Pre-administration of super-low volume polyethylene glycol is as effective as senna laxative as bowel preparation for colonoscopy: a randomized controlled phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Senna laxatives are commonly used for bowel preparation before colonoscopies in Japan. However, this laxative frequently causes complications such as abdominal pain. This study aimed to establish a novel method of bowel preparation, which involved the pre-administration of super-low volume polyethylene glycol (PEG) for three days followed by the same-day administration of low volume PEG. METHODS: This study was a prospective, multicenter, investigator-blinded, phase 2, randomized control trial. The intake of 13.9 g (120 mL) of PEG or 1 g of a senna laxative for 3 days before the examination was indicated for each group, and 2 L of PEG solution was used for preparation on the examination day. The primary endpoint was the efficacy of bowel cleansing, as assessed by the Boston bowel preparation scale. The secondary endpoints were the adenoma detection rate and occurrence of complications. RESULTS: A total of 250 patients were initially enrolled. A total of 122 patients from each group were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the responder rates were the same for the two groups (56.6% vs 50.8%). Additionally, the adenoma detection rate did not differ between the two groups (34.9% vs 41.8%, P = 0.3795). In contrast, adherence was higher in the PEG group (93.4% vs 82.8%, P = 0.0101), and the occurrence of complications was lower in the PEG group (1.7% vs 16.4%, P = 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The novel super-low volume PEG method for bowel preparation was as effective as the conventional method with senna laxatives.

Quality management system for screening esophagogastroduodenoscopy improves detection of Helicobacter pylori -negative interval gastric cancer.

Background and study aims Double-checking the findings of examinations is necessary for endoscopy quality control in gastric cancer screening; however, there have been no reports showing its effectiveness. We prospectively analyzed the effectiveness of a quality management system (QMS) in endoscopy for gastric cancer screening. Patients and methods QMS was defined as having images and reports checked by a second endoscopist on the same day and reporting inconsistencies to the examining endoscopist. Patients diagnosed with early gastric cancer (EGC) in the 2 years before and after the introduction of QMS were divided into two groups: the interval cancer group, which included those for whom cancer was detected within 1 year of the last endoscopy and the noninterval cancer group. Changes in detection rates were compared. Results Before the introduction of QMS, 11 interval EGC cases were diagnosed among 36,189 endoscopies, whereas after the introduction, 32 interval ECG cases were diagnosed among 38,290 endoscopies ( P  = 0.004). Fifteen noninterval EGC cases were diagnosed before the introduction, while 12 noninterval EGC cases were diagnosed after the introduction; no significant difference was observed. Subanalyses by Helicobacter pylori (HP) infection status revealed no difference in the detection rate among HP-positive EGC patients, but the detection rates among HP-eradicated and HP-naïve EGC patients were improved ( P  = 0.005 and P  = 0.011). Logistic regression analysis showed that QMS was an independent predictor for detection of HP-negative interval EGC ( P  = 0.017, OR = 4.4, 95 % CI: 2.0-9.7). Conclusions QMS improved the detection rate for HP-negative interval early gastric cancer. (UMIN000042991).

Erratum: Quality management system for screening esophagogastroduodenoscopy improves detection of Helicobacter pylori -negative interval gastric cancer.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1055/a-1594-1833.].

Individual feedback and monitoring of endoscopist performance improves the adenoma detection rate in screening colonoscopy: a prospective case-control study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Previous reports have suggested that a longer withdrawal time (WT) during colonoscopy led to an improved adenoma detection rate (ADR); however, there are few controlled studies that substantiated monitoring WT as an educational method. We aimed to validate a feedback and monitoring system to improve the ADR in screening colonoscopy in a prospective case-control setting. METHODS: After collecting data in the pre-feedback period (3.5 months), the individual performance and the average ADR and WT values of the facility were provided to 6 endoscopists in the intervention group, while 3 endoscopists were isolated as the control group during the feedback period (2 weeks). The intervention group consisted of two subgroups, the Fast and Slow WT groups, according to the results from the pre-feedback period. The endoscopists in the intervention group were instructed to be aware of their own WT in each examination during the post-feedback period (4 months). The performances of all endoscopists in the post-feedback period were analyzed and compared with those in the pre-feedback period. RESULTS: Among the initial analyses, the correlation analysis and multivariate analysis revealed that WT was an independent predictor for the ADR (P = 0.0101). After providing individual performance feedback and instruction regarding real-time WT monitoring, the WT was significantly prolonged in the Fast WT group (P = 0.0346) but did not change in the Slow WT and control groups. In addition, the ADR of the Fast WT group significantly improved after the intervention (P = 0.024), whereas the ADR of the Slow WT and control groups did not change. CONCLUSION: Providing individual feedback on ADR and WT and monitoring WT helped improve the endoscopists' ADRs.

Quality Indicators for the Detection of Helicobacter pylori-Negative Early Gastric Cancer: A Retrospective Observational Study.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: While Helicobacter pylori (HP)-negative gastric cancer is frequently reported, little is known about the predictors for detecting HP-negative early gastric cancer (EGC). We aimed to evaluate the predictors for the detection of HP-negative EGC. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 13,477 consecutive asymptomatic cases where upper endoscopy was performed by nine physicians from April 2017 to March 2019 and analyzed the detection rate of high-risk lesions (HRLs), including EGC, tubular adenoma, and lymphoma, according to the status of HP infection. The observation time was corrected for multiple regression analyses. RESULTS: For all physicians, the average observation time for screening HP-eradicated and -naïve patients was shorter than that for screening HP-positive patients (p<0.05). Multiple regression analyses revealed that the observation time in the three groups was an independent predictor for detecting HRLs in HP-eradicated patients (p=0.03106, 0.01263, and 0.02485, respectively), while experience of endoscopy was an independent predictor for detecting HRLs in HP-naïve patients (p=0.02638). CONCLUSION: While observation time during screening endoscopy was a quality indicator for detecting HRLs in HP-eradicated patients, experience of endoscopy was a quality indicator for detecting HRLs in HP-naïve patients.

[A case of pulmonary embolism due to heparin-induced thrombocytopenia after the placement of hepatic arterial infusion catheter].

A 68-year-old woman developed acute pulmonary embolism after hepatic arterial infusion therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Because the platelet count was significantly reduced, heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) due to heparin usage in hepatic arterial infusion therapy was clinically suspected. Subsequently, the patient tested positively for HIT antibodies, and a definitive diagnosis was obtained. Antithrombotic therapy with heparin was discontinued and treatment with argatroban was started. After the heparinized hydrophilic catheter was removed, the platelet count improved immediately. HIT should be considered when a decrease in platelet count and thrombosis are involved with the usage of heparin.