, patients with liver disease admitted for upper gastrointestinal bleeding or for outpatient elective variceal therapy were enrolled. New patients were randomized preprocedure to either banding or sclerotherapy, and subsequent sessions utilized the initial procedure. The groups consisted of banding, sclerotherapy, and endoscopy without variceal therapy. Subjects underwent endoscopy by one out of three gastroenterologists. Blood cultures were obtained 5 min before and 30 min after endoscopy to check for bacteremia. RESULTS: Postendoscopic blood cultures were positive following 4 out of 139 (2.9%) sessions: 1 sclerotherapy and 3 control sessions. All postendoscopic positive blood cultures were found following emergency sessions (4/92, 4.3%). One pre-endoscopic blood culture was positive in a patient with emergency banding. The rates of positive postendoscopic blood cultures among groups with emergency banding (0/22, 0%), emergency sclerotherapy (1/41, 2.3%), and emergency control (3/29, 10.3%) were not significantly different. Postendoscopic positive blood cultures were not found after elective sessions with either banding or sclerotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Postendoscopic bacteremia was infrequent following emergency endoscopy in patients with esophageal variceal bleeding. Bacteremia was not found after esophageal variceal banding, although this was not significantly less frequent than after sclerotherapy. Postendoscopic bacteremia was not associated with elective variceal therapy.

Assessment of intestinal permeability and absorption in cirrhotic patients with ascites using combined sugar probes.

Gastrointestinal dysfunction in patients with cirrhosis may contribute to complications such as malnutrition and spontaneous bacterial peritonitis. To determine whether cirrhotic patients with ascites have altered intestinal function, we compared intestinal permeability and absorption in patients with liver disease and normal subjects. Intestinal permeability and absorption were investigated in 66 cirrhotic patients (48 with ascites, 18 without ascites) and 74 healthy control subjects. Timed recovery of 3-O-methyl-D-glucose, D-xylose, L-rhamnose, and lactulose in urine following oral administration was measured in order to assess active and passive carrier-mediated, and nonmediated, absorptive capacity, as well as intestinal large-pore/small-pore (lactulose/rhamnose) permeability. Test sugars were measured by quantitative thin-layer chromatography and results are expressed as a percentage of test dose recovered in a 5-h urine collection. Sugar excretion ratios relating to small intestinal permeability (lactulose/rhamnose) and absorption (rhamnose/3-O-methyl-D-glucose) were calculated to avoid the effects of nonmucosal factors such as renal clearance, portal hypertension, and ascites on the recovery of sugar probes in urine. Compared with normal subjects, the mean lactulose/rhamnose permeability ratio in cirrhotic patients with ascites was significantly higher (0.058 vs. 0.037, P < 0.001) but not in cirrhotic patients without ascites (0.041 vs. 0.037). Cirrhotic patients with ascites had significantly lower mean recoveries of 3-O-methyl-D-glucose (23.0 vs. 49.1%; P < 0.001), D-xylose (18.8 vs. 34.5%; P < 0.001), L-rhamnose (4.0 vs. 9.1%; P < 0.001), and lactulose (0.202 vs. 0.337%; P < 0.001) than normal subjects. However, the mean rhamnose/3-O-methyl-D-glucose ratio was the same in cirrhotic patients with ascites as normal subjects (0.189 vs. 0.189), indicating that the reduction in probe recovery was due to nonmucosal factors. Compared with normal subjects, cirrhotic patients with ascites have abnormal intestinal permeability, measured by urinary lactulose/rhamnose excretion, and normal small intestinal absorption, assessed by the urinary rhamnose/3-O-methyl-D-glucose ratio. Low urine recovery of sugar probes found in cirrhotic patients appears to be the result of nonintestinal factors affecting clearance rather than reduced intestinal absorption.