Development and evaluation of a risk assessment tool to improve clinical triage accuracy for colonoscopic investigations.

BACKGROUND: Gastroenterology Departments at hospitals within Australia receive thousands of General Practitioner (GP)-referral letters for gastrointestinal investigations every month. Many of these requests are for colonoscopy. This study aims to evaluate the performance of the current symptoms-based triage system compared to a novel risk score using objective markers. METHODS: Patients with lower abdominal symptoms referred by their GPs and triaged by a Gastroenterology consultant to a colonoscopy consent clinic were recruited into the study. A risk assessment tool (RAT) was developed using objective data (clinical, demographic, pathology (stool test, FIT), standard blood tests and colonoscopy outcome). Colonoscopy and histology results were scored and then stratified as either significant bowel disease (SBD) or non-significant bowel disease (non-SBD). RESULTS: Of the 467 patients in our study, 45.1% were male, the mean age was 54.3 ± 13.8 years and mean BMI was 27.8 ± 6.2. Overall, 26% had SBD compared to 74% with non-SBD (42% of the cohort had a normal colonoscopy). Increasing severity of referral symptoms was related to a higher triage category, (rectal bleeding, P = 2.86*10-9; diarrhoea, P = 0.026; abdominal pain, P = 5.67*10-4). However, there was no significant difference in the prevalence of rectal bleeding (P = 0.991) or diarrhoea (P = 0.843) for SBD. Abdominal pain significantly reduced the risk of SBD (P = 0.0344, OR = 0.52, CI = 0.27-0.95). Conversely, the RAT had a very high specificity of 98% with PPV and NPV of SBD prediction, 74% and 77%, respectively. The RAT provided an odds ratio (OR) of 9.0, 95%CI 4.29-18.75, p = 2.32*10-11), higher than the FIT test (OR = 5.3, 95%CI 2.44-11.69, p = 4.88*10-6), blood score (OR = 2.8, 95%CI 1.72- 4.38, p = 1.47*10-5) or age (OR = 2.5, 95%CI 1.61-4.00, 5.12*10-5) independently. Notably, the ORs of these individual objective measures were higher than the current practice of symptoms-based triaging (OR = 1.4, 95%CI 0.88-2.11, p = 0.153). CONCLUSIONS: It is critical that individuals with high risk of having SBD are triaged to the appropriate category with the shortest wait time. Here we provide evidence that a combination of blood markers, demographic markers and the FIT test have a higher diagnostic accuracy for SBD than FIT alone.

The use of indigocarmine spray increases the colonoscopic detection rate of adenomas.

PURPOSE: It remains controversial whether chromocolonoscopy using indigocarmine increases the detection of colorectal polyps. We aimed to assess the impact of indigocarmine dye spray on the detection rate of adenomas and the feasibility of learning the technique in a Western practice. METHODS: 400 patients were prospectively allocated into 2 groups; A (n = 200): indigocarmine chromocolonoscopy was performed by a Japanese colonoscopist with expertise in chromoscopy; B (n = 200): initial 100 patients (B-1), a Western colonoscopist with no previous experience of chromoscopy performed conventional colonoscopy, but with at least 10 min observation during colonoscopy withdrawal. In the next 100 patients (B-2), he performed chromocolonoscopy. All polyps found were resected. Regression analysis was used to compare the numbers of polyps detected in groups A, B-1 and B-2, whilst controlling for gender, age, indication and history of colorectal cancer. RESULTS: There were significant differences in the numbers of neoplastic polyps and flat adenomas between groups A and B-1 as well as between B-1 and B-2, but not between A and B-2. There was no significant difference in numbers of advanced lesions. Chromocolonoscopy (A and B-2) detected more neoplastic polyps of

Evidence-based guideline for the written radiology report: methods, recommendations and implementation challenges.

The written radiology report is the dominant method by which radiologists communicate the results of diagnostic and interventional imaging procedures. It has an important impact on decisions about further investigation and management. Its form and content can be influential in reducing harm to patients and mitigating risk for practitioners but varies markedly with little standardisation in practice. Until now, the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists has not had a guideline for the written report. International guidelines on this subject are not evidence based and lack description of development methods. The current guideline seeks to improve the quality of the written report by providing evidence-based recommendations for good practice. The following attributes of the report are addressed by recommendations: Content Clinical information available to the radiologist at the time the report was created Technical details of the procedure Examination quality and limitations Findings (both normal and abnormal) Comparison with previous studies Pathophysiological diagnosis Differential diagnoses Clinical correlation and/or answer to the clinical question Recommendations, particularly for further imaging and other investigations Conclusion/opinion/impression Format Length Format Language Confidence and certainty Clarity Readability Accuracy Communication of discrepancies between an original verbal or written report and the final report Proofreading/editing of own and trainee reports.

Diagnosis and outcome of small bowel tumors found by capsule endoscopy: a three-center Australian experience.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to examine diagnosis and outcome in a series of patients with small bowel tumors detected by capsule endoscopy (CE) in three Australian centers. METHODS: Review of prospectively collected data from 416 CEs identified 27 tumors in 26 patients. Clinical parameters, tumor histology, and follow-up are reported. RESULTS: Twenty-seven tumors were identified in 26 patients (mean age 61 +/- 13.7 yr). Indications for CE were obscure gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding (21), suspected tumor (3), abdominal pain (1), diarrhea (1). Prior radiology found a possible lesion in 8 of 23 (35%). Nine tumors were proven benign: hamartoma (4), cystic lymphangioma (1), primary amyloid (1), lipoma (1). Two lesions were non-neoplastic: heterotopic gastric mucosa and inflammatory fibroid polyp. Seventeen tumors were malignant: five adenocarcinomas, six carcinoids, two melanoma metastases, two gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST), one colon carcinoma metastasis, one non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Tumors were surgically resected in 23 patients. Resection was considered curative in 12 (52%). Mean duration of follow-up was 26 +/- 13.7 months. Of the five patients with primary adenocarcinoma only one remains disease free. Three of the six with carcinoid tumors have had no recurrence up to 51 months postresection. Both patients with GIST are disease free. Anemia resolved after surgery in the patients with melanoma. CONCLUSIONS: Small bowel tumors are a significant finding at CE and are often missed by other methods of investigation. In many patients, detection of a tumor alters management and improves outcome. Even in malignant lesions, treatment is potentially curative in the absence of metastatic disease.