Validation of Faecal Pyruvate Kinase Isoenzyme Type M2 (Faecal M2PK Quick) Test in Detection of Colorectal Adenoma and Adenocarcinoma Among High-Risk Malaysian Population.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal neoplasia is a multistep process that can lead to the development of colorectal cancer. Colonoscopy is the gold standard for diagnosis and screening of colorectal cancer, but its uptake is often hindered by unpleasant experiences and logistic obstacles. Therefore, non-invasive biomarker tests such as the M2-pyruvate kinase (M2PK) test have been explored as a potential screening tool. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of the M2PK Quick Stool Test (ScheBo®) in detecting colorectal adenoma and adenocarcinoma in high-risk Malaysian populations using colonoscopy as the comparison. METHODS: A prospective, cross-sectional, multicenter study was conducted from December 2017 to December 2019 in four hospitals in Malaysia. Participants were eligible if they met any of the following criteria: personal or family history of colorectal polyps or cancer, inherited syndromes, altered bowel habits, rectal bleeding, unintended weight loss, loss of appetite, abdominal pain or cramps, or unexplained iron deficiency, or an Asia-Pacific Colorectal Screening score of 4-7. Participants provided a stool sample that was tested for M2PK using the M2PK Quick Test. Participants then underwent a colonoscopy, and any lesions found were biopsied and sent for histopathological examination. RESULTS: A total of 562 participants were included in the study, of whom 89 had a positive M2PK test. Presence of adenoma and/or dysplastic lesions were confirmed in 14.4% and adenocarcinoma in 3.0% of the participants. The M2PK Quick Stool Test showed a sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of 58.8%, 85.5%, 11.2% and 98.5%, respectively in detecting colorectal adenocarcinoma. For detection of colorectal adenoma, this test yielded a sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of 27.3%, 86.3%, 27.0% and 86.5%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The M2PK Quick Stool Test showed a moderate accuracy in detecting colorectal adenocarcinoma and adenomas in the studied population.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided colo-colostomy in a case of acute large bowel obstruction.

Bowel obstruction is one of the most common surgical emergencies and a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Standard supportive measures must be instituted as soon as the diagnosis is confirmed. Anastomotic strictures are a benign etiology of intestinal obstruction, occurring in up to 22 % of patients following colorectal resection. Traditionally, endoscopic balloon dilation (EBD) has been the intervention of choice in such cases; however, it may not be feasible in all settings. We report a novel application of the AXIOS stent and electrocautery-enhanced delivery system (Boston Scientific, Marlborough, Massachusetts, United States) to create a colo-colostomy to bypass a sigmoid colon stricture in a 51-year-old woman who presented with acute intestinal obstruction. Despite stent dislodgment during the procedure, the preexisting tract allowed us to improvise our technique with a second LAMS placement. The patient was discharged well 48 hours after the procedure. However, 4 months later, she required a session of EBD following a presentation for fecal impaction. She is currently asymptomatic and being followed up regularly as an outpatient.

What information and the extent of information research participants need in informed consent forms: a multi-country survey.

BACKGROUND: The use of lengthy, detailed, and complex informed consent forms (ICFs) is of paramount concern in biomedical research as it may not truly promote the rights and interests of research participants. The extent of information in ICFs has been the subject of debates for decades; however, no clear guidance is given. Thus, the objective of this study was to determine the perspectives of research participants about the type and extent of information they need when they are invited to participate in biomedical research. METHODS: This multi-center, cross-sectional, descriptive survey was conducted at 54 study sites in seven Asia-Pacific countries. A modified Likert-scale questionnaire was used to determine the importance of each element in the ICF among research participants of a biomedical study, with an anchored rating scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (very important). RESULTS: Of the 2484 questionnaires distributed, 2113 (85.1%) were returned. The majority of respondents considered most elements required in the ICF to be 'moderately important' to 'very important' for their decision making (mean score, ranging from 3.58 to 4.47). Major foreseeable risk, direct benefit, and common adverse effects of the intervention were considered to be of most concerned elements in the ICF (mean score = 4.47, 4.47, and 4.45, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Research participants would like to be informed of the ICF elements required by ethical guidelines and regulations; however, the importance of each element varied, e.g., risk and benefit associated with research participants were considered to be more important than the general nature or technical details of research. Using a participant-oriented approach by providing more details of the participant-interested elements while avoiding unnecessarily lengthy details of other less important elements would enhance the quality of the ICF.