Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 76
Filter
Add more filters

Publication year range
1.
Gastroenterology ; 164(4): 690-695, 2023 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36775722

ABSTRACT

DESCRIPTION: The purpose of this American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute Clinical Practice Update (CPU) is to review the available evidence and provide expert advice regarding best practices for use of telemedicine in gastroenterology and hepatology. METHODS: This CPU was commissioned and approved by the AGA Institute Clinical Practice Updates Committee (CPUC) and the AGA Governing Board to provide timely guidance on a topic of high clinical importance to the AGA membership and underwent internal peer review by the CPUC and external peer review through standard procedures of Gastroenterology. This expert commentary incorporates important, as well as recently published, studies in this field, and it reflects the experiences of the authors who are active gastroenterologists and hepatologists with extensive experience using telemedicine in clinical practice.


Subject(s)
Gastroenterology , Telemedicine , Humans , United States
2.
Gastroenterology ; 162(2): 621-644, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34678215

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Gastrointestinal diseases account for considerable health care use and expenditures. We estimated the annual burden, costs, and research funding associated with gastrointestinal, liver, and pancreatic diseases in the United States. METHODS: We generated estimates using data from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey; National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey; Nationwide Emergency Department Sample; National Inpatient Sample; Kids' Inpatient Database; Nationwide Readmissions Database; Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program; National Vital Statistics System; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Wide-Ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research; MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters data; MarketScan Medicare Supplemental data; United Network for Organ Sharing registry; Medical Expenditure Panel Survey; and National Institutes of Health (NIH). RESULTS: Gastrointestinal health care expenditures totaled $119.6 billion in 2018. Annually, there were more than 36.8 million ambulatory visits for gastrointestinal symptoms and 43.4 million ambulatory visits with a primary gastrointestinal diagnosis. Hospitalizations for a principal gastrointestinal diagnosis accounted for more than 3.8 million admissions, with 403,699 readmissions. A total of 22.2 million gastrointestinal endoscopies were performed, and 284,844 new gastrointestinal cancers were diagnosed. Gastrointestinal diseases and cancers caused 255,407 deaths. The NIH supported $3.1 billion (7.5% of the NIH budget) for gastrointestinal research in 2020. CONCLUSIONS: Gastrointestinal diseases are responsible for millions of health care encounters and hundreds of thousands of deaths that annually costs billions of dollars in the United States. To reduce the high burden of gastrointestinal diseases, focused clinical and public health efforts, supported by additional research funding, are warranted.


Subject(s)
Biomedical Research/economics , Gastrointestinal Diseases/economics , Health Expenditures/statistics & numerical data , Liver Diseases/economics , Pancreatic Diseases/economics , Ambulatory Care/economics , Ambulatory Care/statistics & numerical data , Cost of Illness , Digestive System Neoplasms/economics , Digestive System Neoplasms/epidemiology , Endoscopy, Digestive System/economics , Endoscopy, Digestive System/statistics & numerical data , Gastrointestinal Diseases/epidemiology , Hospitalization/economics , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Liver Diseases/epidemiology , National Institutes of Health (U.S.) , Pancreatic Diseases/epidemiology , Patient Readmission/economics , Patient Readmission/statistics & numerical data , United States/epidemiology
3.
Gastroenterology ; 161(2): 701-711, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34334168

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this American Gastroenterological Association Institute Clinical Practice Update was to review the available evidence and provide best practice advice regarding strategies to improve the quality of screening and surveillance colonoscopy. This review is framed around 15 best practice advice statements regarding colonoscopy quality that were agreed upon by the authors, based on a review of the available evidence and published guidelines. This is not a formal systematic review and thus no formal rating of the quality of evidence or strength of recommendation has been carried out.


Subject(s)
Colonoscopy/standards , Colorectal Neoplasms/pathology , Early Detection of Cancer/standards , Gastroenterology/standards , Quality Improvement/standards , Quality Indicators, Health Care/standards , Benchmarking , Colorectal Neoplasms/mortality , Colorectal Neoplasms/therapy , Consensus , Evidence-Based Medicine/standards , Humans , Predictive Value of Tests , Prognosis , Time Factors
4.
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol ; 20(5): e984-e1005, 2022 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34051380

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Postcolonoscopy colorectal cancers (PCCRCs) account for up to 50% of colorectal cancers (CRCs) in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). We investigated characteristics of IBD patients with PCCRC and their survival. METHODS: We identified IBD patients (ulcerative colitis [UC] and Crohn's disease) diagnosed with CRC from 1995 to 2015. We defined PCCRC as diagnosed between 6 and 36 months, and detected CRC (dCRC) as diagnosed within 6 months after colonoscopy. We computed prevalence ratios comparing PCCRC vs dCRC and followed up patients from the diagnosis of PCCRC/dCRC until death, emigration, or study end. Mortality was compared using Cox proportional hazards regression models adjusted for sex, age, year of CRC diagnosis, and stage. The main analyses focused on patients with UC. RESULTS: Among 23,738 UC patients undergoing colonoscopy, we identified 352 patients with CRC, of whom 103 (29%) had PCCRC. Compared with dCRC, PCCRC was associated with a higher prevalence of metastatic cancer (33% vs 20%; prevalence ratio, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.13-2.38), cancers showing mismatch repair deficiency (79% vs 56%; prevalence ratio, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.13-1.72), and proximally located cancers (54% vs 40%; prevalence ratio, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.06-1.69). The 1- and 5-year adjusted hazard ratios of death for PCCRC vs dCRC among UC patients were 1.29 (95% CI, 0.77-2.18) and 1.24 (95% CI, 0.86-1.79), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The characteristics of UC-related PCCRC suggest tumor biology as an important factor in the progression to cancer. However, the prognosis of PCCRC appears similar to that of dCRC.


Subject(s)
Colitis, Ulcerative , Colorectal Neoplasms , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases , Chronic Disease , Colitis, Ulcerative/complications , Colonoscopy , Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Colorectal Neoplasms/epidemiology , Colorectal Neoplasms/pathology , Humans , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases/complications , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases/epidemiology , Risk Factors
5.
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol ; 20(8): 1757-1765.e4, 2022 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34971811

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Serrated polyps are important colorectal cancer precursors and are most commonly located in the proximal colon, where post-polypectomy bleeding rates are higher. There is limited clinical trial evidence to guide best practices for resection of large serrated polyps (LSPs). METHODS: In a multicenter trial, patients with large (≥20 mm) non-pedunculated polyps undergoing endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) were randomized to clipping of the resection base or no clipping. This analysis is stratified by histologic subtype of study polyp(s), categorized as serrated [sessile serrated lesions (SSLs) or hyperplastic polyps (HPs)] or adenomatous, comparing clip vs control groups. The primary outcome was severe post-procedure bleeding within 30 days of colonoscopy. RESULTS: A total of 179 participants with 199 LSPs (191 SSLs and 8 HPs) and 730 participants with 771 adenomatous polyps were included in the study. Overall, 5 patients with LSPs (2.8%) experienced post-procedure bleeding compared with 42 (5.8%) of those with adenomas. There was no difference in post-procedure bleeding rates between patients in the clip vs control group among those with LSPs (2.3% vs 3.3%, respectively, difference 1.0%; P = NS). However, among those with adenomatous polyps, clipping was associated with a lower risk of post-procedure bleeding (3.9% vs 7.6%, difference 3.7%; P = .03) and overall serious adverse events (5.5% vs 10.6%, difference 5.1%; P = .01). CONCLUSION: The post-procedure bleeding risk for LSPs removed via EMR is low, and there is no discernable benefit of prophylactic clipping of the resection base in this group. This study indicates that the benefit of endoscopic clipping following EMR may be specific for >2 cm adenomatous polyps located in the proximal colon. CLINICALTRIALS: gov, Number: NCT01936948.


Subject(s)
Adenoma , Adenomatous Polyps , Colonic Polyps , Colorectal Neoplasms , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection , Adenoma/pathology , Adenomatous Polyps/pathology , Adenomatous Polyps/surgery , Colonic Polyps/pathology , Colonoscopy/methods , Colorectal Neoplasms/pathology , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection/adverse effects , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection/methods , Humans , Postoperative Hemorrhage/epidemiology , Postoperative Hemorrhage/etiology , Postoperative Hemorrhage/prevention & control
6.
Ann Fam Med ; 20(5): 452-459, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36228064

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The purposes of this study were to determine if (1) certain demographic characteristics (potential predictors) of participants, and (2) clock-drawing test results (as a screening test for cognitive impairment) were associated with fecal immunochemical test (FIT) sample collection errors. METHODS: Patients scheduled for an upcoming colonoscopy were asked to collect stool samples using 5 different FITs. Patients completed a questionnaire that included the clock-drawing test. Errors included mistakes or omissions in recording the stool collection date and errors in stool collection. Each clock drawing was scored by 2 reviewers using 2 established methods. RESULTS: Of the 1,448 participants with a clock drawing, 63% were female with a mean age of 63 years. In this population there were 83% White, 6% Black, and 24% Hispanic persons. Cognitive impairment was found in 292 patients by the Mendes-Santos method. Kappa coefficient for the 2 clock-drawing scores was 0.79 (P <.001). The multivariable generalized linear mixed model for FIT collection errors indicated being female (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.64; 95% CI, 1.09-2.48), having an 8th grade or less education (AOR, 3.40; 95% CI, 1.87-6.18), and having an abnormal Mendes-Santos method clock score (AOR, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.08-2.54) were associated with significantly more errors. CONCLUSION: Among the participants who do not have dementia, FIT collection errors were made not only by those who had abnormal clock drawing, but also, by those with normal clock drawings. Subjects being female, having 8th grade education or less, and having an abnormal clock drawing scored by Mendes-Santos's method were associated with FIT collection errors.


Subject(s)
Cognitive Dysfunction , Colorectal Neoplasms , Cognitive Dysfunction/diagnosis , Colonoscopy , Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Early Detection of Cancer , Feces , Female , Humans , Male , Mass Screening/methods , Middle Aged , Neuropsychological Tests
7.
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol ; 19(7): 1327-1336, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33581359

ABSTRACT

DESCRIPTION: The purpose of this expert review is to describe the role of medications for the chemoprevention of colorectal neoplasia. Neoplasia is defined as precancerous lesions (e.g., adenoma and sessile serrated lesion) or cancer. The scope of this review excludes dietary factors and high-risk individuals with hereditary syndromes or inflammatory bowel disease. METHODS: The best practice advice statements are based on a review of the literature to provide practical advice. A formal systematic review and rating of the quality of evidence or strength of recommendation were not performed. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1: In individuals at average risk for CRC who are (1) younger than 70 years with a life expectancy of at least 10 years, (2) have a 10-year cardiovascular disease risk of at least 10%, and (3) not at high risk for bleeding, clinicians should use low-dose aspirin to reduce CRC incidence and mortality. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2: In individuals with a history of CRC, clinicians should consider using aspirin to prevent recurrent colorectal neoplasia. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3: In individuals at average risk for CRC, clinicians should not use non-aspirin NSAIDs to prevent colorectal neoplasia because of a substantial risk of cardiovascular and gastrointestinal adverse events. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4: In individuals with type 2 diabetes, clinicians may consider using metformin to prevent colorectal neoplasia. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 5: In individuals with CRC and type 2 diabetes, clinicians may consider using metformin to reduce mortality. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 6: Clinicians should not use calcium or vitamin D (alone or together) to prevent colorectal neoplasia. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 7: Clinicians should not use folic acid to prevent colorectal neoplasia. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 8: In individuals at average risk for CRC, clinicians should not use statins to prevent colorectal neoplasia. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 9: In individuals with a history of CRC, clinicians should not use statins to reduce mortality.


Subject(s)
Colorectal Neoplasms , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Aspirin/therapeutic use , Chemoprevention , Colorectal Neoplasms/epidemiology , Colorectal Neoplasms/prevention & control , Humans , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local
8.
Gastroenterology ; 159(1): 119-128.e2, 2020 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32173478

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND & AIMS: There is debate over the type of electrosurgical setting that should be used for polyp resection. Some endoscopists use a type of blended current (yellow), whereas others prefer coagulation (blue). We performed a single-blinded, randomized trial to determine whether type of electrosurgical setting affects risk of adverse events or recurrence. METHODS: Patients undergoing endoscopic mucosal resection of nonpedunculated colorectal polyps 20 mm or larger (n = 928) were randomly assigned, in a 2 × 2 design, to groups that received clip closure or no clip closure of the resection defect (primary intervention) and then to either a blended current (Endocut Q) or coagulation current (forced coagulation) (Erbe Inc) (secondary intervention and focus of the study). The study was performed at multiple centers, from April 2013 through October 2017. Patients were evaluated 30 days after the procedure (n = 919), and 675 patients underwent a surveillance colonoscopy at a median of 6 months after the procedure. The primary outcome was any severe adverse event in a per patient analysis. Secondary outcomes were complete resection and recurrence at first surveillance colonoscopy in a per polyp analysis. RESULTS: Serious adverse events occurred in 7.2% of patients in the Endocut group and 7.9% of patients in the forced coagulation group, with no significant differences in the occurrence of types of events. There were no significant differences between groups in proportions of polyps that were completely removed (96% in the Endocut group vs 95% in the forced coagulation group) or the proportion of polyps found to have recurred at surveillance colonoscopy (17% and 17%, respectively). Procedural characteristics were comparable, except that 17% of patients in the Endocut group had immediate bleeding that required an intervention, compared with 11% in the forced coagulation group (P = .006). CONCLUSIONS: In a randomized trial to compare 2 commonly used electrosurgical settings for the resection of large colorectal polyps (Endocut vs forced coagulation), we found no difference in risk of serious adverse events, complete resection rate, or polyp recurrence. Electrosurgical settings can therefore be selected based on endoscopist expertise and preference. Clinicaltrials.gov ID NCT01936948.


Subject(s)
Colonic Polyps/surgery , Electrosurgery/adverse effects , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection/adverse effects , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Aged , Colon/diagnostic imaging , Colon/pathology , Colon/surgery , Colonic Polyps/diagnosis , Colonic Polyps/pathology , Colonoscopy , Electrosurgery/instrumentation , Electrosurgery/methods , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection/instrumentation , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection/methods , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Recurrence , Treatment Outcome
9.
Endoscopy ; 53(11): 1150-1159, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33291159

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIM : Delayed bleeding is a common adverse event following endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of large colorectal polyps. Prophylactic clip closure of the mucosal defect after EMR of nonpedunculated polyps larger than 20 mm reduces the incidence of severe delayed bleeding, especially in proximal polyps. This study aimed to evaluate factors associated with complete prophylactic clip closure of the mucosal defect after EMR of large polyps. METHODS : This is a post hoc analysis of the CLIP study (NCT01936948). All patients randomized to the clip group were included. Main outcome was complete clip closure of the mucosal resection defect. The defect was considered completely closed when no remaining mucosal defect was visible and clips were less than 1 cm apart. Factors associated with complete closure were evaluated in multivariable analysis. RESULTS : In total, 458 patients (age 65, 58 % men) with 494 large polyps were included. Complete clip closure of the resection defect was achieved for 338 polyps (68.4 %); closure was not complete for 156 (31.6 %). Factors associated with complete closure in adjusted analysis were smaller polyp size (odds ratio 1.06 for every millimeter decrease [95 % confidence interval 1.02-1.08]), good access (OR 3.58 [1.94-9.59]), complete submucosal lifting (OR 2.28 [1.36-3.90]), en bloc resection (OR 5.75 [1.48-22.39]), and serrated histology (OR 2.74 [1.35-5.56]). CONCLUSIONS : Complete clip closure was not achieved for almost one in three resected large nonpedunculated polyps. While stable access and en bloc resection facilitate clip closure, most factors associated with clip closure are not modifiable. This highlights the need for alternative closure options and measures to prevent bleeding.


Subject(s)
Colonic Polyps , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection , Aged , Colonic Polyps/surgery , Colonoscopy , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection/adverse effects , Female , Humans , Male , Surgical Instruments
10.
Gastroenterology ; 157(4): 949-966.e4, 2019 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31323292

ABSTRACT

In addition to the adenoma to carcinoma sequence, colorectal carcinogenesis can occur via the serrated pathway. Studies have focused on clarification of categories and molecular features of serrated polyps, as well as endoscopic detection and risk assessment. Guidelines from the World Health Organization propose assigning serrated polyps to categories of hyperplastic polyps, traditional serrated adenomas, and sessile serrated lesions (SSLs). Traditional serrated adenomas and SSLs are precursors to colorectal cancer. The serrated pathway is characterized by mutations in RAS and RAF, disruptions to the Wnt signaling pathway, and widespread methylation of CpG islands. Epidemiology studies of serrated polyps have been hampered by inconsistencies in terminology and reporting, but the prevalence of serrated class polyps is 20%-40% in average-risk individuals; most serrated polyps detected are hyperplastic. SSLs, the most common premalignant serrated subtype, and are found in up to 15% of average-risk patients by high-detecting endoscopists. Variations in rate of endoscopic detection of serrated polyps indicate the need for careful examination, with adequate bowel preparation and sufficient withdrawal times. Risk factors for SSLs include white race, family history of colorectal cancer, smoking, and alcohol intake. Patients with serrated polyps, particularly SSLs and traditional serrated adenomas, have an increased risk of synchronous and metachronous advanced neoplasia. Surveillance guidelines vary among countries, but SSLs and proximal hyperplastic polyps require special attention in assignment of surveillance interval-especially in light of concerns regarding incomplete detection and resection.


Subject(s)
Adenomatous Polyps , Carcinoma , Colonic Polyps , Colorectal Neoplasms , Terminology as Topic , Adenomatous Polyps/classification , Adenomatous Polyps/epidemiology , Adenomatous Polyps/genetics , Adenomatous Polyps/therapy , Biomarkers, Tumor/genetics , Carcinoma/classification , Carcinoma/epidemiology , Carcinoma/genetics , Carcinoma/therapy , Cell Transformation, Neoplastic/genetics , Cell Transformation, Neoplastic/pathology , Colonic Polyps/classification , Colonic Polyps/epidemiology , Colonic Polyps/genetics , Colonic Polyps/therapy , Colorectal Neoplasms/classification , Colorectal Neoplasms/epidemiology , Colorectal Neoplasms/genetics , Colorectal Neoplasms/therapy , Genetic Predisposition to Disease , Genetic Variation , Humans , Phenotype , Prevalence , Prognosis , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors
11.
Gastroenterology ; 156(1): 254-272.e11, 2019 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30315778

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Estimates of disease burden can inform national health priorities for research, clinical care, and policy. We aimed to estimate health care use and spending among gastrointestinal (GI) (including luminal, liver, and pancreatic) diseases in the United States. METHODS: We estimated health care use and spending based on the most currently available administrative claims from commercial and Medicare Supplemental plans, data from the GI Quality Improvement Consortium Registry, and national databases. RESULTS: In 2015, annual health care expenditures for gastrointestinal diseases totaled $135.9 billion. Hepatitis ($23.3 billion), esophageal disorders ($18.1 billion), biliary tract disease ($10.3 billion), abdominal pain ($10.2 billion), and inflammatory bowel disease ($7.2 billion) were the most expensive. Yearly, there were more than 54.4 million ambulatory visits with a primary diagnosis for a GI disease, 3.0 million hospital admissions, and 540,500 all-cause 30-day readmissions. There were 266,600 new cases of GI cancers diagnosed and 144,300 cancer deaths. Each year, there were 97,700 deaths from non-malignant GI diseases. An estimated 11.0 million colonoscopies, 6.1 million upper endoscopies, 313,000 flexible sigmoidoscopies, 178,400 upper endoscopic ultrasound examinations, and 169,500 endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography procedures were performed annually. Among average-risk persons aged 50-75 years who underwent colonoscopy, 34.6% had 1 or more adenomatous polyps, 4.7% had 1 or more advanced adenomatous polyps, and 5.7% had 1 or more serrated polyps removed. CONCLUSIONS: GI diseases contribute substantially to health care use in the United States. Total expenditures for GI diseases are $135.9 billion annually-greater than for other common diseases. Expenditures are likely to continue increasing.


Subject(s)
Gastrointestinal Diseases/economics , Gastrointestinal Diseases/therapy , Health Care Costs/trends , Health Expenditures/trends , Liver Diseases/economics , Liver Diseases/therapy , Pancreatic Diseases/economics , Pancreatic Diseases/therapy , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Cost of Illness , Female , Gastrointestinal Diseases/diagnosis , Gastrointestinal Diseases/ethnology , Health Services Needs and Demand/economics , Humans , Incidence , Liver Diseases/diagnosis , Liver Diseases/ethnology , Male , Middle Aged , Needs Assessment/economics , Pancreatic Diseases/diagnosis , Pancreatic Diseases/ethnology , Prevalence , Socioeconomic Factors , Time Factors , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
12.
Gastroenterology ; 157(4): 977-984.e3, 2019 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30885778

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Bleeding is the most common severe complication after endoscopic mucosal resection of large colon polyps and is associated with significant morbidity and cost. We examined whether prophylactic closure of the mucosal defect with hemoclips after polyp resection reduces the risk of bleeding. METHODS: We performed a multicenter, randomized trial of patients with a large nonpedunculated colon polyp (≥20 mm) at 18 medical centers in North America and Spain from April 2013 through October 2017. Patients were randomly assigned to groups that underwent endoscopic closure with a clip (clip group) or no closure (control group) and followed. The primary outcome, postprocedure bleeding, was defined as a severe bleeding event that required hospitalization, a blood transfusion, colonoscopy, surgery, or another invasive intervention within 30 days after completion of the colonoscopy. Subgroup analyses included postprocedure bleeding with polyp location, polyp size, or use of periprocedural antithrombotic medications. We also examined the risk of any serious adverse event. RESULTS: A total of 919 patients were randomly assigned to groups and completed follow-up. Postprocedure bleeding occurred in 3.5% of patients in the clip group and 7.1% in the control group (absolute risk difference [ARD] 3.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.7%-6.5%). Among 615 patients (66.9%) with a proximal large polyp, the risk of bleeding in the clip group was 3.3% and in the control group was 9.6% (ARD 6.3%; 95% CI 2.5%-10.1%); among patients with a distal large polyp, the risks were 4.0% in the clip group and 1.4% in the control group (ARD -2.6%; 95% CI -6.3% to -1.1%). The effect of clip closure was independent of antithrombotic medications or polyp size. Serious adverse events occurred in 4.8% of patients in the clip group and 9.5% of patients in the control group (ARD 4.6%; 95% CI 1.3%-8.0%). CONCLUSIONS: In a randomized trial, we found that endoscopic clip closure of the mucosal defect following resection of large colon polyps reduces risk of postprocedure bleeding. The protective effect appeared to be restricted to large polyps located in the proximal colon. ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT01936948.


Subject(s)
Colectomy/adverse effects , Colonic Polyps/surgery , Colonoscopy/adverse effects , Hemostatic Techniques/instrumentation , Postoperative Hemorrhage/prevention & control , Surgical Instruments , Aged , Colectomy/methods , Colonic Polyps/pathology , Equipment Design , Female , Hemostatic Techniques/adverse effects , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , North America , Postoperative Hemorrhage/etiology , Risk Factors , Spain , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
13.
Gastrointest Endosc ; 91(6): 1353-1360, 2020 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31962121

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Clip closure of the mucosal defect after resecting large (≥20 mm) nonpedunculated colorectal polyps reduces postprocedure bleeding and is cost saving for payers. Clip costs are not reimbursed by payers, posing a major barrier to adoption of this technique in the community. We aimed to determine appropriate clip costs to support broader use of this procedure in practice. METHODS: We performed budget impact analysis using our recent decision analytic model, comparing prophylactic clip closure with no clip closure on national cost and outcomes data, to determine the maximum feasible clip price while maintaining cost savings in practice. Sensitivity analyses were performed on important clinical factors. RESULTS: In the original model, the baseline postprocedure bleeding risk was 6.8%, increasing cost of care by $614.11 averaged among all patients undergoing large polyp resection without clip closure. Prophylactic clip closure of only large right-sided polyps reduced postprocedure bleeding risk by 70.7% but resulted in cost saving only if the price of clips was $100 or less. Comparatively, prophylactic clip closure of large left-sided polyps had no clinical benefit and was not cost saving. Clip closure strategies focused only on extra-large polyps (≥40 mm), or patients taking antithrombotics regardless of polyp characteristics, were only minimally cost saving. Cost savings and maximum tolerated clip prices depended on medical comorbidity, which directly influences the costs of care to manage postprocedure bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic clip closure after endoscopic resection of large colon polyps, particularly those in the right colon segment, is cost saving but requires clip costs less than $100. Translating these findings into practice requires gastroenterology practices to obtain reimbursement from payers for improved clinical outcomes and to align commercial clip prices with this clinical indication.


Subject(s)
Colonic Polyps , Colon , Colonic Polyps/surgery , Colonoscopy , Cost Savings , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection , Humans , Surgical Instruments
14.
Gut ; 68(3): 475-486, 2019 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29496722

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Serrated lesions such as sessile serrated adenomas or polyps (SSA/Ps) are important colorectal cancer precursors, but aetiological factors for these lesions are largely unknown. We aimed to determine the effects of calcium and vitamin D supplementation on the incidence of serrated polyps (SPs) in general and hyperplastic polyps and SSA/Ps specifically. DESIGN: Participants with one or more adenoma at baseline were randomised to receive 1200 mg/day of elemental calcium, 1000 IU/day of vitamin D3, both or neither agent. Treatment continued for 3 or 5 years, when risk of polyps was determined from surveillance colonoscopy (treatment phase). Outcomes after treatment ceased were also assessed (observational phase). Adjusted risk ratios (aRRs) of SPs were determined via multivariable generalised linear models. RESULTS: SPs were diagnosed in 565 of 2058 (27.5%) participants during the treatment phase and 329/1108 (29.7%) during the observational phase. In total, 211 SSA/Ps were identified during follow-up. In the treatment phase, there was no effect of either calcium or vitamin D on incidence of SSA/Ps. However, during the later observational phase, we observed elevated risks of SSA/Ps associated with calcium alone and calcium+vitamin D treatment (aRR (95% CI): 2.65 (1.43 to 4.91) and 3.81 (1.25 to 11.64), respectively). CONCLUSION: In a large multicentre chemoprevention study, we found evidence that calcium and vitamin D supplementation increased the risk of SSA/Ps. This appeared to be a late effect: 6-10 years after supplementation began. These possible risks must be weighed against the benefits of calcium and vitamin D supplementation. : Trial registration NUMBER: NCT00153816; Results.


Subject(s)
Calcium/adverse effects , Colonic Polyps/chemically induced , Dietary Supplements/adverse effects , Vitamin D/adverse effects , Adenoma/chemically induced , Adenoma/diagnosis , Aged , Calcium/administration & dosage , Colonic Polyps/diagnosis , Colonoscopy , Colorectal Neoplasms/chemically induced , Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Double-Blind Method , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Precancerous Conditions/chemically induced , Precancerous Conditions/diagnosis , Vitamin D/administration & dosage , Vitamin D/blood
15.
Gastroenterology ; 154(5): 1352-1360.e3, 2018 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29317277

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Despite the availability of endoscopic therapy, many patients in the United States undergo surgical resection for nonmalignant colorectal polyps. We aimed to quantify and examine trends in the use of surgery for nonmalignant colorectal polyps in a nationally representative sample. METHODS: We analyzed data from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project National Inpatient Sample for 2000 through 2014. We included all adult patients who underwent elective colectomy or proctectomy and had a diagnosis of either nonmalignant colorectal polyp or colorectal cancer. We compared trends in surgery for nonmalignant colorectal polyps with surgery for colorectal cancer and calculated age, sex, race, region, and teaching status/bed-size-specific incidence rates of surgery for nonmalignant colorectal polyps. RESULTS: From 2000 through 2014, there were 1,230,458 surgeries for nonmalignant colorectal polyps and colorectal cancer in the United States. Among those surgeries, 25% were performed for nonmalignant colorectal polyps. The incidence of surgery for nonmalignant colorectal polyps has increased significantly, from 5.9 in 2000 to 9.4 in 2014 per 100,000 adults (incidence rate difference, 3.56; 95% confidence interval 3.40-3.72), while the incidence of surgery for colorectal cancer has significantly decreased, from 31.5 to 24.7 surgeries per 100,000 adults (incidence rate difference, -6.80; 95% confidence interval -7.11 to -6.49). The incidence of surgery for nonmalignant colorectal polyps has been increasing among individuals age 20 to 79, in men and women and including all races and ethnicities. CONCLUSIONS: In an analysis of a large, nationally representative sample, we found that surgery for nonmalignant colorectal polyps is common and has significantly increased over the past 14 years.


Subject(s)
Colectomy/trends , Colonic Polyps/surgery , Colorectal Neoplasms/surgery , Intestinal Polyps/surgery , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/trends , Rectal Diseases/surgery , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Colectomy/statistics & numerical data , Colonic Polyps/ethnology , Colonic Polyps/pathology , Colorectal Neoplasms/epidemiology , Colorectal Neoplasms/pathology , Databases, Factual , Female , Humans , Incidence , Intestinal Polyps/ethnology , Intestinal Polyps/pathology , Male , Middle Aged , Rectal Diseases/ethnology , Rectal Diseases/pathology , Time Factors , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
16.
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol ; 17(8): 1571-1579.e7, 2019 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30326300

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND & AIMS: There is significant variation among endoscopists in their adenoma detection rates (ADRs). We explored associations between ADR and characteristics of endoscopists, including personality traits and financial incentives. METHODS: We collected electronic health record data from October 2013 through September 2015 and calculated ADRs for physicians from 4 health systems. ADRs were risk-adjusted for differences in patient populations. Physicians were surveyed to assess financial motivations, knowledge and perceptions about colonoscopy quality, and personality traits. Of 140 physicians sent the survey, 117 responded. RESULTS: The median risk-adjusted ADR for all surveyed physicians was 29.3% (interquartile range, 24.1%-35.5%). We found no significant association between ADR and financial incentives, malpractice concerns, or physicians' perceptions of ADR as a quality metric. ADR was associated with the degree of self-reported compulsiveness relative to peers: among endoscopists who described themselves as much more compulsive, the ADR was 33.1%; among those who described themselves as somewhat more compulsive, the ADR was 32.9%; among those who described themselves as about the same as others, the ADR was 26.4%; and among those who described themselves as somewhat less compulsive, the ADR was 27.3%) (P = .0019). ADR was also associated with perceived thoroughness (much more thorough than peers, ADR = 31.5%; somewhat more, 31.9%; same/somewhat less, 27.1%; P = .0173). Physicians who reported feeling rushed, having difficulty pacing themselves, or having difficulty in accomplishing goals had higher ADRs. A secondary analysis found the same associations between personality and adenomas per colonoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: We found no significant association between ADR and financial incentives, malpractice concerns, or perceptions of ADR as a quality metric. However, ADRs were higher among physicians who described themselves as more compulsive or thorough, and among those who reported feeling rushed or having difficulty accomplishing goals.


Subject(s)
Adenoma/diagnosis , Colonic Neoplasms/diagnosis , Colonoscopy/methods , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Personality , Physicians/psychology , Quality Indicators, Health Care , Adenoma/epidemiology , Colonic Neoplasms/epidemiology , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Incidence , Male , Retrospective Studies , United States/epidemiology
19.
Am J Gastroenterol ; 113(3): 431-439, 2018 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29380819

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Endoscopist quality measures such as adenoma detection rate (ADR) and serrated polyp detection rates (SPDRs) depend on pathologist classification of histology. Although variation in pathologic interpretation is recognized, we add to the literature by quantifying the impact of pathologic variability on endoscopist performance. METHODS: We used natural language processing to abstract relevant data from colonoscopy and related pathology reports performed over 2 years at four clinical sites. We quantified each pathologist's likelihood of classifying polyp specimens as adenomas or serrated polyps. We estimated the impact on endoscopists' ADR and SPDR of sending their specimens to pathologists with higher or lower classification rates. RESULTS: We observed 85,526 colonoscopies performed by 119 endoscopists; 50,453 had a polyp specimen, which were analyzed by 48 pathologists. There was greater variation across pathologists in classification of serrated polyps than in classification of adenomas. We estimate the endoscopist's average SPDR would be 0.5% if all their specimens were analyzed by the pathologist in our sample with the lowest classification rate and 12.0% if all their specimens were analyzed by the pathologist with the highest classification rate. In contrast, the endoscopist's average ADR would be 28.5% and 42.4% if their specimens were analyzed by the pathologist with lowest and highest classification rate, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: There is significant variation in pathologic interpretation, which more substantially affects endoscopist SPDR than ADR.

20.
Curr Opin Gastroenterol ; 34(5): 330-335, 2018 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29957661

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Acute pancreatitis is a common condition that affects patients with varying degrees of severity and may lead to significant morbidity and mortality. The present article will review the current paradigm in acute pancreatitis management within the first 72 h of diagnosis. RECENT FINDINGS: Patients presenting with acute pancreatitis should be evaluated clinically for signs and symptoms of organ failure in order to appropriately triage. Initial management should focus on fluid resuscitation, with some data to support Ringer's lactate over physiological saline. Routine use of prophylactic antibiotics in acute pancreatitis is not recommended, nor is urgent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in the absence of concomitant acute cholangitis. Early oral feeding should be encouraged, not avoided, and use of parenteral nutrition is discouraged. Cholecystectomy during the same admission of biliary pancreatitis should be performed in order to prevent future acute pancreatitis episodes. Patients with acute pancreatitis secondary to alcohol should receive alcohol counseling. Finally, there is ongoing interest in the development of prognostic laboratory tests in acute pancreatitis and pharmacological therapies to reduce the inflammation that occurs in acute pancreatitis. SUMMARY: Acute pancreatitis is a common and heterogeneous condition with the potential for significant morbidity. Best practices in acute pancreatitis management focus on triage, hydration and enteral feeding.


Subject(s)
Pancreatitis/diagnosis , Pancreatitis/therapy , Patient Care Management , Acute Disease , Enteral Nutrition , Fluid Therapy , Humans , Pancreatitis/etiology , Time Factors , Triage
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL