Performance of the faecal immunochemical test for the detection of colorectal neoplasms and the role of proton pump inhibitors in their diagnostic accuracy.

AIM: The faecal immunochemical test (FIT) is currently utilized in both symptomatic and screening populations, but little is known about factors that affect its performance. For example, proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy has been purported to increase false negative rates. This has significant implications given the extent of PPI prescriptions. The aim of this work was to evaluate the performance of the FIT for the detection of colorectal neoplasms and the impact of PPI therapy on its diagnostic accuracy. METHOD: Symptomatic patients referred on the suspected cancer pathway and those on polyp surveillance between 2015 and 2019 were approached to participate. Estimates of the accuracy of FIT at different cut-off levels in diagnosing colorectal neoplasms were made. Logistic regression was used to assess the effect of PPIs on the FIT results. RESULTS: A total of 667 participants were eligible for the final analysis. At a cut-off of 10 µg/g faeces, the overall sensitivity and specificity of FIT for the detection of colorectal cancer (CRC) was 0.85 (95% CI 0.71-0.94) and 0.81 (95% CI 0.78-0.84), respectively. For the detection of advanced neoplasia, the sensitivity was 0.70 (95% CI 0.58-0.79) and the specificity was 0.83 (95% CI 0.80-0.86). At higher thresholds, the sensitivity steadily declined whilst specificity increased. PPI therapy did not have a significant effect on performance of the FIT. CONCLUSION: FIT is a good rule-out test for the detection of CRC and advanced neoplasia at lower thresholds. PPI therapy does not appear to have an effect on its diagnostic performance.

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy under spinal anaesthesia: A prospective, randomised study.

CONTEXT: Spinal anaesthesia has been reported as an alternative to general anaesthesia for performing laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). AIMS: Study aimed to evaluate efficacy, safety and cost benefit of conducting laparoscopic cholecystectomy under spinal anaesthesia (SA) in comparison to general anaesthesia(GA). SETTINGS AND DESIGN: A prospective, randomised study conducted over a two year period at an urban, non teaching hospital. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients meeting inclusion criteria e randomised into two groups. Group A and Group B received general and spinal anaesthesia by standardised techniques. Both groups underwent standard four port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Mean anaesthesia time, pneumoperitoneum time and surgery time defined primary outcome measures. Intraoperative events and post operative pain score were secondary outcome measure. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: The Student t test, Pearson's chi-square test and Fisher exact test. RESULTS: Out of 235 cases enrolled in the study, 114 cases in Group A and 110 in Group B analysed. Mean anaesthesia time appeared to be more in the GA group (49.45 vs. 40.64, P = 0.02) while pneumoperitoneum time and corresponding the total surgery time was slightly longer in the SA group. 27/117 cases who received SA experienced intraoperative events, four significant enough to convert to GA. No postoperative complications noted in either group. Pain relief significantly more in SA group in immediate post operative period (06 and 12 hours) but same as GA group at time of discharge (24 hours). No late postoperative complication or readmission noted in either group. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy done under spinal anaesthesia as a routine anaesthesia of choice is feasible and safe. Spinal anaesthesia can be recommended to be the anaesthesia technique of choice for conducting laparoscopic cholecystectomy in hospital setups in developing countries where cost factor is a major factor.