The effect of prophylactic hemoclips on the risk of delayed post-endoscopic mucosal resection bleed for upper and lower gastrointestinal lesions: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is a minimally invasive procedure used for the treatment of lesions in the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. There is increased usage of hemoclips during EMR for the prevention of delayed bleeding. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of hemoclips in the prevention of delayed bleeding after EMR of upper and lower GI tract lesions. METHOD: This is a retrospective cohort study using the Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC) EMR registry. Lesions in upper and lower GI tracts that underwent EMR between January 2012 and December 2015 were analyzed. Rates of delayed bleeding were compared between the hemoclip and no-hemoclip groups. Analysis was stratified by upper GI and lower GI lesions. Lower GI group was further stratified by right and left colon. We examined the relationship between clip use and several clinically-relevant variables among the patients who exhibited delayed bleeding. Furthermore, we explored possible procedure-level and endoscopist-level characteristics that may be associated with clip usage. RESULTS: A total of 18 out of 657 lesions (2.7%) resulted in delayed bleeding: 7 (1.1%) in hemoclip group and 11 (1.7%) in no-hemoclip group (p = 0.204). There was no evidence that clip use moderated the effects of the lesion size (p = 0.954) or lesion location (p = 0.997) on the likelihood of delayed bleed. In the lower GI subgroup, clip application did not alter the effect of polyp location (right versus left colon) on the likelihood of delayed bleed (p = 0.951). Logistic regression analyses showed that the clip use did not modify the likelihood of delayed bleeding as related to the following variables: use of aspirin/NSAIDs/anti-coagulants/anti-platelets, pathologic diagnoses (including different types of colon polypoid lesions), ablation, piecemeal resection. The total number of clips used was 901 at a minimum additional cost of $173,893. CONCLUSION: Prophylactic hemoclip application did not reduce delayed post-EMR bleed for upper and lower GI lesions in this retrospective study performed in a large-scale community practice setting. Routine prophylactic hemoclip application during EMR may lead to significantly higher healthcare cost without a clear clinical benefit.

Accuracy of screening for fecal occult blood on a single stool sample obtained by digital rectal examination: a comparison with recommended sampling practice.

BACKGROUND: Many expert panels recommend colorectal cancer screening for average-risk asymptomatic individuals older than 50 years of age. Recent studies have found that 24% to 64% of primary care providers use only the digital fecal occult blood test (FOBT) as their primary screening test. The effectiveness of a single digital FOBT is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To compare the sensitivity and specificity of digital FOBT and the recommended 6-sample at-home FOBT for advanced neoplasia in asymptomatic persons. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: 13 Veterans Affairs medical centers. PATIENTS: 3121 asymptomatic patients 50 to 75 years of age. INTERVENTION: 2665 patients had 6-sample at-home FOBT and digital FOBT, followed by complete colonoscopy. MEASUREMENTS: We measured the sensitivity of digital and 6-sample FOBT for advanced neoplasia and the specificity for no neoplasia. We calculated predictive values and likelihood ratios for advanced neoplasia, defined as tubular adenomas 10 mm or greater, adenomas with villous histology or high-grade dysplasia, or invasive cancer. RESULTS: Of all participants, 96.8% were men; their average age was 63.1 years. The 6-sample FOBT and the single digital FOBT had specificities of 93.9% and 97.5%, respectively, as defined by studying 1656 patients with no neoplasia. Sensitivities for detection of advanced neoplasia in 284 patients were 23.9% for the 6-sample FOBT and 4.9% for the digital FOBT. The likelihood ratio for advanced neoplasia was 1.68 (95% CI, 0.96 to 2.94) for positive results on digital FOBT and 0.98 (CI, 0.95 to 1.01) for negative results. LIMITATIONS: Most patients were men. CONCLUSIONS: Single digital FOBT is a poor screening method for colorectal neoplasia and cannot be recommended as the only test. When digital FOBT is performed as part of a primary care physical examination, negative results do not decrease the odds of advanced neoplasia. Persons with these results should be offered at-home 6-sample FOBT or another type of screening test.