Identifying factors associated with detection of sessile gastric polyps in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis.

Background and study aims Gastric cancer (GC) is increasingly reported and a leading cause of death in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). Identifying features in patients with FAP who harbor sessile gastric polyps, likely precursors to GC, may lead to alterations in endoscopic surveillance in those patients and allow endoscopic intervention to decrease the risk of GC. The aim of this study was to identify demographic and clinical factors in patients with FAP who harbor sessile gastric polyps. Patients and methods We retrospectively compared demographic, clinical, and endoscopic features in consecutive adult patients with FAP who presented for a surveillance endoscopy at a tertiary-care center with a FAP registry who harbor sessile gastric polyps to those without them. Sessile gastric polyps included pyloric gland adenomas, gastric adenomas, hyperplastic polyps, and fundic gland polyps with high-grade dysplasia. We also display the location of germline APC pathogenic variants in patients with and without sessile gastric polyps. Results Eighty patients with FAP were included. Their average age was 48 years and 70 % were male . Nineteen (24 %) had sessile gastric polyps. They were older ( P  < 0.03), more likely to have a family history of GC ( P  < 0.05), white mucosal patches in the proximal stomach ( P  < 0.001), and antral polyps ( P  < 0.026) compared to patients without a gastric neoplasm. No difference in Spigelman stage, extra-intestinal manifestations, or surgical history was note. 89 % of patients with a gastric neoplasm had an APC pathogenic variant 5' to codon 1309. Conclusions Specific demographic, endoscopic, and genotypic features are associated with patients with FAP who harbor sessile gastric polyps. We recommend heightened awareness of these factors when performing endoscopic surveillance of the stomach with resection of gastric neoplasia when identified.

Chemoprevention Considerations in Patients with Hereditary Colorectal Cancer Syndromes.

Secondary prevention of colorectal neoplasia with chemoprevention is long-studied area of research and clinical use in patients with the 2 most common hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes including Lynch syndrome and familial adenomatous polyposis. No medication is currently approved for use for the prevention of colorectal polyps or cancer in either the general population or individuals with the hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes. Emerging data in animal models and limited data in humans suggest vaccines may be the next breakthrough for neoplasia prevention in patients with hereditary colorectal cancer. Clinicians must acknowledge chemoprevention is an adjunct and does not supplant endoscopic surveillance.

Safety and efficacy of sodium picosulfate, magnesium oxide, and citric acid bowel preparation in patients with baseline renal impairment or diabetes: subanalysis of a randomized, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Selecting a bowel preparation for patients with renal impairment or diabetes requires special consideration. We aimed to describe the effect of baseline renal impairment or diabetes on the safety, efficacy, and tolerability of low-volume sodium picosulfate, magnesium oxide, and citric acid (SPMC) ready-to-drink oral solution bowel preparation. METHODS: A post hoc secondary analysis was performed from a randomized, assessor-blinded study of SPMC oral solution bowel preparation in participants with mild or moderate baseline renal impairment or diabetes. Primary efficacy endpoint ('responders') was the proportion of participants with 'excellent' or 'good' ratings on a modified Aronchick Scale (AS). Secondary efficacy outcomes were the quality of ascending colon cleansing from the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS), and selected results from the Mayo Clinic Bowel Prep Tolerability Questionnaire. Safety assessments included adverse events (AEs), adenoma detection, and laboratory evaluations. RESULTS: Similar overall colon cleansing was demonstrated in the subgroups, with >85% of participants in any subgroup rated as responders by the AS, and >92% of participant responders by the BBPS. Most participants reported a tolerable bowel preparation, regardless of baseline renal impairment or diabetes history. Safety of SPMC oral solution was similar between all subgroups and the overall cohort. For the mild renal impairment, moderate renal impairment, and diabetes subgroups, respectively, commonly reported, drug-related AEs were nausea (2.6%, 5.3%, 1.4%) and headache (2.2%, 2.6%, 4.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Ready-to-drink SPMC oral solution demonstrated efficacious colon cleansing in patients with baseline mild/moderate renal impairment or diabetes, with a tolerable bowel preparation reported by most. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03017235.

Surveillance for pathology associated with cancer on endoscopy (SPACE): criteria to identify high-risk gastric polyps in familial adenomatous polyposis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Gastric cancer is an extracolonic manifestation of familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) and is associated with high-risk gastric polyps. There are no known endoscopic criteria to identify these high-risk polyps. Our aim was to develop endoscopic criteria to identify high-risk polyps on endoscopy in FAP. METHODS: We prospectively collected 150 gastric polyps in consecutive patients undergoing surveillance EGD at the Cleveland Clinic. Pictures were taken of each polyp under narrow-band imaging and high-definition white light. In an exploratory phase, 5 endoscopists developed consensus criteria using the images to distinguish high-risk (pyloric gland adenoma, tubular adenoma, hyperplastic) from low-risk (fundic gland with low-grade or no dysplasia) polyps. In the assessment phase, endoscopists were blinded to polyp pathology and used the criteria to predict the individual polyp risk category. To measure diagnostic accuracy, we reported the mean sensitivity, specificity, and interrater agreement (κ). RESULTS: Consensus criteria were developed based on 16 low-risk and 9 high-risk polyps. The final 149 polyps consisted of 128 low-risk and 22 high-risk polyps (1 polyp was excluded from analysis). Using the criteria, the 5 endoscopists distinguished high- from low-risk polyps with a mean sensitivity and specificity of 79% (16.3%) and 78.8% (10.8%), respectively. The κ coefficient was .45, indicating moderate agreement. CONCLUSIONS: We developed endoscopic criteria to distinguish between high- and low-risk polyps associated with gastric cancer in FAP. The criteria provide guidance to endoscopists in targeting high-risk polyps while surveying the stomach of patients with proximal gastric polyposis.

Colonic Decompression Reduces Proximal Acute Colonic Pseudo-obstruction and Related Symptoms.

BACKGROUND: Colonoscopic decompression is performed in inpatients for management of acute colonic pseudo-obstruction. Evidence for its efficacy is limited to small descriptive studies published before the use of neostigmine for acute colonic pseudo-obstruction. Furthermore, therapeutic end points were not defined. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to compare the effectiveness of colonic decompression with standard medical therapy (supportive and pharmacologic therapy) to standard medical therapy alone. DESIGN: This is a retrospective, propensity-matched study. SETTING: The study was conducted at a tertiary care center. PATIENTS: Inpatients with first diagnosis of acute colonic pseudo-obstruction between 2000 and 2016 were selected. INTERVENTIONS: The intervention group received colonic decompression as well as supportive and/or pharmacologic therapy. The control group did not receive colonic decompression. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the resolution of overall colonic dilation on imaging 48 hours following colonic decompression or the initiation of standard medical therapy alone. Secondary outcomes included symptom improvement, colonic segment diameter percentage change, perforation, 30-day readmission, and all-cause mortality. RESULTS: The standard medical therapy and colonic decompression groups included 61 and 83 patients. Of the patients who underwent colonic decompression, 47.7% had complete resolution of acute colonic pseudo-obstruction versus 19.9% of patients who underwent standard medical therapy (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in mid or distal colon diameter reduction between groups. The 30-day readmission rate was 15.7% in the colonic decompression group versus 26.2% in the standard medical therapy group. No immediate adverse events were noted in either group. Thirty-day all-cause mortality was 8.4% for the colonic decompression group and 14.8% in the standard medical therapy group. LIMITATIONS: The study was a retrospective review on a highly comorbid population. CONCLUSIONS: Colonic decompression is effective compared to standard medical therapy alone for proximal colonic dilation or symptoms associated with acute colonic pseudo-obstruction. On segmental analysis, colonic decompression does not provide any additional benefit over standard medical therapy in improving transverse or distal colonic dilation. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B32. LA DESCOMPRESIÓN COLÓNICA REDUCE LA PSEUDOOBSTRUCCIÓN COLÓNICA AGUDA PROXIMAL Y LOS SÍNTOMAS RELACIONADOS.: La descompresión colonica se realiza en pacientes hospitalizados para el tratamiento de la pseudoobstrucción colónica aguda. La evidencia de su eficacia se limita a pequeños estudios descriptivos antes del uso de neostigmina para la pseudoobstrucción colónica aguda. Además, los puntos finales terapéuticos no se definieron.El objetivo fue comparar la efectividad de la descompresión colónica mas el tratamiento médico estándar (tratamiento de apoyo y farmacológico) contra el tratamiento médico estándar solamente.Este es un estudio retrospectivo de propensión coincidente.El estudio se realizó en un centro de atención de tercer nivel.Pacientes hospitalizados con diagnóstico de pseudoobstrucción colónica aguda entre 2000 y 2016.El grupo de intervención recibió descompresión colónica, así como tratamiento de apoyo o farmacológica. El grupo control no recibió descompresión colónica.La medida de resultado primaria fue la resolución de la dilatación colónica general en la imagen 48 horas después de la descompresión colónica o el inicio del tratamiento médico estándar solo. Los resultados secundarios incluyeron mejoría de los síntomas, cambio porcentual en el diámetro del segmento colónico, perforación, reingreso a los 30 días y mortalidad por cualquier causa.La terapia médica estándar y los grupos de descompresión colónica incluyeron 61 y 83 pacientes, respectivamente. El 47,7% de los pacientes con descompresión colónica tuvieron una resolución completa de la pseudoobstrucción colónica aguda frente al 19,9% de los pacientes con terapia médica estándar (p < 0,001). No hubo diferencias significativas en la reducción del diámetro del colon medio o distal entre los grupos. La tasa de reingreso a los 30 días fue del 15,7% en el grupo de descompresión colónica frente al 26,2% en el grupo de tratamiento médico estándar. No se observaron eventos adversos inmediatos en ninguno de los dos grupos. La mortalidad por cualquier causa a los 30 días fue del 8.4% para la descompresión del colon y del 14.8% en los grupos de terapia médica estándar.El estudio fue una revisión retrospectiva en una población altamente comórbida.La descompresión colónica es efectiva en comparación con el tratamiento médico estándar solo para la dilatación del colon proximal o los síntomas asociados con la pseudoobstrucción colónica aguda. En el análisis segmentario, la descompresión colónica no proporciona ningún beneficio adicional sobre el tratamiento médica estándar para mejorar la dilatación colónica transversal o distal. Vea el resumen del video en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B32.