Comparing Low Volume Versus Conventional Volume of Polyethylene Glycol for Bowel Preparation during Colonoscopy: A Randomised Controlled Trial.

Background: Polyethylene glycol (PEG) solution is widely used as a colonoscopic bowel cleaning agent, although some patients are intolerant due to the need for ingesting large solution volumes and unpleasant taste. A low-volume solution may enhance patient tolerability and compliance in bowel preparation. Accordingly, this study compared the effectiveness of two difference PEG volumes for bowel preparation before colonoscopy in terms of bowel cleanliness, completeness of colonoscopy, patient tolerability and colonoscopy duration. Methods: Using a prospective randomised controlled single-blinded study design, 164 patients scheduled for colonoscopy were allocated to two groups (n = 82 patients in each) to receive either the conventional PEG volume (3 L, control group) or the low volume (2 L, intervention group). The Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS), a validated scale for assessing bowel cleanliness during colonoscopy, was used to score bowel cleanliness in three colon segments. Secondarily, colonoscopy completeness, tolerability to drinking PEG and the duration of colonoscopy were compared between the groups. Results: There were no statistically significant differences between the two intervention groups in terms of bowel cleanliness (P = 0.119), colonoscopy completion (P = 0.535), tolerability (P = 0.190) or the amount of sedation/analgesia required (midazolam, P = 0.162; pethidine, P = 0.708). Only the duration of colonoscopy differed between the two groups (longer duration in the control group, P = 0.039). Conclusion: Low-volume (2 L) PEG is as effective as the standard 3 L solution in bowel cleaning before colonoscopy; however, the superiority of either solution could not be established.

Factors associated with delay in seeking care for breast symptoms.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women worldwide. Early detection and intervention are associated with better prognosis and survival. The study aim was to investigate the factors associated with delayed presentation among women with breast symptoms. METHODS: After ethics approval, a cross-sectional study was conducted from January to October 2020 in women with new breast cancer symptoms at their first visit to our clinic. The "Delayed Presentation" questionnaires in the Malay language were used and distributed among the participants. Demographic data and presentation time were recorded. Presentation time was defined as the duration of symptoms prior to visiting any health care facilities. Respondents with presentation times > 90 days comprised the delayed group. The potential factors associated with the delayed presentation were analyzed using cross-tabulation and multiple logistic regression. RESULTS: There were 106 respondents to the questionnaire, with a mean age of 34.0 (SD: 11.2) years, and 73.6% (n = 78) were < 39 years old. A total of 35.8% (n = 38) visited the local government clinic first and only 28.3% (n = 30) came to the BestARi clinic directly. The reasons for presentation were a palpable breast lump on breast self-examination (75.5%, n = 80), mastalgia (15.1%, n = 16), nipple discharge (5.7%, n = 6), skin changes (0.9%, n = 1), and others (2.8%, n = 3). Among the respondents, 10.4% (n = 11) had alternative treatments prior to presentation to a hospital. The mean presentation time was 98.9 (SD: 323.7) days. Most of the participants (61.3%, n = 65) presented to us within 1 month. The delayed presentation group accounted for 19.8% (n = 21) of the respondents. The factor that was significantly associated with delayed presentation was the participants' perception of symptoms as not dangerous (adjusted OR 3.05, 95% CI 1.11, 8.38). CONCLUSIONS: The percentage of delayed presentations among our patients was lower than the percentage reported in a previous study. Interpretation of a symptom as harmless by the respondent was the only factor significantly associated with delayed presentation.

Conversion rate and risk factors of conversion to open in laparoscopic appendicectomy.

PURPOSE: Laparoscopic appendicectomy (LA) has several advantages over conventional open appendicectomy (OA). However, about 5% to 10% of LA patients still need to be converted to open surgery. Identifying risk factors that contribute to conversion to OA allows for early identification of patients who may benefit from primary OA. This study aimed to determine the conversion rate of LA to OA and to identify its associated risk factors among patients with acute or perforated appendicitis. METHODS: A retrospective review of medical records was performed among patients with acute or perforated appendicitis who underwent LA between December 2015 and January 2017. With the use of multivariable logistic regression analyses, the predictors of conversion from laparoscopic to OA were investigated. RESULTS: Out of 120 patients, 33 cases were converted to OA which gives a conversion rate of 27.5%. Among 33 patients who were converted to OA, 27 patients (81.8%) had perforated appendix, while in the LA group, perforated appendix cases consisted of 34.5% (P<0.001). Histopathology of the appendix was the predictor of conversion from LA to OA (adjusted odds ratio, 8.82; 95% confidence interval, 3.13-24.91; P<0.001). CONCLUSION: The result from our study shows that the overall conversion rate for the study period was high. Patients with perforated appendicitis had a higher risk of conversion to OA. Therefore, preoperative diagnosis of perforated appendicitis may be paramount in predicting conversion to OA.

Biliary ascariasis - A vicious cycle.

Biliary ascariasis is a rare disease in a non-endemic area. However, it is one of the possible etiological factors for retarded growth as well as malnutrition in children. It may cause intestinal obstruction, appendicitis, biliary obstruction, liver abscess, hepatolithiasis, and pancreatitis in adults. Herein, we report a patient with ascending cholangitis secondary to biliary ascariasis who was successfully managed with Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangio Pancreaticography.

Use of aerosol protective barrier in a patient with impending cholangitis and unknown COVID-19 status undergoing emergency ERCP during COVID-19 pandemic.

WHO declared worldwide outbreak of COVID-19 a pandemic on 11 March 2020. Healthcare authorities have temporarily stopped all elective surgical and endoscopy procedures. Nevertheless, there is a subset of patients who require emergency treatment such as aerosol-generating procedures. Herein, we would like to discuss the management of a patient diagnosed with impending biliary sepsis during COVID-19 outbreak. The highlight of the discussion is mainly concerning the advantages of concurrent use of aerosol protective barrier in addition to personal protective equipment practice, necessary precautions to be taken during endoscopy retrograde cholangiopancreatography and handling of the patient preprocedure and postprocedure.