Asia-Pacific survey on green endoscopy.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Greenhouse gas emissions are the fundamental cause of global warming, with CO2 being the most contributive. Carbon reduction has been widely advocated to mitigate the climate crisis. The endoscopy unit is the third highest waste-generating department in a hospital. The awareness and acceptance of the practice of green endoscopy among healthcare workers is unclear. METHOD: An online survey was conducted over a 5-week period from July to August 2023 in the Asia-Pacific region, which targeted endoscopists, nurses, and other healthcare professionals of the endoscopy unit. The primary outcome was the agreement to adopt green endoscopy. The secondary outcomes included views on sustainable practices, factors associated with increased acceptance of green endoscopy, the acceptance of different carbon reduction measures, and the perceived barriers to implementation. RESULTS: A total of 259 valid responses were received. Overall, 79.5% of participants agreed to incorporate green endoscopy into their practice. Nevertheless, existing green policies were only reported by 12.7% of respondents. The level of understanding of green endoscopy is the only significant factor associated with its acceptance (odds ratio 3.10, P < 0.007). Potential barriers to implementation include healthcare cost increment, infection risk, inadequate awareness, and lack of policy and industrial support. CONCLUSION: Green endoscopy is well accepted among healthcare workers but not widely implemented. The level of understanding is highly associated with its acceptance, highlighting the importance of education. A reliable assessment tool is needed to quantify the environmental impact of endoscopy. Further studies are needed to ascertain its benefit and cost effectiveness.

Single-use accessories and endoscopes in the era of sustainability and climate change-A balancing act.

Gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy is among the highest waste generator in healthcare facilities. The major reasons include production of large-volume non-renewable waste, use of single-use devices, and reprocessing or decontamination processes. Single-use endoscopic accessories have gradually replaced reusable devices over last two decades contributing to the rising impact of GI endoscopy on ecosystem. Several reports of infection outbreaks with reusable duodenoscopes raised concerns regarding the efficacy and adherence to standard disinfection protocols. Even the enhanced reprocessing techniques like double high-level disinfection have not been found to be the perfect ways for decontamination of duodenoscopes and therefore, paved the way for the development of single-use duodenoscopes. However, the use of single-use endoscopes is likely to amplify the net waste generated and carbon footprint of any endoscopy unit. Moreover, single-use devices challenge one of the major pillars of sustainability, that is, "reuse." In the era of climate change, a balanced approach is required taking into consideration patient safety as well as financial and environmental implications. The possible solutions to provide optimum care while addressing the impact on climate include selective use of disposable duodenoscopes and careful selection of accessories during a case. Other options include use of disposable endcaps and development of effective high-level disinfection techniques. The collaboration between the healthcare professionals and the manufacturers is paramount for the development of environmental friendly devices with low carbon footprint.

Effect of Real-Time Computer-Aided Polyp Detection System (ENDO-AID) on Adenoma Detection in Endoscopists-in-Training: A Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: The effect of computer-aided polyp detection (CADe) on adenoma detection rate (ADR) among endoscopists-in-training remains unknown. METHODS: We performed a single-blind, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial in Hong Kong between April 2021 and July 2022 (NCT04838951). Eligible subjects undergoing screening/surveillance/diagnostic colonoscopies were randomized 1:1 to receive colonoscopies with CADe (ENDO-AID[OIP-1]) or not (control) during withdrawal. Procedures were performed by endoscopists-in-training with <500 procedures and <3 years' experience. Randomization was stratified by patient age, sex, and endoscopist experience (beginner vs intermediate level, <200 vs 200-500 procedures). Image enhancement and distal attachment devices were disallowed. Subjects with incomplete colonoscopies or inadequate bowel preparation were excluded. Treatment allocation was blinded to outcome assessors. The primary outcome was ADR. Secondary outcomes were ADR for different adenoma sizes and locations, mean number of adenomas, and non-neoplastic resection rate. RESULTS: A total of 386 and 380 subjects were randomized to CADe and control groups, respectively. The overall ADR was significantly higher in the CADe group than in the control group (57.5% vs 44.5%; adjusted relative risk, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.17-1.72; P < .001). The ADRs for <5 mm (40.4% vs 25.0%) and 5- to 10-mm adenomas (36.8% vs 29.2%) were higher in the CADe group. The ADRs were higher in the CADe group in both the right colon (42.0% vs 30.8%) and left colon (34.5% vs 27.6%), but there was no significant difference in advanced ADR. The ADRs were higher in the CADe group among beginner (60.0% vs 41.9%) and intermediate-level (56.5% vs 45.5%) endoscopists. Mean number of adenomas (1.48 vs 0.86) and non-neoplastic resection rate (52.1% vs 35.0%) were higher in the CADe group. CONCLUSIONS: Among endoscopists-in-training, the use of CADe during colonoscopies was associated with increased overall ADR. (ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT04838951).

Endoscopic evaluation of indeterminate biliary strictures: Cholangioscopy, endoscopic ultrasound, or both?

Accurate and timely diagnosis of biliary strictures can be challenging. Because the diagnostic sensitivity and accuracy of standard endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-based tissue sampling for malignancy are suboptimal, additional endoscopic evaluation by cholangioscopy and/or endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is often necessary to differentiate between malignant and benign biliary strictures to guide clinical management. While direct visualization by cholangioscopy and/or high-resolution imaging by EUS are often the first step in the evaluation of an indeterminate biliary stricture (IDBS), tissue diagnosis by cholangioscopy-guided biopsy and/or EUS-guided fine-needle tissue acquisition is the preferred modality to establish a diagnosis of malignancy. Because each modality has its own strengths and limitations, selection of cholangioscopy and EUS is best guided by the biliary stricture location and local expertise. Artificial intelligence-assisted diagnosis, biopsy forceps with improved design, contrast-enhanced EUS, and dedicated fine-needle biopsy devices are recent technological advances that may further improve the diagnostic performance of cholangioscopy and EUS in patients with IDBS.

Risk of recurrent advanced colorectal neoplasia in individuals with baseline non-advanced neoplasia followed up at 5 vs 7-10 years.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the commonest cancers, especially among the Asian populations. We compared the recurrence rate of advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACN) at 5 year vs 7-10 years among individuals with non-advanced adenoma (NAA) detected and polypectomized at baseline colonoscopy in a large Chinese population. METHODS: We extracted data of a large Chinese population with NAA polypectomized who received surveillance colonoscopy after 5 or 7-10 years from a large database (2008-2018). The outcome variable included recurrence of ACN at surveillance colonoscopy. We examined the association between length of surveillance and the outcome variable, whilst controlling for risk factors of colorectal cancer. RESULTS: We include 109 768 subjects who have received a baseline colonoscopy from our dataset. They were aged 67.35 (SD 9.84) years, and 60.9% of them were male subjects. The crude 5-year and 10-year recurrence rate of ACN was 1.50% and 2.42%, respectively (crude odds ratio = 1.629, 95% CI 1.362 to 1.949, P < 0.001). From the binary logistic regression model, individuals with surveillance colonoscopy performed at 10 years had a statistically higher recurrence rate of ACN than those followed-up at 5 year (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.544, 95% CI 1.266 to 1.877, P < 0.001), but the effect size of aOR is small. CONCLUSIONS: There is a small difference in recurrence of ACN between individuals who received colonoscopy workup at 5 years vs 7-10 years. These findings support a 7-10 years surveillance period after baseline NAA was polypectomized.

Recurrence rates of advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACN) in subjects with baseline ACN followed up at different surveillance intervals.

BACKGROUND: Current clinical guidelines recommend that a baseline finding of advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACN) should be followed-up within 1-3 years. AIM: We compared the recurrence rate of ACN at 1 year vs. 3 years among individuals with ACN detected and polypectomised at baseline colonoscopy. METHODS: We extracted data from eligible patients in a Chinese population database from 2008 to 2018. The outcome variables included recurrence of advanced adenoma and advanced neoplasia, respectively, at follow-up colonoscopy. Binary logistic regression modeling was constructed to examine the association between length of surveillance and the outcome variables, controlling for risk factors of colorectal cancer, including age, gender, smoking, alcohol drinking, body mass index and chronic diseases. RESULTS: We included 147,270 subjects who have received a baseline colonoscopy from our dataset. They were aged 69.3 years and 59.7% of them were male subjects. The crude 1-year and 3-year recurrence rate of ACN was 7.57% and 7.74%. From a binary logistic regression model, individuals with surveillance colonoscopy performed at 3 years did not have significantly higher recurrence rate of ACN than those followed-up at 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: No statistically significantly difference in recurrence of ACN between individuals who received workup at 1vs. 3 years. These findings support a 3-year surveillance period after baseline ACN was polypectomised.

Impact of COVID-19 infection and vaccination in pancreatobiliary IgG4-related disease patients: An international multicenter study.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Dedicated studies evaluating the impact of COVID-19 on outcomes of pancreatobiliary IgG4 related disease (IgG4-RD) patients are scarce. Whether COVID-19 infection or vaccination would trigger IgG4-RD exacerbation remains unknown. METHODS: Pancreatobiliary IgG4-RD patients ≥ 18 years old with active follow-up since January 2020 from nine referral centers in Asia, Europe, and North America were included in this multicenter retrospective study. Outcome measures include incidence and severity of COVID-19 infection, IgG4-RD disease activity and treatment status, interruption of indicated IgG4-RD treatment. Prospective data on COVID-19 vaccination status and new COVID-19 infection during the Omicron outbreak were also retrieved in the Hong Kong cohort. RESULTS: Of the 124 pancreatobiliary IgG4-RD patients, 25.0% had active IgG4-RD, 71.0% were on immunosuppressive therapies and 80.6% had ≥ 1 risk factor for severe COVID. In 2020 (pre-vaccination period), two patients (1.6%) had COVID-19 infection (one requiring ICU admission), and 7.2% of patients had interruptions in indicated immunosuppressive treatment for IgG4-RD. Despite a high vaccination rate (85.0%), COVID-19 infection rate has increased to 20.0% during Omicron outbreak in the Hong Kong cohort. A trend towards higher COVID-19 infection rate was noted in the non-fully vaccinated/unvaccinated group (17.6% vs 33.3%, P = 0.376). No IgG4-RD exacerbation following COVID-19 vaccination or infection was observed. CONCLUSION: While a low COVID-19 infection rate with no mortality was observed in pancreatobiliary IgG4-RD patients in the pre-vaccination period of COVID-19, infection rate has increased during the Omicron outbreak despite a high vaccination rate. No IgG4-RD exacerbation after COVID-19 infection or vaccination was observed.

Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Colonoscopy for Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted colonoscopy improves polyp detection and characterization in colonoscopy. However, data from large-scale multicenter randomized controlled trials (RCT) in an asymptomatic population are lacking. METHODS: This multicenter RCT aimed to compare AI-assisted colonoscopy with conventional colonoscopy for adenoma detection in an asymptomatic population. Asymptomatic subjects 45-75 years of age undergoing colorectal cancer screening by direct colonoscopy or fecal immunochemical test were recruited in 6 referral centers in Hong Kong, Jilin, Inner Mongolia, Xiamen, and Beijing. In the AI-assisted colonoscopy, an AI polyp detection system (Eagle-Eye) with real-time notification on the same monitor of the endoscopy system was used. The primary outcome was overall adenoma detection rate (ADR). Secondary outcomes were mean number of adenomas per colonoscopy, ADR according to endoscopist's experience, and colonoscopy withdrawal time. This study received Institutional Review Board approval (CRE-2019.393). RESULTS: From November 2019 to August 2021, 3059 subjects were randomized to AI-assisted colonoscopy (n = 1519) and conventional colonoscopy (n = 1540). Baseline characteristics and bowel preparation quality between the 2 groups were similar. The overall ADR (39.9% vs 32.4%; P < .001), advanced ADR (6.6% vs 4.9%; P = .041), ADR of expert (42.3% vs 32.8%; P < .001) and nonexpert endoscopists (37.5% vs 32.1%; P = .023), and adenomas per colonoscopy (0.59 ± 0.97 vs 0.45 ± 0.81; P < .001) were all significantly higher in the AI-assisted colonoscopy. The median withdrawal time (8.3 minutes vs 7.8 minutes; P = .004) was slightly longer in the AI-assisted colonoscopy group. CONCLUSIONS: In this multicenter RCT in asymptomatic patients, AI-assisted colonoscopy improved overall ADR, advanced ADR, and ADR of both expert and nonexpert attending endoscopists. (ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT04422548).

Effectiveness of prophylactic clipping in preventing postpolypectomy bleeding in aspirin users: a propensity-score analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Antithrombotic use is a significant risk factor of postpolypectomy bleeding (PPB). Evidence of prophylactic clipping is only available for proximal and large colonic lesions in the general population. Dedicated studies to examine the benefit of prophylactic clipping in patients on aspirin remain scarce. METHODS: A propensity score-weighted retrospective cohort study was performed in a tertiary referral center from January 2018 to September 2021. Patients who received aspirin and underwent colonoscopic polypectomy, EMR, or endoscopic submucosal dissection were included. Data on baseline demographics, medications, and endoscopic factors (polyp number, size, location, and morphology; resection method; and prophylactic clipping) were captured. Propensity score-weighted models were developed between prophylactic clipping and no clipping groups. The primary outcome was delayed PPB within 30 days, with a composite endpoint consisting of repeated colonoscopy for hemostasis, requirement of blood transfusion, or hemoglobin drop >2 g/dL. RESULTS: A total of 1373 patients with 3952 polyps were included. Baseline characteristics were balanced between the 2 groups. In the multivariate analysis, the largest polyp size was a significant risk factor for PPB (odds ratio, 1.07; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.11; P = .002). Prophylactic clipping was not associated with a reduced risk of PPB (odds ratio, 1.34; 95% confidence interval, .83-2.18; P = .240) and did not show any risk reduction in subgroups with different polyp sizes and locations and endoscopic resection techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic clipping was not associated with a lower risk of PPB in aspirin users after endoscopic resection of colorectal polyps. Aspirin use should not be regarded as the only factor for the routine use of prophylactic clips.

Nurse-led reinforced education by mobile messenger improves the quality of bowel preparation of colonoscopy in a population-based colorectal cancer screening program: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Adequate bowel preparation is an important colonoscopy quality indicator. Reinforced education is effective in improving bowel preparation quality of colonoscopy with mixed indications. However, it remains unclear whether such improvement can be consistently observed in pre- and post-irrigation during colonoscopy in screening population. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to study the effectiveness of nurse-led reinforced education delivered via mobile messenger (WhatsApp Messenger) on pre- and post-irrigation bowel preparation adequacy in colonoscopies for positive fecal immunochemical test in a population-based colorectal cancer screening program. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. SETTING: A hospital-based endoscopy centre in Hong Kong, China. PARTICIPANTS: Patients undergoing colonoscopy for positive fecal immunochemical test in a population-based colorectal cancer screening program. METHODS: The recruited patients were randomized to receive either WhatsApp Reinforced Education (WRE) or No Reinforced Education (NRE) (1:1). Patients in WRE group received one-off reinforced education of bowel preparation in text and video formats via WhatsApp Messenger four days prior to colonoscopy sent by investigator while NRE group received standard-of-care only. Primary outcome was the bowel preparation adequacy rate as evaluated by Aronchick Scale. Secondary outcomes included bowel preparation adequacy rate as evaluated by Boston Bowel Preparation Scale, adenoma detection rate and risk factors of bowel preparation inadequacy. Continuous variables were described as means with standard deviation (SD) and analyzed with Student's t-test. The Pearson Chi Square Test or Fisher Exact Test was used to assess categorical variables when appropriate. Risk factors were determined by logistic regression. RESULTS: From July 2017 to April 2019, 685 eligible patients were randomized to WRE (n = 343) and NRE (n = 342) groups. Patients in WRE group had higher bowel preparation adequacy rate as evaluated by Aronchik Scale (83.4% vs 75.4%, p = 0.010) and Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (94.2% vs 88.9%, p = 0.013). Adenoma detection rate was higher in WRE group but without statistical significance (71.4% vs 67.5%, p = 0.27). In logistic regression, WhatsApp Reinforced Education reduced the inadequate bowel preparation risk (Adjusted odds ratio: 0.564; 95% confidence interval: 0.371-0.856, p = 0.007). Male gender (Adjusted odds ratio [AOR]: 1.638; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.054-2.546, p = 0.028) and diabetes (AOR: 2.062; 95% CI: 1.215-3.497, p = 0.007) were risk factors of bowel preparation inadequacy. CONCLUSIONS: Nurse-led mobile messenger-initiated reinforced education improves both pre- and post-irrigation bowel preparation quality of screening colonoscopy following positive fecal immunochemical test. It is readily incorporable in clinical practice because of its low setup cost. REGISTRATION NUMBER: Registered on 4 July 2017 on https://clinicaltrials.gov/ (NCT03209739).

Effectiveness of prophylactic clipping in preventing postpolypectomy bleeding in oral anticoagulant users: a propensity-score analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Evidence of prophylactic clipping is inconsistent except for proximal and large colonic lesions in the general population. Although warfarin and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are significant risk factors of postpolypectomy bleeding (PPB), dedicated studies to examine the benefit of prophylactic clipping in these high-risk patients remain limited. METHODS: We performed a propensity score-weighted retrospective cohort study from 2012 to 2020. Patients who received an oral anticoagulant and underwent colonoscopic polypectomy were included. Data were collected on baseline demographics, medications (anticoagulant, antiplatelet, and heparin bridging), and endoscopies (polyp number, location, size, morphology, histopathology, resection method and prophylactic clipping). Propensity-score models with inverse probability of treatment weighting were developed between prophylactic clipping and no clipping groups. Unbalanced variables were included in a doubly robust model with multivariate analysis. The primary outcome was clinically significant delayed PPB, defined as a composite endpoint of hemoglobin drop ≥2 g/dL, blood transfusion, or repeat colonoscopy for hemostasis within 30 days. RESULTS: Five hundred forty-seven patients with 1485 polyps were included. Prophylactic clipping was not associated with a reduced risk of PPB (odds ratio [OR], 1.19; 95% confidence interval [CI], .73-1.95; P = .497). The hot resection method was associated with a significantly higher risk of PPB (OR, 9.76; 95% CI, 3.94-32.60; P < .001) compared with cold biopsy or snare polypectomy. In a subgroup analysis, prophylactic clipping was associated with a lower PPB risk in patients on DOACs (OR, .36; 95% CI, .16-.82; P = .015). CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic clipping was not associated with an overall reduced risk of PPB in patients on oral anticoagulants. The use of cold snare polypectomy should be maximized in anticoagulated patients.

Endoscopy After the COVID-19 Pandemic-What Will Be Different?

Purpose of Review: This paper reviews the latest literature regarding the impact of COVID on endoscopy service provision. Recent Findings: Endoscopy has been shown to be largely safe when appropriate infection prevention and control measures are in place. Endoscopy training and education has been profoundly affected though novel training models to overcome this have been developed. Proper handling of delayed or cancelled procedures is of utmost importance to minimize delays in diagnosis and treatment of diseases such as cancer. Adoption of new technologies such as non-endoscopy alternatives and telehealth may be a viable alternative to minimize infection risks. Summary: This pandemic has led to tangible differences in how we provide endoscopy service in the future. Future research focusing on better risk stratification of patients who need endoscopy, validating novel endoscopy training models, and adopting new technologies are urgently needed to support these changes in the post-pandemic world.

Two vs One Forward View Examination of Right Colon on Adenoma Detection: An International Multicenter Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Second forward view (SFV) examination of the right colon (RC) in colonoscopy was suggested to improve the adenoma detection rate (ADR), but multicenter data to inform its routine use remain limited. We performed an international multicenter randomized trial comparing SFV vs a standard single forward view examination of the RC on adenoma detection. METHODS: Asymptomatic individuals undergoing screening or surveillance colonoscopies from 6 Asia Pacific regions were invited for study. A forward view examination of the RC was first performed in all patients, followed by randomization at the hepatic flexure to either SFV examination of the RC and standard withdrawal examination from the hepatic flexure to rectum, or a standard withdrawal colonoscopy (SWC) examination from the hepatic flexure to rectum. The primary outcome was RC ADR. RESULTS: Between 2016 and 2019, there were 1011 patients randomized (SFV group, 502 patients; SWC group, 509 patients). Forty-five endoscopists performed the colonoscopies. The RC ADR was significantly higher in the SFV group than in the SWC group (27.1% vs 21.6%; P = .042). The whole-colon ADR was high in both groups (49.0% vs 45.0%; P =.201). The SFV examination identified 58 additional adenomas in 49 patients (9.8%), leading to a change in surveillance recommendations in 15 patients (3.0%). The median overall withdrawal time was 1.5 minutes longer in the SFV group (12.0 vs 10.5 min; P < .001). Older age, male sex, ever smoking, and longer RC withdrawal time were independent predictors of right-sided adenoma detection. CONCLUSIONS: In this multicenter trial, SFV examination significantly increased the RC ADR in screening and surveillance colonoscopies. Routine RC SFV examination should be considered. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT03121495.

Timing of endoscopy for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a territory-wide cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: While it is recommended that patients presenting with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB) should receive endoscopic intervention within 24 hours, the optimal timing is still uncertain. We aimed to assess whether endoscopy timing postadmission would affect outcomes. DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective, territory-wide, cohort study with healthcare data from all public hospitals in Hong Kong. Adult patients (age ≥18) that presented with AUGIB between 2013 and 2019 and received therapeutic endoscopy within 48 hours (n=6474) were recruited. Patients were classified based on endoscopic timing postadmission: urgent (t≤6), early (6

Effects of a Rice Bran Dietary Intervention on the Composition of the Intestinal Microbiota of Adults with a High Risk of Colorectal Cancer: A Pilot Randomised-Controlled Trial.

Rice bran exhibits chemopreventive properties that may help to prevent colorectal cancer (CRC), and a short-term rice bran dietary intervention may promote intestinal health via modification of the intestinal microbiota. We conducted a pilot, double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial to assess the feasibility of implementing a long-term (24-week) rice bran dietary intervention in Chinese subjects with a high risk of CRC, and to examine its effects on the composition of their intestinal microbiota. Forty subjects were randomised into the intervention group (n = 19) or the control group (n = 20). The intervention participants consumed 30 g of rice bran over 24-h intervals for 24 weeks, whilst the control participants consumed 30 g of rice powder on the same schedule. High rates of retention (97.5%) and compliance (≥91.3%) were observed. No adverse effects were reported. The intervention significantly enhanced the intestinal abundance of Firmicutes and Lactobacillus, and tended to increase the Firmicutes/Bacteroidetes ratio and the intestinal abundance of Prevotella_9 and the health-promoting Lactobacillales and Bifidobacteria, but had no effect on bacterial diversity. Overall, a 24-week rice bran dietary intervention was feasible, and may increase intestinal health by inducing health-promoting modification of the intestinal microbiota. Further larger-scale studies involving a longer intervention duration and multiple follow-up outcome assessments are recommended.

Mobile messenger-initiated reminders improve longitudinal adherence in a community-based, opportunistic colorectal cancer screening program: A single-blind, crossover randomized controlled study.

BACKGROUND: The fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is a cost-effective colorectal cancer (CRC) screening tool. However, longitudinal adherence, a factor that is critical to the success to any FIT-based screening program, often is poor. The authors hypothesized that reminders sent via mobile messengers, such as WhatsApp, improve such adherence. METHODS: In the current single-blind, randomized study, subjects from an opportunistic FIT screening program who had a negative FIT result the year prior were randomly allocated (1:1) to receive either a 1-off reminder via the WhatsApp messenger (WR) 1 month prior to the due appointments or no reminder (NR). All subjects were blinded to study participation and group allocation. At 24 months after randomization, a crossover of intervention was performed among those individuals who remained in the FIT program. The primary outcome was FIT adherence, defined as the pick-up and on-time return of the FIT. The secondary outcome was FIT adherence after the crossover. RESULTS: A total of 500 subjects were randomized to receive WR (250 subjects) or NR (250 subjects). Three individuals were excluded from analysis (1 died and 2 underwent colonoscopy). Both the FIT pick-up rate (80.3% vs 59.3%; P < .001) and return rate (79.9% vs 57.3%; P < .001) were significantly higher in the WR group compared with the NR group. After crossover of intervention (452 subjects), the WR group again was found to have a higher FIT pick-up rate (79.1% vs 52.9%; P < .001) and return rate (78.2% vs 52.4%; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Text reminders sent via mobile messenger appear to improve the longitudinal adherence to FIT-based opportunistic CRC screening programs. The routine use of this technology in CRC screening should be considered.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided cyanoacrylate injection to prevent rebleeding in hepatocellular carcinoma patients with variceal hemorrhage.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Secondary prophylaxis (SP) of variceal rebleeding was reported to improve outcomes of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients, but the optimal endoscopic approach is not well defined. We compared outcomes in HCC patients who underwent SP by endoscopic ultrasound-guided cyanoacrylate obturation (EUS-CYA) versus no SP. METHODS: Between 2014 and 2018, 30 consecutive patients with inoperable HCC and recent endoscopically controlled variceal bleeding were prospectively recruited. Twenty-seven patients with persistent varices ≥ 3 mm on endoscopic ultrasound underwent EUS-CYA for SP. Thirty-three HCC patients treated by esophagogastroduodenoscopy-guided CYA obturation (EGD-CYA) alone for acute variceal bleeding between 2009 and 2013 were identified from a prospective gastrointestinal bleed registry as standard of care controls for comparison. Outcome measures were death-adjusted cumulative incidence of rebleeding, bleeding-free survival, technical success, and procedure-related adverse events of EUS-CYA. RESULTS: The majority of patients in both groups had advanced HCC, portal vein thrombosis, and Child-Pugh B cirrhosis. EUS-CYA was successful in all 27 patients with no radiographic evidence of cyanoacrylate-lipiodol embolization. Significantly lower 30- and 90-day death-adjusted cumulative incidence of rebleeding (14.8% vs 42.4%, P = 0.023 and 18.5% vs 60.6%, P = 0.002, respectively) and significantly higher variceal bleeding-free survival at 3 and 6 months (51.9% vs 21.2%, P = 0.009, 40.7% vs 15.2%, P = 0.010, respectively) were observed in the EUS-CYA group when compared with standard of care group. CONCLUSIONS: Secondary prophylaxis by EUS-CYA reduced rebleeding rate and improved variceal bleeding-free survival in patients with inoperable HCC and variceal bleeding when compared with no SP. Randomized studies are needed to confirm the benefits of EUS-CYA for this difficult-to-treat population.

Timing of Endoscopy for Acute Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding.

BACKGROUND: It is recommended that patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding undergo endoscopy within 24 hours after gastroenterologic consultation. The role of endoscopy performed within time frames shorter than 24 hours has not been adequately defined. METHODS: To evaluate whether urgent endoscopy improves outcomes in patients predicted to be at high risk for further bleeding or death, we randomly assigned patients with overt signs of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding and a Glasgow-Blatchford score of 12 or higher (scores range from 0 to 23, with higher scores indicating a higher risk of further bleeding or death) to undergo endoscopy within 6 hours (urgent-endoscopy group) or between 6 and 24 hours (early-endoscopy group) after gastroenterologic consultation. The primary end point was death from any cause within 30 days after randomization. RESULTS: A total of 516 patients were enrolled. The 30-day mortality was 8.9% (23 of 258 patients) in the urgent-endoscopy group and 6.6% (17 of 258) in the early-endoscopy group (difference, 2.3 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.3 to 6.9). Further bleeding within 30 days occurred in 28 patients (10.9%) in the urgent-endoscopy group and in 20 (7.8%) in the early-endoscopy group (difference, 3.1 percentage points; 95% CI, -1.9 to 8.1). Ulcers with active bleeding or visible vessels were found on initial endoscopy in 105 of the 158 patients (66.4%) with peptic ulcers in the urgent-endoscopy group and in 76 of 159 (47.8%) in the early-endoscopy group. Endoscopic hemostatic treatment was administered at initial endoscopy for 155 patients (60.1%) in the urgent-endoscopy group and for 125 (48.4%) in the early-endoscopy group. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding who were at high risk for further bleeding or death, endoscopy performed within 6 hours after gastroenterologic consultation was not associated with lower 30-day mortality than endoscopy performed between 6 and 24 hours after consultation. (Funded by the Health and Medical Fund of the Food and Health Bureau, Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01675856.).