Cost-effectiveness analysis of single colonoscopy versus single fecal test for colorectal cancer diagnosis and treatment.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Regular endoscopy or fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is ideal for screening colorectal cancer. However, only a limited number of individuals undergo regular screening. This study aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of a single colonoscopy with a single FIT performed for colorectal cancer screening. METHODS: A microsimulation model was constructed based on real-world observational data collected from three institutions between 2019 and 2022 that compared colonoscopy-based screening with FIT-based screening. The total costs of diagnosis and treatment of the detected lesions using the two strategies were calculated. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per life year gained (LYG) of the colonoscopy-based strategy was calculated. RESULTS: Data from 11 407 patients undergoing colonoscopies and 59 176 patients undergoing FITs were used to establish a model. In the base case analysis of screening strategies, colonoscopy was more cost-effective than FIT (ICER 415 193 yen/LYG). The ICER of the colonoscopy-based strategy among 60- to 69-year-old patients was lowest at 394 200 yen/LYG, whereas that in 20- to 29-year-old patients was highest. Monte Carlo simulations showed that the colonoscopy-based strategy was more cost-effective than the FIT-based strategy (net monetary benefit [NMB]: 5 695 957 yen vs 5 348 253 yen). When the adenoma detection rate in the colonoscopy was over 30% or the positive FIT rate was lower than 8.6% in the FIT-based strategy, the NMB of the colonoscopy-based strategy exceeded that of the FIT-based strategy. CONCLUSION: In the microsimulation model, colonoscopy is recommended as a one-time screening procedure in patients aged >60 years with >30% ADR or <8.6% positive FIT rate.

An algorithm-based active cleansing protocol can reduce the bowel preparation time for screening colonoscopy: A propensity score matching study.

BACKGROUND: Methods that minimize the time for on-site bowel preparation before colonoscopy are needed. We prospectively validated that a novel algorithm-based active cleansing (ABAC) protocol could reduce the time for preparation compared with the conventional method. METHODS: This was an open-label, multicenter, prospective comparative study from April to October 2021. The study compared the bowel preparation time for colonoscopy between patients instructed with the ABAC protocol and control groups. Patients in the ABAC protocol group as well as the control group were administered 2000 mL of polyethylene glycol (PEG) within 2 hours. After the first two hours, patients in the protocol group voluntarily took 300 ml of the solution without the instruction of nursing staff depending on the number of defecations in the first 2 hours. The intervention and control groups were adjusted for background characteristics by propensity score matching (PSM). RESULTS: After adjustment by PSM, 174 patients in each of the two groups were included in the final analysis. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the preparation time was significantly shorter in the intervention group than that in the control group (126.3 ± 32.7 min vs. 144.9 ± 39.9 min, P = 0.018). The proportion of additional PEG intake was significantly higher in the intervention group (16 [9.2%] vs. 6 [3.4%], P = 0.047). The number of defecations was also higher in the intervention group than in the control group (7.8 ± 2.5 vs. 6.3 ± 2.2, P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Simple active instruction protocol is effective to reduce on-site bowel preparation time and nursing staff labor for colonoscopy.

Dietary restriction after cold snare polypectomy of colorectal polyp for prevention of delayed bleeding.

Background and Aim: Cold snare polypectomy (CSP) for small colorectal polyps is a safe technique; however, there is little evidence on whether dietary restriction after CSP is essential. This study aimed to determine whether dietary restriction after CSP is necessary to prevent delayed bleeding. Methods: This is a randomized, controlled, non-inferiority trial conducted between November 2021 and March 2022. Patients with non-pedunculated small colorectal polyps (<10 mm) and who did not take anticoagulants were randomly allocated to two groups: (i) the normal diet (ND) group, and (ii) the low-residue diet (LRD) group. The ND group was instructed to eat anything after CSP, whereas the LRD group was advised to take LRD for 3 days after CSP. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of delayed major bleeding that needed endoscopic hemostasis. Results: A total of 193 patients (average 57.5 years old, 51.9% male) were enrolled in the study. Subsequently, 97 and 96 patients were allocated to the ND and LRD group, respectively. The occurrence of delayed major bleeding was 1.0% in the ND group and 2.1% in the LRD group (95% confidence interval [CI]: -4.4% to 2.4%; difference: -1.1%), which showed the non-inferiority of the ND group. In addition, there was no difference between the two groups with respect to the occurrence of minor delayed bleeding (3.1% and 4.2%, respectively; difference: -1.1% [95% CI: -6.4% to 4.2%]). Conclusion: Dietary restriction after CSP for low-bleeding-risk colorectal polyps is not necessary for the prevention of delayed bleeding (Registration number: UMIN000045669).

Detecting colorectal lesions with image-enhanced endoscopy: an updated review from clinical trials.

Colonoscopy plays an important role in reducing the incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer by detecting adenomas and other precancerous lesions. Image-enhanced endoscopy (IEE) increases lesion visibility by enhancing the microstructure, blood vessels, and mucosal surface color, resulting in the detection of colorectal lesions. In recent years, various IEE techniques have been used in clinical practice, each with its unique characteristics. Numerous studies have reported the effectiveness of IEE in the detection of colorectal lesions. IEEs can be divided into two broad categories according to the nature of the image: images constructed using narrowband wavelength light, such as narrowband imaging and blue laser imaging/blue light imaging, or color images based on white light, such as linked color imaging, texture and color enhancement imaging, and i-scan. Conversely, artificial intelligence (AI) systems, such as computer-aided diagnosis systems, have recently been developed to assist endoscopists in detecting colorectal lesions during colonoscopy. To better understand the features of each IEE, this review presents the effectiveness of each type of IEE and their combination with AI for colorectal lesion detection by referencing the latest research data.

A Close Follow-Up Strategy in the Short Period of Time after Helicobacter pylori Eradication Contributes to Earlier Detection of Gastric Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to optimize the surveillance frequency and period for efficient detection of early gastric cancer (EGC) after Helicobacter pylori (HP) eradication. METHODS: Data from patients with eradicated HP infection were extracted from the endoscopy databases of two institutions from January 2016 to March 2021. The patients were divided into a close follow-up group with frequent surveillance after eradication and an open follow-up group with an intermittent surveillance method, and the cases of post-eradication EGC found in the two groups were analyzed. RESULTS: Thirty-six out of 9,322 patients (0.39%) in the close follow-up group and 20 out of 11,436 patients (0.17%) in the open follow-up group were found to have EGC. The cumulative incidence of EGC after eradication was significantly higher in the close follow-up group (p = 0.004). The duration between eradication and EGC detection was significantly shorter in the close follow-up group (51.7 vs. 90.5 months, p = 0.002). A logistic regression model revealed that duration after eradication was an independent predictor for detecting EGC in the close follow-up group (p = 0.045). A Cox proportional hazards model revealed that the close follow-up strategy was effective in patients with an eradication duration of less than 65 months to identify EGC (p = 0.015), but there was no difference between the two strategies in patients with an eradication duration of more than 65 months (p = 0.624). DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS: Frequent surveillance after HP eradication is efficient for the early detection of EGC during the first 65 months.

Colorectal cold snare polypectomy: Current standard technique and future perspectives.

It has been shown that resection of adenomatous colorectal polyps can reduce mortality due to colorectal cancer. In daily clinical practice, simpler and safer methods of colorectal polypectomy have been sought to enable endoscopists to resect all detected lesions. Among these, cold snare polypectomy (CSP) is widely used in clinical practice because of its advantages in shortening procedure time, reducing delayed bleeding risk, and lowering treatment costs, while maintaining a similar complete resection rate for lesions smaller than 10 mm when compared to conventional hot snare polypectomy. This review introduces the findings of previous studies that investigated the efficacy and safety of the CSP procedure for nonpedunculated polyps smaller than 10 mm, and describes technical points to remember when practicing CSP based on the latest evidence, including using a thin wire snare specifically designed for CSP, and observing the surrounding mucosa of the resection site with chromoendoscopy or image-enhanced endoscopy to ensure that there is no residual lesion. This review also describes the potential of expanding the indication of CSP as a treatment for lesions larger than 10 mm, those with pedunculated morphology, those located near the appendiceal orifice, and for patients under continuous antithrombotic agent therapy. Finally, the perspective on optimal treatments for recurrent lesions after CSP is also discussed, despite the limited related evidence and data.

A delay in the diagnosis of colorectal cancer screened by fecal immunochemical tests during the COVID-19 pandemic: a longitudinal cohort study.

PURPOSE: There is concern that the COVID-19 pandemic may cause people to refrain from undergoing examination resulting in delayed detection of colorectal cancer (CRC). The purpose of this study was to investigate whether there was a delay in CRC detection due to withholding of screening. METHODS: The colonoscopy screening rate and the CRC detection rate were calculated for patients who underwent fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) from 2018 to 2021 in the longitudinal cohort. The stages of CRC cases detected as a result of positive FIT in each year were compared. RESULTS: A total of 39,521 patients were initially screened by FIT over a 4-year period. The FIT-positive rate was 4.7% (441 /9,349) in 2018, 4.6% (420 /9,156) in 2019, 4.9% (453 /9,255) in 2020, and 4.3% (504 /11,760) in 2021. The colonoscopy screening rate for positive FIT results was lower in 2020 than in 2019 (25.8% vs. 38.1%, P < 0.001), and higher in 2021 than in 2020 (56.7% vs. 25.8%, P < 0.001). The CRC detection rate among colonoscopy recipients was higher in 2021 than in 2020 (13% vs. 4%, P = 0.014). Stage 1 or higher CRC accounted for 25.0% (1/4) in 2020, and 78% (18/23) in 2021. Among the CRC cases detected each year, 1 (14%), 1 (25%), and 10 (43%) did not undergo colonoscopy despite positive FIT results in the previous year. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic has reduced the detection of CRC by screening colonoscopy following FIT and might have led to a delay in the detection of CRC.

Evaluation in real-time use of artificial intelligence during colonoscopy to predict relapse of ulcerative colitis: a prospective study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The use of artificial intelligence (AI) during colonoscopy is attracting attention as an endoscopist-independent tool to predict histologic disease activity of ulcerative colitis (UC). However, no study has evaluated the real-time use of AI to directly predict clinical relapse of UC. Hence, it is unclear whether the real-time use of AI during colonoscopy helps clinicians make real-time decisions regarding treatment interventions for patients with UC. This study aimed to establish the role of real-time AI in stratifying the relapse risk of patients with UC in clinical remission. METHODS: This open-label, prospective, cohort study was conducted in a referral center. The cohort comprised 145 consecutive patients with UC in clinical remission who underwent AI-assisted colonoscopy with a contact-microscopy function. We classified patients into either the Healing group or Active group based on the AI outputs during colonoscopy. The primary outcome measure was clinical relapse of UC (defined as a partial Mayo score >2) during 12 months of follow-up after colonoscopy. RESULTS: Overall, 135 patients completed the 12-month follow-up after AI-assisted colonoscopy. AI-assisted colonoscopy classified 61 patients as the Healing group and 74 as the Active group. The relapse rate was significantly higher in the AI-Active group (28.4% [21/74]; 95% confidence interval, 18.5%-40.1%) than in the AI-Healing group (4.9% [3/61]; 95% confidence interval, 1.0%-13.7%; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Real-time use of AI predicts the risk of clinical relapse in patients with UC in clinical remission, which helps clinicians make real-time decisions regarding treatment interventions. (Clinical trial registration number: UMIN000036650.).

Beyond complete endoscopic healing: Goblet appearance using an endocytoscope to predict future sustained clinical remission in ulcerative colitis.

OBJECTIVES: Complete endoscopic healing, defined as Mayo endoscopic score (MES) = 0, is an optimal target in the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC). However, some patients with MES = 0 show clinical relapse within 12 months. Histologic goblet mucin depletion has emerged as a predictor of clinical relapse in patients with MES = 0. We observed goblet depletion in vivo using an endocytoscope, and analyzed the association between goblet appearance and future prognosis in UC patients. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, all enrolled UC patients had MES = 0 and confirmed clinical remission between October 2016 and March 2020. We classified the patients into two groups according to the goblet appearance status: preserved-goblet and depleted-goblet groups. We followed the patients until March 2021 and evaluated the difference in cumulative clinical relapse rates between the two groups. RESULTS: We identified 125 patients with MES = 0 as the study subjects. Five patients were subsequently excluded. Thus, we analyzed the data for 120 patients, of whom 39 were classified as the preserved-goblet group and 81 as the depleted-goblet group. The patients were followed-up for a median of 549 days. During follow-up, the depleted-goblet group had a significantly higher cumulative clinical relapse rate than the preserved-goblet group (19% [15/81] vs. 5% [2/39], respectively; P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Observing goblet appearance in vivo allowed us to better predict the future prognosis of UC patients with MES = 0. This approach may assist clinicians with onsite decision-making regarding treatment interventions without a biopsy.

Real-Time Artificial Intelligence-Based Optical Diagnosis of Neoplastic Polyps during Colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND: Artificial intelligence using computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) in real time with images acquired during colonoscopy may help colonoscopists distinguish between neoplastic polyps requiring removal and nonneoplastic polyps not requiring removal. In this study, we tested whether CADx analyzed images helped in this decision-making process. METHODS: We performed a multicenter clinical study comparing a novel CADx-system that uses real-time ultra-magnifying polyp visualization during colonoscopy with standard visual inspection of small (≤5 mm in diameter) polyps in the sigmoid colon and the rectum for optical diagnosis of neoplastic histology. After committing to a diagnosis (i.e., neoplastic, uncertain, or nonneoplastic), all imaged polyps were removed. The primary end point was sensitivity for neoplastic polyps by CADx and visual inspection, compared with histopathology. Secondary end points were specificity and colonoscopist confidence level in unaided optical diagnosis. RESULTS: We assessed 1289 individuals for eligibility at colonoscopy centers in Norway, the United Kingdom, and Japan. We detected 892 eligible polyps in 518 patients and included them in analyses: 359 were neoplastic and 533 were nonneoplastic. Sensitivity for the diagnosis of neoplastic polyps with standard visual inspection was 88.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 84.3 to 91.5) compared with 90.4% (95% CI, 86.8 to 93.1) with CADx (P=0.33). Specificity was 83.1% (95% CI, 79.2 to 86.4) with standard visual inspection and 85.9% (95% CI, 82.3 to 88.8) with CADx. The proportion of polyp assessment with high confidence was 74.2% (95% CI, 70.9 to 77.3) with standard visual inspection versus 92.6% (95% CI, 90.6 to 94.3) with CADx. CONCLUSIONS: Real-time polyp assessment with CADx did not significantly increase the diagnostic sensitivity of neoplastic polyps during a colonoscopy compared with optical evaluation without CADx. (Funded by the Research Council of Norway [Norges Forskningsråd], the Norwegian Cancer Society [Kreftforeningen], and the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science; UMIN number, UMIN000035213.)