RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Both macroscopic and histological lesions are frequently detected at upper endoscopy in elderly patients. We assessed the prevalence of main endoscopic and histological alterations in elderly (> 65 years old) patients. METHODS: In this study, clinical, endoscopic and histological features of patients referred for upper endoscopy in clinical practice were retrieved. Both univariate and multivariate analyses were executed. Comparisons with previous data were performed. RESULTS: A total of 1336 underwent upper endoscopy in the 28 participating centres. At endoscopy, at least one macroscopic lesion was present in overall 420 (31.4%) patients. Erosive gastritis (13.3%) and erosive oesophagitis (9.8%) were the most prevalent lesions, whilst Barrett's oesophagus, gastric ulcer, duodenal ulcer and erosive duodenitis were observed in 1.8%, 2%, 1.4% and 3.1% patients, respectively. Nine (0.6%) cases of oesophageal, 25 (1.8%) gastric and 2 (0.1%) duodenal neoplasia were detected. At histology, Helicobacter pylori infection was diagnosed in 99 (15.9%) patients, and extensive precancerous lesions on gastric mucosa were detected in 80 (14.5%) patients. Endoscopic lesions were more frequent in males, at first endoscopy and in those with alarm symptoms and lower during PPI therapy. At multivariate analysis, PPI therapy significantly reduced the probability of finding endoscopic lesions (OR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.46-0.99; P = 0.04), whilst neoplastic lesions were associated with presence of alarm symptoms (OR: 1.5, 95% CI: 1.1-2.1; P = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: We found that the frequency of erosive and neoplastic lesions remained high in elderly patients, whilst the prevalence of both H. pylori infection and peptic ulcer was decreased.
RESUMO
[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2022.868449.].
RESUMO
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: International guidelines advise improving esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) quality in Western countries, where gastric cancer is still diagnosed in advanced stages. This nationwide study investigated some indicators for the quality of EGD performed in endoscopic centers in Italy. METHODS: Clinical, endoscopic, and procedural data of consecutive EGDs performed in one month in the participating centers were reviewed and collected in a specific database. Some quality indicators before and during endoscopic procedures were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 3,219 EGDs performed by 172 endoscopists in 28 centers were reviewed. Data found that some relevant information (family history for GI cancer, smoking habit, use of proton pump inhibitors) were not collected before endoscopy in 58.5-80.7% of patients. Pre-endoscopic preparation for gastric cleaning was routinely performed in only 2 (7.1%) centers. Regarding the procedure, sedation was not performed in 17.6% of patients, and virtual chromoendoscopy was frequently (>75%) used in only one (3.6%) center. An adequate sampling of the gastric mucosa (i.e., antral and gastric body specimens) was heterogeneously performed, and it was routinely performed only by 23% of endoscopists, and in 14.3% centers. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis showed that the quality of EGD performed in clinical practice in Italy deserves to be urgently improved in different aspects.
Assuntos
Neoplasias Gastrointestinais , Neoplasias Gástricas , Humanos , Endoscopia do Sistema Digestório/métodos , Endoscopia Gastrointestinal , Neoplasias Gástricas/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Gástricas/epidemiologia , ItáliaRESUMO
Background: The quality of gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy has been recently identified as a major priority being associated with many outcomes and patient's experience. Objective: To assess adherence of endoscopists to the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) quality performance measures for upper and lower GI endoscopy in Italy. Methods: All endoscopist members of the Italian Society of Digestive Endoscopy (SIED) were invited from October 2018 to December 2018 to participate to a self-administered questionnaire-based survey. The questionnaire included questions on demographics and professional characteristics, and the recent ESGE quality performance measures for upper and lower GI endoscopy. Results: A total of 392 endoscopists participated in the study. Only a minority (18.2%) of participants recorded the duration of esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and 51% provided accurate photo documentation in the minimum standard of 90% of cases. Almost all endoscopists correctly used Prague and Los Angeles classifications (87.8% and 98.2%, respectively), as well as Seattle and Management of precancerous conditions and lesions in the stomach (MAPS) biopsy protocols (86.5% and 91.4%, respectively). However, only 52.8% of participants monitored complications after therapeutic EGD, and 40.8% recorded patients with a diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus (BE). With regard to colonoscopy, almost all endoscopists (93.9%) used the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale for measuring bowel preparation quality and reported a cecal intubation rate ≥90%. However, about a quarter (26.2%) of participants reported an adenoma detection rate of <25%, only 52.8% applied an appropriate polypectomy technique, 48% monitored complications after the procedure, and 12.4% measured patient's experience. Conclusion: The adherence of endoscopists to ESGE performance measures for GI endoscopy is sub-optimal in Italy. There is a need to disseminate and implement performance measures and endorse educational and scientific interventions on the quality of endoscopy.
RESUMO
Background and study aims Endoscope reprocessing has been associated with a variable failure rate. Our aim was to present an overview on current practices for reprocessing in Italian facilities and discuss the principle critical points. Methods In 2014 the Italian Society for Digestive Diseases implemented an accreditation program in collaboration with an independent organization for certification and with the Italian Association for Endoscopy Technical Operators. During a 1-day site visit of the endoscopy center, two endoscopists, one nurse, and the representative of the certification body evaluated the endoscope reprocessing. Results As of July 1, 2020, 28 endoscopy centers had been accredited. Ten centers are completing the measures to correct deficiencies found at the visit. Three centers withdrew from the program. The accreditation program has found variations between the various centers, confirming the poor compliance with guidelines. Major deviations from the standards, established by the model before the site visit according to national and international guidelines, concerned instrument cleaning (44.7â% of the centers), instrument storage (23.7â%), and microbiological tests (31.6â%). Conclusions Our overview demonstrated the lack of many reprocessing phases, which are important to prevent endoscopy-associated infections. Accreditation can achieve a transformation in quality and safety of reprocessing with the Italian centrally-led approach.
RESUMO
Transmission with endoscopes, particularly duodenoscope, of potential lethal infections prompted different scientific societies to deliver recommendations aimed reducing this risk. Some International societies extended recommendations on microbial surveillance to all the endoscopes and devices used in the reprocessing procedure. Considering the relevance of the topic, 8 Italian scientific societies of physicians, nurses and technical operators prepared a concerted document taking into account Institutional advisories and facilities in Italy. The rules for a correct microbial surveillance on endoscopes were detailed in term of what, how and when to perform the procedure, also suggesting behaviors in case of contamination.
Assuntos
Infecção Hospitalar/transmissão , Endoscópios Gastrointestinais/microbiologia , Contaminação de Equipamentos/prevenção & controle , Infecção Hospitalar/prevenção & controle , Endoscópios Gastrointestinais/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Gestão da Segurança/normasRESUMO
The new corona virus disease has started in Wuhan - China at the end of 2019 and quickly spread with a pandemic trend across the rest of the world. The scientific community is making an extraordinary effort to study and control the situation, but the results are just partial. Based on the most recent scientific literature and strong statements by the most prestigious international health institutions, the Italian Society of Digestive Endoscopy has drawn up some recommendations about the use of personal protective equipment, the correct way of dressing and undressing of endoscopists and nurses, before and after digestive endoscopy procedures. In addition, some other important indications are given to reduce the risk of contamination of healthcare providers during endoscopic activities, in the setting of a pandemic. Nevertheless, because of the very quick evolution of our knowledge on this issue, these recommendations must be considered as evolving, because they could change in a short time.
Assuntos
Infecções por Coronavirus/prevenção & controle , Transmissão de Doença Infecciosa/prevenção & controle , Endoscopia Gastrointestinal/normas , Controle de Infecções/normas , Pandemias/prevenção & controle , Pneumonia Viral/prevenção & controle , Aerossóis/efeitos adversos , COVID-19 , Infecções por Coronavirus/transmissão , Pessoal de Saúde , Humanos , Controle de Infecções/métodos , Itália , Pneumonia Viral/transmissão , Segurança , Sociedades MédicasRESUMO
Background and study aims Accreditation of endoscopy services, using valid quality indicators, may address failures to comply with quality standards between endoscopy services. The aim of this work was to present the Italian Society for Digestive Endoscopy (SIED) accreditation model and its effectiveness. Methods A team of eight endoscopists identified quality indicators derived from international guidelines and assessed them in each center voluntarily requesting accreditation. During a 1-day site visit, two expert endoscopists, the representative of the independent and international administrative certification body and a professional nurse evaluated the endoscopy center, by direct observation of the endoscopy team and examination of the medical records Results In all centers we noted shortcomings in instrument reprocessing. In 30 of 40 centers (75â%) the information in the nursing charts was incomplete. Sampling for Helicobacter pylori had not been done in 12 of 40 centers (30â%). In six of 40 centers (15â%) the adenoma detection rate for each endoscopist had not been evaluated. Post-polypectomy intervals were inappropriate in 12 of 40 centers (30â%). We noted a statistically significant difference ( P â<â0.001) between the answers to the SIED checklist of indicators submitted to the inspection team for accreditation before the site visit and the situation found for colonoscopy on site. As of June 30, 2018, 18 endoscopy centers had been accredited and 10 centers had not yet being accredited because they had not completed the measures to correct points raised at the visits. Conclusions Numerous Italian endoscopy centers fail to meet important quality indicators. Our accreditation program can provide means for detecting these problems and correcting them by implementing SIED standards.