Disparities in telemedicine utilization among kidney transplant patients during the COVID-19 pandemic: Barriers and opportunities.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic allowed for the rapid implementation of telemedicine for kidney transplant patients; however, widespread adoption may worsen existing health care inequities among vulnerable populations. This study aimed to characterize telemedicine utilization by kidney transplant patients during the early pandemic with particular attention to healthcare equity. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of kidney transplant patients interacting with telemedicine was performed. Patient demographic data and distance to the transplant center were obtained. The National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) Urban-Rural Classification Scheme for Counties and Brokamp Neighborhood Deprivation Index (NDI) score were used to characterize patients' counties of residence. Multivariable logistic regression evaluated associations between patient and community characteristics and the likelihood of an encounter being telemedicine. RESULTS: This study included 1033 patients who participated in 3727 encounters from March 11 through October 2020. Characteristics associated with decreased likelihood of telemedicine use were increased age (OR = .993; 95% CI = .986-.999, P = .022), non-White vs. White race (OR = .826, 95% CI = .697-.979; P = .028), male vs. female sex (OR = .746, 95% CI = .632-.880; P < .001), and a higher Brokamp Neighborhood Deprivation Index score (OR = .159; 95% CI = .029-.873; P = .034). The effect of distance to the transplant center on the likelihood of a telemedicine encounter differed by NCHS Urban-Rural designation (interaction P = .018), with its likelihood increasing by 2%-3% with each 10-mile increment among persons residing in medium-, small-, and non-metropolitan counties compared to those residing in the most rural counties. CONCLUSIONS: Telemedicine visits were less often completed by patients of older age, non-white race, male sex, and those residing in counties having higher NDI scores. While telemedicine has the potential to improve healthcare access and decrease costs, proactive efforts need to be taken to mitigate disparities in vulnerable populations.

Faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) in patients with signs or symptoms of suspected colorectal cancer (CRC): a joint guideline from the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI) and the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG).

Faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) has a high sensitivity for the detection of colorectal cancer (CRC). In a symptomatic population FIT may identify those patients who require colorectal investigation with the highest priority. FIT offers considerable advantages over the use of symptoms alone, as an objective measure of risk with a vastly superior positive predictive value for CRC, while conversely identifying a truly low risk cohort of patients. The aim of this guideline was to provide a clear strategy for the use of FIT in the diagnostic pathway of people with signs or symptoms of a suspected diagnosis of CRC. The guideline was jointly developed by the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland/British Society of Gastroenterology, specifically by a 21-member multidisciplinary guideline development group (GDG). A systematic review of 13 535 publications was undertaken to develop 23 evidence and expert opinion-based recommendations for the triage of people with symptoms of a suspected CRC diagnosis in primary care. In order to achieve consensus among a broad group of key stakeholders, we completed an extended Delphi of the GDG, and also 61 other individuals across the UK and Ireland, including by members of the public, charities and primary and secondary care. Seventeen research recommendations were also prioritised to inform clinical management.

MRI-Diagnosed Tumor Deposits and EMVI Status Have Superior Prognostic Accuracy to Current Clinical TNM Staging in Rectal Cancer.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: MRI assessment of rectal cancer not only assesses tumor depth and surgical resectability but also extramural disease which affects prognosis. We have observed that nonnodal tumor nodules (tumor deposits; mrTDs) have a distinct MRI appearance compared to lymph node metastases (mrLNMs). OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess whether mrTDs and mrLNMs have different prognostic implications and compare these to other known prognostic markers. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of 233 patients undergoing resection for rectal cancer from January 2007 to October 2015. Data were obtained from electronic records and MRIs blindly rereported. Survival was determined using Kaplan-Meier method. Prognostic markers were evaluated using Cox regression and competing risks analysis. Inter-observer agreement for mrTD was measured using Cohen Kappa. RESULTS: On multivariable analysis, baseline mrTD/mrEMVI (extramural venous invasion) status was the only significant MRI factor for adverse survival [hazard ratio (HR) 2.36 (1.54-3.61] for overall survival, 2.37 (1.47-3.80) for disease-free survival (both P < 0.001), superseding T and N categories. mrLNMs were associated with good prognosis (HR 0.50 (0.31-0.80) P = 0.004 for overall survival, 0.60 (0.40-0.90) P = 0.014 for disease-free survival). On multivariable analysis, mrTDs/mrEMVI were strongly associated with distant recurrence (HR 6.53 (2.52-16.91) P ≤ 0.001) whereas T and N category were not. In a subgroup analysis of posttreatment MRIs in postchemoradiotherapy patients, mrTD/mrEMVI status was again the only significant prognostic factor; furthermore those who showed a good treatment response had a prognosis similar to patients who were negative at baseline. Inter-observer agreement for detection of mrTDs was k0.77 and k0.83. CONCLUSIONS: Current MRI staging predicting T and N status does not adequately predict prognosis. Positive mrTD/mrEMVI status has greater prognostic accuracy and would be superior in determining treatment and follow-up protocols. Chemoradiotherapy may be a highly effective treatment strategy in mrTD/mrEMVI positive patients.

A comparison of the faecal haemoglobin concentrations and diagnostic accuracy in patients suspected with colorectal cancer and serious bowel disease as reported on four different faecal immunochemical test systems.

OBJECTIVES: Faecal immunochemical tests for haemoglobin (FIT) are used in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programmes and to triage patients presenting with symptoms suggestive of CRC for further bowel investigations. There are a number of quantitative FIT analytical systems available. Currently, there is no harmonisation or standardisation of FIT methods. The aim of the study was to assess the comparability of numerical faecal haemoglobin concentrations (f-Hb) obtained with four quantitative FIT systems and the diagnostic accuracy at different f-Hb thresholds. METHODS: A subgroup of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) FIT study, a multicentre, prospective diagnostic accuracy study were sent four FIT specimen collection devices from four different FIT systems or two FIT devices for one FIT system. Faecal samples were examined and analysis of results carried out to assess difference between methods at thresholds of limit of detection (LoD), 10 µg haemoglobin/g faeces (µg/g) and 100 µg/g. RESULTS: 233 patients returned specimen collection devices for examination on four different systems; 189 patients returned two FIT kits for one system. At a threshold of 100 µg/g the sensitivity is the same for all methods. At lower thresholds of LoD and 10 µg/g differences were observed between systems in terms of patients who would be referred and diagnostic accuracies. CONCLUSIONS: The lack of standardisation or harmonisation of FIT means that differences are observed in f-Hb generated on different systems. Further work is required to understand the clinical impact of these differences and to minimise them.

Introduction of an integrated primary care faecal immunochemical test referral pathway for patients with suspected colorectal cancer symptoms.

AIM: To determine the efficacy of a new 2-week wait pathway that uses the faecal immunochemical test (FIT) in primary care to triage patients with high and low risk symptoms suspicious of colorectal cancer (CRC). This service improvement pilot follows 2017 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance, that recommended using FIT to guide referral of patients with low risk, but not high risk symptoms, which continue to be referrred on the 2-week pathway. METHOD: Patients with high- and low-risk CRC symptoms were tested with FIT and those with faecal haemoglobin (f-Hb) ≥9.5 µg haemoglobin/g faeces (hereafter µg/g) were referred to secondary care. Results were tracked and primary care prompted to refer if timely referral was not made. RESULTS: Between December 2019 and October 2020, 5672 patients presented to primary care with high and/or low risk symptoms warranting investigations. Of these, 622 (11%) patients were referred without a FIT, of whom 36 (5.8%) had CRC. The remaining 5050 patients had a FIT, of which 4187 (83%) were processed to produce a quantitative result. Of these, 1085 patients (25.9%) had an f-Hb ≥9.5 µg/g and of those, 982 patients (90.5%) were referred and 56 (5.7%) had CRC. A total of 3102 patients (74.1%) had an f-Hb <9.5 µg/g, of which 456 (14.7%) were referred and three (0.7%) had CRC. A total of 97 cancers were diagnosed with a cancer prevalence of 1.7%. CONCLUSION: A 2-week wait pathway incorporating FIT as a triage tool can be implemented successfully in primary care to identify symptomatic patients at highest risk of CRC.

Faecal immunochemical test is superior to symptoms in predicting pathology in patients with suspected colorectal cancer symptoms referred on a 2WW pathway: a diagnostic accuracy study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether a faecal immunochemical test (FIT) could be used to select patients with suspected colorectal cancer (CRC) symptoms for urgent investigation. DESIGN: Multicentre, double-blinded diagnostic accuracy study in 50 National Health Service (NHS) hospitals across England between October 2017 and December 2019. Patients referred to secondary care with suspected CRC symptoms meeting NHS England criteria for urgent 2 weeks wait referral and triaged to investigation with colonoscopy were invited to perform a quantitative FIT. The sensitivity of FIT for CRC, and effect of relevant variables on its diagnostic accuracy was assessed. RESULTS: 9822 patients were included in the final analysis. The prevalence of CRC at colonoscopy was 3.3%. The FIT positivity decreased from 37.2% to 19.0% and 7.6%, respectively, at cut-offs of 2, 10 and 150 µg haemoglobin/g faeces (µg/g). The positive predictive values of FIT for CRC at these cut-offs were 8.7% (95% CI, 7.8% to 9.7%), 16.1% (95% CI 14.4% to 17.8%) and 31.1% (95% CI 27.8% to 34.6%), respectively, and the negative predictive values were 99.8% (95% CI 99.7% to 99.9%), 99.6% (95% CI 99.5% to 99.7%) and 98.9% (95% CI 98.7% to 99.1%), respectively. The sensitivity of FIT for CRC decreased at the same cut-offs from 97.0% (95% CI 94.5% to 98.5%) to 90.9% (95% CI 87.2% to 93.8%) and 70.8% (95% CI 65.6% to 75.7%), respectively, while the specificity increased from 64.9% (95% CI 63.9% to 65.8%) to 83.5% (95% CI 82.8% to 84.3%) and 94.6% (95% CI 94.1% to 95.0%), respectively. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.93 (95% CI 0.92 to 0.95). CONCLUSION: FIT sensitivity is maximised to 97.0% at the lowest cut-off (2 µg/g); a negative FIT result at this cut-off can effectively rule out CRC and a positive FIT result is better than symptoms to select patients for urgent investigations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN49676259.

Finding the needle in the haystack: the diagnostic accuracy of the faecal immunochemical test for colorectal cancer in younger symptomatic patients.

AIM: Detection of early onset colorectal cancer is challenging, and remains a rare diagnosis amongst younger people with gastrointestinal symptoms. We investigated whether faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) could identify younger patients at higher risk of colorectal cancer or serious bowel disease including colorectal cancer, inflammatory bowel disease or advanced adenomas. METHODS: A subgroup analysis was performed of symptomatic patients under 50 years of age (<50) from the NICE FIT study, a multicentre, prospective diagnostic accuracy study of FIT conducted between October 2017 and December 2019. The diagnostic accuracy of FIT for colorectal cancer and serious bowel disease was investigated in younger patients at different faecal haemoglobin (f-Hb) cut-offs of 2, 10 and 150 µg blood/g faeces (µg/g). RESULTS: Early onset colorectal cancer was diagnosed in 1.5% (16/1103) of younger symptomatic patients. The sensitivity of FIT for younger patients aged <50 was 87.5% (95% CI 61.7%-98.4%), 81.3% (54.4%-96.0%) and 68.8% (41.3%-89.0%) at f-Hb cut-offs of 2, 10 and 150 µg/g, respectively. The positive predictive value for colorectal cancer increased from 4.2% (2.3%-6.9%) to 11.5% (5.9%-19.6%) at cut-offs of 2 and 150 µg/g, while the positive predictive value for serious bowel disease increased from 31.3% (26.3%-36.5%) to 65.6% (55.2%-75.0%) at the same cut-offs. The negative predictive value of FIT for colorectal cancer remained above 99.5% at all cut-offs. CONCLUSION: Detectable f-Hb on FIT in symptomatic younger patients may indicate referral for investigation of colorectal cancer and serious bowel disease.

Using the faecal immunochemical test in patients with rectal bleeding: evidence from the NICE FIT study.

AIM: The aim of this work was to investigate whether the faecal immunochemical test (FIT) could safely rule out colorectal cancer (CRC) in patients with rectal bleeding (RB). METHOD: This was a multicentre, double-blinded diagnostic accuracy study in 50 National Health Service hospitals. Patients referred from primary care with suspected CRC on an urgent 2-week-wait pathway were asked to perform a FIT prior to colonoscopy. The primary outcome measure was the sensitivity of the FIT for CRC in patients with RB versus nonrectal bleeding symptoms (NRB). The secondary outcome measures included the diagnostic accuracy of the FIT for CRC and other serious bowel disease. RESULTS: Of 9822 patients included in the study, 3143 (32.0%) were referred with RB. CRC was present in 4.7% of patients with RB versus 2.7% of patients with NRB (p < 0.05). Faecal haemoglobin (f-Hb) was detectable (>2 µg/g) in 44.1% of patients with RB and 33.9% with NRB (p < 0.05). In RB patients, CRC was present in 10.4% when f-Hb was >2 µg/g compared with 0.1% when f-Hb was not detected. Flexible sigmoidoscopy in this group would further reduce the risk of CRC to 0.03%. The sensitivity of the FIT for CRC in RB versus NRB groups was 98.6% (95% CI 95.2%-99.8%) vs 95.6% (91.5%-98.1%) for f-Hb >2 µg/g and 96.6% (92.2%-98.9%) vs 86.3 (80.4%-90.9%) for f-Hb >10 µg/g. CONCLUSION: Faecal haemoglobin is not always detectable in patients with RB; 56% of patients had undetectable f-Hb (<2 µg/g) and CRC was present in 0.1%. The high sensitivity of the FIT can be used to rule out CRC in patients with RB and triage them more appropriately for investigation.

Joint ACPGBI and The Duke's Club statement on colonoscopy training.

Colorectal surgeons across the UK currently undertake a large proportion of routine diagnostic and therapeutic colonoscopy in most NHS Trusts [1]. Meanwhile, the new UK General Surgical curriculum now includes an indicative requirement of 200 diagnostic colonoscopies for surgical trainees who have declared a colorectal subspecialty interest (hereafter termed 'colorectal trainees'), indicating the JCST's (Joint Committee on Surgical Training) commitment to colonoscopy training. However, several studies have reported a marked deficiency in colonoscopy training opportunities and accreditation for surgical trainees compared with gastroenterology trainees [2-4].

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for diagnosis of acute appendicitis.

BACKGROUND: Appendicitis remains a difficult disease to diagnose, and imaging adjuncts are commonly employed. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is an imaging test that can be used to diagnose appendicitis. It is not commonly regarded as a first-line imaging test for appendicitis, but the reported diagnostic accuracy in some studies is equivalent to computed tomography (CT) scans. As it does not expose patients to radiation, it is an attractive imaging modality, particularly in women and children. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of MRI for detecting appendicitis in all patients. Secondary objectives: To investigate the accuracy of MRI in subgroups of pregnant women, children, and adults. To investigate the potential influence of MRI scanning variables such as sequences, slice thickness, or field of view. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase until February 2021. We searched the references of included studies and other systematic reviews to identify further studies. We did not exclude studies that were unpublished, published in another language, or retrospective. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included studies that compared the outcome of an MRI scan for suspected appendicitis with a reference standard of histology, intraoperative findings, or clinical follow-up. Three study team members independently filtered search results for eligible studies. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We independently extracted study data and assessed study quality using the Quality Assessment of Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy - Revised (QUADAS-2) tool. We used the bivariate model to calculate pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 58 studies with sufficient data for meta-analysis including a total of 7462 participants (1980 with and 5482 without acute appendicitis). Estimates of sensitivity ranged from 0.18 to 1.0; estimates of specificity ranged from 0.4 to 1.0. Summary sensitivity was 0.95 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94 to 0.97); summary specificity was 0.96 (95% CI 0.95 to 0.97). Sensitivity and specificity remained high on subgroup analysis for pregnant women (sensitivity 0.96 (95% CI 0.88 to 0.99); specificity 0.97 (95% CI 0.95 to 0.98); 21 studies, 2282 women); children (sensitivity 0.96 (95% CI 0.95 to 0.97); specificity 0.96 (95% CI 0.92 to 0.98); 17 studies, 2794 children); and adults (sensitivity 0.96 (95% CI 0.93 to 0.97); specificity 0.93 (95% CI 0.80 to 0.98); 9 studies, 1088 participants), as well as different scanning techniques. In a hypothetical cohort of 1000 patients, there would be 12 false-positive results and 30 false-negative results. Methodological quality of the included studies was poor, and the risk of bias was high or unclear in 53% to 83% of the QUADAS-2 domains. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: MRI appears to be highly accurate in confirming and excluding acute appendicitis in adults, children, and pregnant women regardless of protocol. The methodological quality of the included studies was generally low due to incomplete and low standards of follow-up, so summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity may be biased. We could not assess the impact and direction of potential bias given the very low number of high-quality studies. Studies comparing MRI protocols were few, and although we found no influence of MRI protocol variables on the summary estimates of accuracy, our results do not rule out that some MRI protocols are more accurate than others.

Battle of the Bites: The Effect of Sewage Effluent Exposure on Mosquitofish Biocontrol of Mosquitoes in Residential Louisiana.

Mosquitofish, Gambusia affinis, are eponymous larval mosquito predators. Their ability to colonize and survive in habitats that are uninhabitable by other potential predators allows them to naturally manage larval mosquito populations in most ground pools they are present in. However, effluent from residential onsite wastewater treatment systems (OWTSs) appears to limit the presence of fish predators. This is especially problematic in Louisiana, where regulations allow the discharge of OWTS effluent into open drainage conveyances. To determine the effect of effluent on the capacity of mosquitofish for biocontrol in contaminated areas, we assessed the body condition metrics of populations from two effluent-exposed sites and two sites not exposed to effluent, determined the lethal effect of effluent-contaminated drainage water on fish, and measured the prey consumption rates in the presence of effluent. Female fish collected from effluent-impacted sites had a reduced somatic body condition and most females examined displayed masculinized anal fins resembling the male gonopodium structure. This trait was not seen in fish collected from the control sites and has not yet been documented in association with OWTSs or in the state of Louisiana. Fish from the control sites survived at effluent-contaminated water levels < 70%, and the prey clearance rates increased with dilution. Onsite wastewater treatment system effluent has significant effects on both the short- and long-term persistence of mosquitofish, their body composition, reproductive health, and larval mosquito consumption. These effects likely release mosquito larvae from suppression and may increase the threat of mosquito-transmitted pathogens in effluent-contaminated locations.

Lake Erie ice is a repository of organisms.

Organism abundance and diversity were assessed in Lake Erie ice samples using sequences derived from a combined metagenomic and metatranscriptomic analysis. The 68,417 unique sequences were from Bacteria (77.5%), Eukarya (22.3%), and Archaea (0.2%) and indicated diverse species of organisms from 32 bacterial, 8 eukaryotic, and 2 archaeal taxonomic groups.

How to access the presacral space using a posterior trans-sacral approach.

This article describes a posterior trans-sacral approach to the presacral space. This is an important technique in contemporary colorectal surgical practice for resection of presacral tumours, and less commonly to allow access for rectal sleeve advancement, segmental resection of the lower rectum (rarely indicated in the era of total mesorectal excision and trans-anal techniques), drainage of supralevator sepsis and resection of extensive ischiorectal fossa tumours.

Survival outcomes for right-versus left-sided colon cancer and rectal cancer in England: A propensity-score matched population-based cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to evaluate 5-year overall survival (OS) in patients operated on for potentially curable right versus left-sided colon cancer and rectal cancer in England. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective propensity-score matched population-based cohort study was performed using data from English Hospital Episode Statistics, Office for National Statistics and National Bowel Cancer Audit dataset. Patients ≥18 who underwent elective resection for right-colon, left-colon, or rectal cancer between 2000 and 2015 were included. Patients were matched using propensity scores with the dependant variable being site of primary tumour (right-colon, left-colon, or rectum) and independent variables age, Charlson comorbidity index, operation year and Duke's stage. The primary outcome was 5-year overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A total of 167,606 patients were included. Following propensity-score matching 26,662 patients remained in each group (right-colon, left-colon, and rectum). 5-year OS was significantly worse for patients with Duke's A-C right-sided primaries compared to left-sided and rectal cancers in the unmatched (58.8% vs 66.7% vs 70.0% p=<0.001) and matched cohorts (62.6%, 66.8%, 65.8% p=<0.001). Superior OS for patients with left-sided colon cancer was demonstrated across all stages (Duke's A HR 0.845, p = 0.003; Duke's B HR 0.947, p = 0.045; Duke's C HR 0.783, p < 0.0001). Secondary analysis demonstrated equivalent OS between study groups when ≥22 lymph nodes were harvested. CONCLUSION: There is a significant difference in survival between comparable patients with right and left sided colon cancers in England. The quality and/or extent of mesenteric resection may be of particular importance in right-sided colon cancer.

Role of the faecal immunochemical test in patients with risk-stratified suspected colorectal cancer symptoms: A systematic review and meta-analysis to inform the ACPGBI/BSG guidelines.

Background: The UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), recommended in 2017 the use of the faecal immunochemical test (FIT) to guide investigations in patients presenting with NICE-defined low-risk symptoms suspicious for colorectal cancer (CRC). At that time, NICE did not recommend FIT use for high-risk symptoms. This is the first systematic review to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of FIT in NICE-defined high and low-risk symptoms and was designed to inform the joint ACPGBI/BSG guidelines. Methods: We performed a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. PROSPERO registration number CRD42021224674. Medline and EMBASE databases were searched from inception to 31st March 2022. We included studies recruiting adult patients presenting with suspected CRC symptoms in whom FIT was performed and diagnostic accuracy data for CRC detection could be derived at a limit of detection (LoD) and/or 10 µg haemoglobin/gram faeces threshold in four commonly used analysers. FIT performance was assessed for high-risk, low-risk and individual symptoms where possible. Bivariate meta-analysis was performed where study numbers allowed. Findings: Thirty-one studies (79566 patients) met inclusion criteria. At 10 µg/g, for "all symptoms" (n = 35,945) sensitivity and specificity were 91.0% (95% CI: 88.9, 92.7) and 75.2% (95% CI: 69.6, 80.1); for "high-risk" symptoms (n = 18,264), 88.7% (95% CI: 84.4, 92.0) and 78.5% (95% CI: 73.0, 83.2); and for "low-risk" symptoms (n = 2161), 88.7% (95% CI: 78.1, 95.3) and 88.5% (95% CI: 87.1, 89.9), respectively. At LoD, for "all symptoms" (n = 26,056) sensitivity and specificity were 94.7% (95% CI: 90.5, 97.1) and 66.5% (95% CI: 58.7, 73.6); for "high-risk" symptoms (n = 16,768), 92.8% (95% CI: 86.4, 96.3) and 70.3% (95% CI: 66.5, 73.8); and for "low-risk" symptoms (n = 2082), 94.7% (95% CI: 85.4, 98.9) and 71.9% (95% CI: 69.9, 73.9), respectively. Summary estimates were similar across different analysers. Interpretation: FIT sensitivity for CRC detection is maximised at the LoD; its performance is similar in high and low-risk symptoms, and across different analysers where a common threshold is used. FIT performance for CRC detection is adequate and transferrable to clinical diagnostic pathways. Funding: This review was part-funded by NHS England awarded to RM Partners. RB and RC were funded by research fellowships awarded by Croydon University Hospital.

Faecal immunochemical test for suspected colorectal cancer symptoms: patient survey of usability and acceptability.

BACKGROUND: Recent evidence suggests that the faecal immunochemical test (FIT) can rule out colorectal cancer (CRC) in symptomatic patients. To date, there is no research on usability and perception of FIT for these patients. AIM: To measure variation in attitudes and perception of FIT in patients with suspected CRC symptoms. DESIGN & SETTING: A cross-sectional survey of a subset of participants of the NICE FIT study. METHOD: A questionnaire was co-developed with patients covering four themes on a Likert scale: FIT feasibility, faecal aversion, patient knowledge, and future intentions. Questionnaire and FIT kits were sent to patients with suspected CRC symptoms participating in the NICE FIT study. Logistic regression explored differences in patients' test perception by ethnic group, language, age, location, deprivation, FIT use, and previous experience. RESULTS: A total of 1151 questionnaires were analysed; 90.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 88.3% to 91.8%) of patients found faecal collection straightforward, 76.3% (95% CI = 73.7% to 78.6%) disagreed FIT was unhygienic, and 78.1% (95% CI = 75.6% to 80.4%) preferred FIT to colonoscopy. Preference for FIT over colonoscopy was weaker in patients aged 40-64 years than those >65 years (odds ratio [OR] 0.60; 95% CI = 0.43 to 0.84). Intention to use FIT again was stronger in patients who successfully used FIT than those unsuccessful (OR 11.08; 95% CI = 2.74 to 44.75), and white compared with non-white patients assessed (OR 3.20; 95% CI = 1.32 to 7.75). CONCLUSION: While most patients found FIT practical and hygienic, perception differences were found. Strategies to engage patients with more negative FIT perception should underpin symptomatic FIT pathways.

Hepatic processing of mercuric ions facilitates delivery to renal proximal tubules.

Mercury (Hg) is a toxic heavy metal to which humans are exposed on a regular basis. Hg has a high affinity for thiol-containing biomolecules with the majority of Hg in blood being bound to albumin. The current study tested the hypothesis that circulating Hg-albumin complexes are taken up into hepatocytes and processed to form Hg-glutathione (GSH) conjugates (GSH-Hg-GSH). Subsequently, GSH-Hg-GSH conjugates are exported from hepatocytes into blood via multidrug resistance transporters (MRP) 3 and 5. To test this hypothesis, the portal vein and hepatic artery in Wistar rats were ligated to prevent delivery of Hg to the liver. Ligated and control rats were injected with HgCl2 or GSH-Hg-GSH (containing radioactive Hg) and the disposition of Hg was assessed in various organs. Renal accumulation of Hg was reduced significantly in ligated rats exposed to HgCl2. In contrast, when rats were exposed to GSH-Hg-GSH, the renal accumulation of Hg was similar in control and ligated rats. Experiments using HepG2 cells indicate that Hg-albumin conjugates are taken up by hepatocytes and additional experiments using inside-out membrane vesicles showed that MRP3 and MRP5 mediate the export of GSH-Hg-GSH from hepatocytes. These data are the first to show that Hg-albumin complexes are processed within hepatocytes to form GSH-Hg-GSH, which is, in part, exported back into blood via MRP3 and MRP5 for eventual excretion in urine.

Immediate versus delayed reconstruction following surgery for breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer is the most prevalent cancer in women and has a lifetime incidence of one in nine in the UK. Curative treatment requires surgery, and may involve adjuvant and neo-adjuvant therapy. In many women, post-mastectomy breast reconstruction is essential to restore body image and improve quality of life. Timing of reconstruction may be immediately at the time of mastectomy or delayed until after surgery. Outcomes such as psychosocial morbidity, aesthetics and complications rates may differ between the two approaches. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of immediate versus delayed reconstruction following surgery for breast cancer. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group (CBCG) Specialised Register on 22 July 2010, MEDLINE from July 2008 to 26 August 2010, EMBASE from 2008 to 26 August 2010 and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) on 26 August 2010. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing immediate breast reconstruction versus delayed or no reconstruction in women in any age group and stage of breast cancer. We considered any recognised methods of reconstruction to one or both breasts undertaken at the same time as mastectomy or at any time following mastectomy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened papers, extracted trial details and assessed the risk of bias in the one eligible study. MAIN RESULTS: We included only one RCT that involved that involved 64 women.We judged this study as being at a high risk of bias. Post-operative morbidity and mortality were not addressed, and secondary outcomes of patient cosmetic evaluations and psychosocial well-being post-reconstruction were inadequately reported. Based on limited data there was some, albeit unreliable, evidence that immediate reconstruction compared with delayed or no reconstruction, reduced psychiatric morbidity reported three months post-operatively. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The current level of evidence for the effectiveness of immediate versus delayed reconstruction following surgery for breast cancer was based on a single RCT with methodological flaws and a high risk of bias, which does not allow confident decision-making about choice between these surgical options. Until high quality evidence is available, clinicians may wish to consider the recommendations of relevant guidelines and protocols. Although the limitations and ethical constraints of conducting RCTs in this field are recognised, adequately powered controlled trials with a focus on clinical and psychological outcomes are still required. Given the paucity of RCTs in this subject, in future versions of this review we will look at study designs other than RCTs specifically good quality cohort and case-controlstudies.