Risks associated with colonoscopy in a population-based colon screening program: an observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The risks associated with colonoscopy performed through the British Columbia Colon Screening Program (BCCSP) are not known. We aimed to determine the rate of colonoscopy-related serious adverse events within this program. METHODS: For this prospective observational study, we used the BCCSP database to identify participants 50 to 74 years of age who had a positive result on fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) between Nov. 15, 2013, and Dec. 31, 2017, followed by colonoscopy. Unplanned medical events were recorded at the time of colonoscopy and 14 days later. We reviewed the unplanned events and defined them as serious adverse events if they resulted in death, hospital admission or intervention; we also classified them as probably, possibly or unlikely related to the colonoscopy. The primary outcome was the overall rate of serious adverse events; the secondary outcomes were 14-day post-colonoscopy rates of perforation, bleeding and death. RESULTS: During the study period, a total of 96 192 colonoscopies were performed by 308 physicians at 50 sites. The median age of patients was 62 (10th-90th percentile 52-71) years, and 56% were male. Of these, 78 831 patients were contacted after the colonoscopy. Serious adverse events were deemed to have occurred in 350 colonoscopies (44 per 10 000, 95% confidence interval [CI] 39-50 per 10 000), with a number needed to harm of 225. Of the 332 (94.9%) serious adverse events that were probably or possibly related to colonoscopy, perforation occurred in 6 (95% CI 5-8) per 10 000 colonoscopies, bleeding in 26 (95% CI 22-30) per 10 000 colonoscopies and death in 3 (95% CI 1-10) per 100 000 colonoscopies. INTERPRETATION: The rate of serious adverse events associated with colonoscopy in the BCCSP was in keeping with previous publications and met accepted benchmarks. The findings of this study inform stakeholders of the risks associated with colonoscopy in an FIT-based colon screening program.

The probiotic VSL#3 has anti-inflammatory effects and could reduce endoscopic recurrence after surgery for Crohn's disease.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Probiotic formulations of single species of bacteria have not been effective in preventing the recurrence of Crohn's disease after surgery. We investigated the ability of VSL#3, a mixture of 8 different bacterial probiotic species, to prevent Crohn's disease recurrence after surgery in a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. METHODS: Within 30 days of ileocolonic resection and re-anastomosis, patients with Crohn's disease were randomly assigned to groups given 1 sachet of VSL#3 (900 billion viable bacteria, comprising 4 strains of Lactobacillus, 3 strains of Bifidobacterium, and 1 strain of Streptococcus salivarius subspecies thermophilus) (n = 59) or matching placebo (n = 60). Colonoscopy was performed at days 90 and 365 to evaluate the neoterminal ileum for disease recurrence and obtain mucosal biopsies for cytokine analysis. Patients from both groups with either no or mild endoscopic recurrence at day 90 received VSL#3 until day 365. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with severe endoscopic recurrence at day 90. RESULTS: At day 90, the proportion of patients with severe endoscopic lesions did not differ significantly between VSL#3 (9.3%) and placebo (15.7%, P = .19). The proportions of patients with non-severe lesions at day 90 who had severe endoscopic recurrence at day 365 were 10.0% in the early VSL#3 group (given VSL#3 for the entire 365 days) and 26.7% in the late VSL#3 group (given VSL#3 from days 90 through 365) (P = .09). Aggregate rates of severe recurrence (on days 90 and 365) were not statistically different, 20.5% of subjects in the early VSL#3 group and 42.1% in the late VSL#3 group. Patients receiving VSL#3 had reduced mucosal inflammatory cytokine levels compared with placebo at day 90 (P < .05). Crohn's disease activity index and inflammatory bowel disease quality of life scores were similar in the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: There were no statistical differences in endoscopic recurrence rates at day 90 between patients who received VSL#3 and patients who received placebo. Lower mucosal levels of inflammatory cytokines and a lower rate of recurrence among patients who received early VSL#3 (for the entire 365 days) indicate that this probiotic should be further investigated for prevention of Crohn's disease recurrence. Clinical trials.gov number: NCT00175292.

Canadian consensus on medically acceptable wait times for digestive health care.

BACKGROUND: Delays in access to health care in Canada have been reported, but standardized systems to manage and monitor wait lists and wait times, and benchmarks for appropriate wait times, are lacking. The objective of the present consensus was to develop evidence- and expertise-based recommendations for medically appropriate maximal wait times for consultation and procedures by a digestive disease specialist. METHODS: A steering committee drafted statements defining maximal wait times for specialist consultation and procedures based on the most common reasons for referral of adult patients to a digestive disease specialist. Statements were circulated in advance to a multidisciplinary group of 25 participants for comments and voting. At the consensus meeting, relevant data and the results of voting were presented and discussed; these formed the basis of the final wording and voting of statements. RESULTS: Twenty-four statements were produced regarding maximal medically appropriate wait times for specialist consultation and procedures based on presenting signs and symptoms of referred patients. Statements covered the areas of gastrointestinal bleeding; cancer confirmation and screening and surveillance of colon cancer and colonic polyps; liver, biliary and pancreatic disorders; dysphagia and dyspepsia; abdominal pain and bowel dysfunction; and suspected inflammatory bowel disease. Maximal wait times could be stratified into four possible acuity categories of 24 h, two weeks, two months and six months. FUTURE DIRECTIONS: Comparison of these benchmarks with actual wait times will identify limitations in access to digestive heath care in Canada. These recommendations should be considered targets for future health care improvements and are not clinical practice guidelines.