Endoscopic treatment options in peptic ulcer bleeding.

This review evaluates the evidence for the use of over-the-scope clips (OTSC), topical haemostatic agents (THA), and prophylactic embolisation (PE) in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding (PUB). The use of OTSC and THA may have the potential to increase the rate of endoscopic haemostasis in PUB not responding to conventional endoscopic treatment. In patients at high risk of recurrent bleeding, the performance of PE after achieving endoscopic haemostasis can reduce the risk of rebleeding and the need for surgery. Implementation of a local treatment protocol including these modalities may improve patient outcomes.

Perspectives of patient and public partners on their involvement in research.

INTRODUCTION: Patient and public involvement (PPI) in research integrates patient and public perspectives to improve research relevance and quality. The experiences of PPI partners have revealed mixed findings in countries where PPI is well established, but accounts from areas less accustomed to PPI in research are limited. This study aimed to explore the knowledge, motivations, expectations and experiences of PPI representatives in such a setting. METHODS: This was a qualitative study based on semi-structured interviews. Patient and public partners who had recently been engaged in a PPI collaboration to redesign the written patient material for a clinical study were interviewed. The interviews were analysed using inductive content analysis in which quotations were extracted, coded, categorised and interpreted into themes. RESULTS: Interviews indicated a lack of knowledge concerning PPI in research. Despite their motivation to collaborate, the PPI partners expressed anxiety and doubts about their abilities as laypeople. A sense of societal obligation to collaborate was noted. Groups-based, repetitive sessions fostered productivity, while challenges included off-topic discussions and skepticism. CONCLUSIONS: The findings provide valuable insights for shaping PPI processes and recruitment strategies in regions that are new to PPI. This highlights the need to describe the PPI concept when recruiting participants elaborately and to utilise repetitive group-based sessions in the design. FUNDING: Supported by the Novo Nordisk Foundation and the Chief Scientist Office, Scotland. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not relevant.

Assessing the potential of artificial intelligence to enhance colonoscopy adenoma detection in clinical practice: a prospective observational trial.

Background/Aim: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the GI Genius (Medtronic) module in clinical practice, focusing on the adenoma detection rate (ADR) during colonoscopy. Computer-aided polyp detection (CADe) systems using artificial intelligence have been shown to improve adenoma detection in controlled trials. However, the effectiveness of these systems in clinical practice has recently been questioned. Methods: This single-center prospective observational study was conducted at the University Hospital of Southern Denmark and included all individuals referred for colonoscopy between November 2020 and January 2021. The primary outcome was ADR, comparing patients examined with CADe to those examined without it. The selection of patients to be examined with the CADe module was completely random. Results: A total of 502 patients were analyzed (318 in the control group and 184 in the CADe group). The overall ADR was 32.1% with a slight increase in the CADe group (34.7% vs. 30.5%). Multivariable analysis showed a very modest and statistically insignificant increase in ADR (risk ratio, 1.12; 95% confidence interval, 0.88-1.43). Conclusions: The use of CADe in clinical practice did not increase ADR with statistical significance when compared to colonoscopy without CADe. These findings suggest that the impact of CADe systems in everyday clinical practice are modest.

The impact of iron deficiency on patients under evaluation for colorectal cancer, a prospective cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Iron deficiency affects more than 60% of colorectal cancer patients at the time of diagnosis. Iron deficiency ultimately leads to anemia, but additionally, iron deficiency might impact other domains of colorectal cancer patients' health and well-being. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of iron deficiency on fatigue, quality of life, cognition, and physical ability in patients undergoing evaluation for colorectal cancer. METHODS: Multicenter, prospective, observational cross-sectional study (2021-2023). Fatigue was the primary outcome, measured using the Focused Assessment of Cancer Treatment-Anemia questionnaire (FACT-An). Quality of Life, Cognition, Aerobe capacity, mobility, and peripheral muscle strength were tested as secondary outcomes. Multivariate analysis was performed to estimate the impact of iron deficiency on all outcomes. RESULTS: Two hundred and one patients were analyzed, 57% being iron deficient. In multivariate regression analysis, iron deficiency was not associated with fatigue: FACT-An (r = -1.17, p = 0.57, 25% CI: -5.27 to 2.92). Results on quality of life, cognition, and mobility were non-significant and with small regression coefficients. Iron deficiency showed a nearly significant association with reduced hand-grip-strength (r = -3.47 kg, p = 0.06, 25%CI -7.03 to 0.08) and reduced 6 min walking distance (r = -40.36 m, p = 0.07, 25%CI: -84.73 to 4.00). CONCLUSION: Iron deficiency in patients undergoing evaluation for colorectal cancer was not associated with fatigue, quality of life, or cognition, but might affect aerobic endurance and peripheral muscle strength to a degree that is clinically relevant.

Preoperative intravenous iron treatment - a cohort study on colorectal cancer recurrence.

Background: Intravenous (i.v.) iron treatment has been speculated to increase the malignant potential of colorectal malignancies but also to enhance the immune systems potential to fight the invasive tumor. Clinical data however is very limited. We investigate if preoperative i.v. iron treatment is associated with colorectal cancer (CRC) recurrence. Methods: Retrospective cohort study on surgical CRC patients with iron deficiency anemia (1st March 2013 - 31st December 2019). Patients were grouped based on whether they had received preoperative treatment with i.v. iron. Local data was combined with data from the National Danish Health registries to identify recurrences, death, and emigration. Survival analysis, including Kaplan-Meyer curves and multivariate competing risk analysis adjusting for sex, age, ASA-group, tumor stage, surgical radicality, and miss match repair status was performed. Results: Of 1228 patients, 125 were available for analysis. 89 patients had received preoperative i.v. iron and 36 had not. The two groups were comparable on baseline and surgical characteristics. Median follow-up times were 4.74 in iron treated patients and 5 years in patients not receiving iron treatment. Five-year rate of non-recurrence was 85 % (0.74-0.91) in the i.v. iron treated group vs. 82 % (0.64-0.91) in the control group, non-significant difference. Multivariate survival analysis did not find iron treatment to be associated with recurrence rates (Hazard Ratio 0.88 (95 % ci; 0.31-2.51). Conclusion: No association between preoperative i.v. iron treatment and the five-year cancer recurrence rate in iron deficient anemic CRC patients was found.

Preoperative Intravenous Iron Treatment in Colorectal Cancer: Experience From Clinical Practice.

INTRODUCTION: Anemia is associated with increased postoperative morbidity and mortality in abdominal surgery. In clinical trials, preoperative i.v. iron treatment increases the preoperative hemoglobin (Hb) concentration but the effect on transfusion rates are not consistent. This study reports on the experience with preoperative i.v. iron treatment in surgical colorectal cancer (CRC) patients in clinical practice. METHODS: A registry-based cohort study. Surgical colorectal cancer patients with iron deficiency anemia were compared after division into two groups; those who preoperatively received i.v. iron treatment and those who did not. Primary outcomes were preoperative changes in Hb and the difference in perioperative red blood cell transfusion (RBCT) rates. Postoperative complications and mortality rates were analyzed and a descriptive analysis on what triggered blood transfusions were performed. RESULTS: A total of 170 patients were included. Of these, 122 had received preoperative i.v. iron treatment and 48 had not. The perioperative transfusion rate was 45% (55/122) in the treatment group and 40% (19/48) in the control group (non-significant difference). The preoperative changes in Hb levels were not different between the two groups. Transfusion practice appeared more liberal and preceded by higher Hb levels that was guided by the National transfusion guideline. I.v. iron treated patients had a higher rate of postoperative complications. No differences were found on length of stay (LOS) or postoperative mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative i.v. iron treatment was neither associated with a rise in Hb concentrations at the time of surgery, nor with a reduction in the likelihood of receiving perioperative red blood cell transfusions (RBCT) in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients with iron deficiency anemia.

Time-of-day variation in the diagnostic quality of screening colonoscopies: a registry-based study.

BACKGROUND: The diagnostic quality of screening colonoscopies has been found to differ between morning and afternoon. Specifically, the adenoma detection rate (ADR) is higher in the morning. Our aim was to assess if time-of-day dependent differences in colonoscopy quality exist in a Danish screening setting. Following national screening guidelines, an individual will be exempt from screening invitations for 8 years if the colonoscopy is without pathology. Therefore, it is of utmost importance to identify factors systematically affecting the detection of lesions. METHODS: This was a single-center study of screening colonoscopies performed between 2014 and 2018. Records were retrieved from the Danish Colorectal Cancer Screening Database and coupled with local data. The ADR and the cecal intubation rate were compared between morning (8-12 a.m.) and afternoon (12-4 p.m.) colonoscopies. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed. RESULTS: A total of 3659 screening colonoscopies were included. The ADR was 51% in the morning and 58% in the afternoon. Multivariate analysis found this statistically significant, with the "afternoon vs. morning" odds ratio for adenoma detection being 1.4 (95% confidence interval 1.17-1.68; P<0.001). The cecal intubation rate was 95.6% in the morning and 94.7%, a non-significant difference. CONCLUSIONS: The ADR of screening colonoscopies was higher in the afternoon. Our study highlights the need for local/regional evaluation of factors affecting colonoscopy quality to address such issues. A clean colonoscopy exempts the patient from subsequent screening invitations for 8 years. Therefore, any observed systematic differences in quality must be addressed and eliminated.

Risk of post colonoscopy colorectal cancer following screening colonoscopy with low-risk or no adenomas: A population-based study.

AIM: In the Danish faecal occult blood test based bowel cancer screening programme, the first round was rolled out over 4 years. After roll-out, the planned faecal test recall procedure for individuals with either no or low risk adenomas at colonoscopy is 8 and 2 years, respectively. Here, we aimed to investigate the post colonoscopy colorectal cancer incidence in these two groups. METHODS: All Danish screening individuals from 2014 to 2015 with a positive faecal test and either no or low risk adenomas at colonoscopy were included and followed for 3 years post screening for the event of colorectal cancer through national registries. RESULTS: Out of 533,023 submitted faecal tests and 36,673 positive tests, 17,627 had no or low risk adenomas. We identified 60 (0.34%) individuals diagnosed with colorectal cancer within 3 years, 18 (0.29%) in the low risk adenoma group, and 42 (0.37%) in the no adenomas group (p = 0.44). Advancing age (HR = 1.079, p < 0.001) and higher faecal test value (HR = 1.001, p = 0.002) increased hazard of colorectal cancer occurrence, whereas male sex (HR = 1.3, p = 0.308) and having low risk adenomas (HR = 0.729, p = 0.264) did not. CONCLUSION: We found no difference in post colonoscopy colorectal cancer occurrence between individuals with either no or low risk adenomas. Instead, advancing age and increased faecal test value was associated with a higher risk of post colonoscopy colorectal cancer.

Iron deficiency in colorectal cancer patients: a cohort study on prevalence and associations.

AIM: The aim of this work was to estimate the prevalence of iron deficiency in patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer (CRC) and to clarify its association with patient- and tumour-related characteristics. METHOD: This was a single-centre registry-based cohort study. Iron status was routinely evaluated upon diagnosis of CRC, and these data were coupled with patient- and tumour-specific data from the Danish CRC Group Registry (2013-2018). Data were analysed using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Out of 846 patients, 543 (64%) were iron deficient. There was an association between increasing depth of invasion and iron deficiency, with odds ratios (ORs) of iron deficiency being 2.8 (p = 0.001, CI 1.5-5.1), 4.22 (p < 0.001, CI 2.48-7.18) and 4.63 (p < 0.001, CI 2.30-9.34) for T-stages 2, 3 and 4, respectively. Right-sided tumours had an OR of 3.54 (p < 0.001, CI 2.22-5.67) of iron deficiency compared with left-sided tumours. Tumours diagnosed through the national CRC screening programme were less likely to be associated with iron deficiency (OR 0.34, CI 0.22-0.52), while female gender was associated with an increase in the odds for iron deficiency (OR 1.91, CI 1.33-2.76). Iron deficiency was prevalent in 88% of anaemic patients and 43% of nonanaemic patients. CONCLUSION: Iron deficiency was highly prevalent in patients diagnosed with CRC. Increased depth of tumour invasion, right-sided location and female gender were all associated with higher odds for iron deficiency, while patients diagnosed through the national screening programme were associated with lower odds for iron deficiency. A large proportion of patients with a normal haemoglobin were also iron deficient.

Bidirectional treatment of peritoneal metastasis with Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) and systemic chemotherapy: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) is used in the palliative treatment of peritoneal metastasis. The combination of intraperitoneal and systemic chemotherapy seems rational, and the aim of this systematic review was to compare PIPAC directed monotherapy with a bidirectional treatment approach (PIPAC in combination with systemic chemotherapy). Main outcomes were survival and quality of life. METHODS: A systematic literature search in Medline, Embase, Cochrane and the "Pleura and Peritoneum" was conducted and analyzed according to PRISMA guidelines. Studies in English reporting on bidirectional treatment with PIPAC and systemic chemotherapy and published before April 2019 were included. RESULTS: Twelve studies with a total of 386 patients were included. None were specifically designed to compare mono- versus bidirectional treatment, but 44% of the patients received bidirectional treatment. This was more frequent in women (non-gynecological cancers) and one-third of the bidirectional treated patients had received no prior chemotherapy. Data from the included studies provided no conclusions regarding survival or quality of life. CONCLUSION: Bidirectional treatment with PIPAC and systemic chemotherapy is practised and feasible, and some patients are enrolled having received no prior systemic chemotherapy for their PM. The difficulty in drawing any conclusions based on this systematic review has highlighted the urgent need to improve and standardize reports on PIPAC directed therapy. We have, therefore, constructed a list of items to be considered when reporting on clinical PIPAC research. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews, PROSPERO. Registration number: 90352, March 5, 2018.

The use of a transparent cap in sigmoidoscopy-A randomized controlled clinical trial on pain, time and success rate.

Trials on cap-assisted colonoscopy have shown a reduction in pain, faster intubation time and a higher success rate attributed to the use of the cap. No similar studies have been published on sigmoidoscopy even though it is a common procedure associated with significant pain. Our objective was to investigate whether the use of a transparent cap for sigmoidoscopy has an impact on pain, time or success rate. To mimic the tendencies of daily clinical practice, the trainee endoscopist performed the procedures, and no analgesics or sedatives were used. We conducted a randomized, controlled clinical trial with a parallel design consisting of two groups masked for the intervention. The primary endpoint was pain, recorded on a 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS). Our results found cap-assisted sigmoidoscopy to be significantly more painful than non-cap-assisted sigmoidoscopy (median VAS 50 vs. 38 mm; p = 0.047). We found no differences on time or success rate due to the cap. Our results suggest pain management, e.g. analgesics which is not routinely used for sigmoidoscopy, when a cap is used to gain therapeutic or diagnostic advantages. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02243930.