Long-term oncological outcomes of endoscopic full-thickness resection after previous incomplete resection of low-risk T1 CRC (LOCAL-study): study protocol of a national prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: T1 colorectal cancer (CRC) without histological high-risk factors for lymph node metastasis (LNM) can potentially be cured by endoscopic resection, which is associated with significantly lower morbidity, mortality and costs compared to radical surgery. An important prerequisite for endoscopic resection as definite treatment is the histological confirmation of tumour-free resection margins. Incomplete resection with involved (R1) or indeterminate (Rx) margins is considered a strong risk factor for residual disease and local recurrence. Therefore, international guidelines recommend additional surgery in case of R1/Rx resection, even in absence of high-risk factors for LNM. Endoscopic full-thickness resection (eFTR) is a relatively new technique that allows transmural resection of colorectal lesions. Local scar excision after prior R1/Rx resection of low-risk T1 CRC could offer an attractive minimal invasive strategy to achieve confirmation about radicality of the previous resection or a second attempt for radical resection of residual luminal cancer. However, oncologic safety has not been established and long-term data are lacking. Besides, surveillance varies widely and requires standardization. METHODS/DESIGN: In this nationwide, multicenter, prospective cohort study we aim to assess feasibility and oncological safety of completion eFTR following incomplete resection of low-risk T1 CRC. The primary endpoint is to assess the 2 and 5 year luminal local tumor recurrence rate. Secondary study endpoints are to assess feasibility, percentage of curative eFTR-resections, presence of scar tissue and/or complete scar excision at histopathology, safety of eFTR compared to surgery, 2 and 5 year nodal and/or distant tumor recurrence rate and 5-year disease-specific and overall-survival rate. DISCUSSION: Since the implementation of CRC screening programs, the diagnostic rate of T1 CRC is steadily increasing. A significant proportion is not recognized as cancer before endoscopic resection and is therefore resected through conventional techniques primarily reserved for benign polyps. As such, precise histological assessment is often hampered due to cauterization and fragmentation and frequently leads to treatment dilemmas. This first prospective trial will potentially demonstrate the effectiveness and oncological safety of completion eFTR for patients who have undergone a previous incomplete T1 CRC resection. Hereby, substantial surgical overtreatment may be avoided, leading to treatment optimization and organ preservation. Trial registration Nederlands Trial Register, NL 7879, 16 July 2019 ( https://trialregister.nl/trial/7879 ).

Factors associated with the progression of gastric intestinal metaplasia: a multicenter, prospective cohort study.

Background and study aims Gastric cancer (GC) is usually preceded by premalignant gastric lesions (GPLs) such as gastric intestinal metaplasia (GIM). Information on risk factors associated with neoplastic progression of GIM are scarce. This study aimed to identify predictors for progression of GIM in areas with low GC incidence. Patients and methods The Progression and Regression of Precancerous Gastric Lesions (PROREGAL) study includes patients with GPL. Patients underwent at least two upper endoscopies with random biopsy sampling. Progression of GIM means an increase in severity according to OLGIM (operative link on gastric intestinal metaplasia) during follow-up (FU). Family history and lifestyle factors were determined through questionnaires. Serum Helicobacter pylori infection, pepsinogens (PG), gastrin-17 and GC-associated single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were determined. Cox regression was performed for risk analysis and a chi-squared test for analysis of single nucleotide polymorphisms. Results Three hundred and eight patients (median age at inclusion 61 years, interquartile range (IQR: 17; male 48.4 %; median FU 48 months, IQR: 24) were included. During FU, 116 patients (37.7 %) showed progression of IM and six patients (1.9 %) developed high-grade dysplasia or GC. The minor allele (C) on TLR4 (rs11536889) was inversely associated with progression of GIM (OR 0.6; 95 %CI 0.4-1.0). Family history (HR 1.5; 95 %CI 0.9-2.4) and smoking (HR 1.6; 95 %CI 0.9-2.7) showed trends towards progression of GIM. Alcohol use, body mass index, history of H. pylori infection, and serological markers were not associated with progression. Conclusions Family history and smoking appear to be related to an increased risk of GIM progression in low GC incidence countries. TLR4 (rs11536889) showed a significant inverse association, suggesting that genetic information may play a role in GIM progression.

[Safe prescribing in patients with liver cirrhosis; 5 pitfalls]. / Veilig voorschrijven bij levercirrose: 5 misvattingen.

The liver has a major role in the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of medicines and hepatic impairment could therefore lead to increased plasma levels and adverse drug reactions. Due to the large overcapacity of the liver, medication adjustments are only needed when a chronic liver disease has progressed to cirrhosis. Important pharmacokinetic alterations that could occur in cirrhosis are: (a) a decreased first-pass effect, (b) impaired metabolism by liver enzymes, and (c) in an advanced stage also impairment of renal elimination. Patients with cirrhosis could also be more sensitive to certain adverse drug reactions at normal drug levels, such as renal impairment due to NSAIDs or the sedative effect of morphinomimetics and psychotropic drugs. Prescribing in patients with cirrhosis is complex, which we illustrate by 5 common pitfalls. In practice, healthcare professionals could use a website with guidance for prescribing almost 300 medicines (www.geneesmiddelenbijlevercirrose.nl).

High practice variation in risk stratification, baseline oncological staging, and follow-up strategies for T1 colorectal cancers in the Netherlands.

Background and study aims Based on pathology, locally resected T1 colorectal cancer (T1-CRC) can be classified as having low- or high-risk for irradicality and/or lymph node metastasis, the latter requiring adjuvant surgery. Reporting and application of pathological high-risk criteria is likely variable, with inherited variation regarding baseline oncological staging, treatment and surveillance. Methods We assessed practice variation using an online survey among gastroenterologists and surgeons participating in the Dutch T1-CRC Working Group. Results Of the 130 invited physicians, 53 % participated. Regarding high-risk T1-CRC criteria, lymphangio-invasion is used by 100 %, positive or indeterminable margins by 93 %, poor differentiation by 90 %, tumor-free margin ≤ 1 mm by 78 %, tumor budding by 57 % and submucosal invasion > 1000 µm by 47 %. Fifty-two percent of the respondents do not perform baseline staging in locally resected low-risk T1-CRC. In case of unoperated high-risk patients, we recorded 61 different surveillance strategies in 63 participants, using 19 different combinations of diagnostic tests. Endoscopy is used in all schedules. Mean follow-up time is 36 months for endoscopy, 26 months for rectal MRI and 30 months for abdominal CT (all varying 3-60 months). Conclusion We found variable use of pathological high-risk T1-CRC criteria, creating risk for misclassification as low-risk T1-CRC. This has serious implications, as most participants will not proceed to oncological staging in low-risk patients and adjuvant surgery nor radiological surveillance is considered. On the other hand, oncological surveillance in patients with a locally resected high-risk T1-CRC who do not wish adjuvant surgery is highly variable emphasizing the need for a uniform surveillance protocol.

Propensity score-matched analysis of oncological outcome between stent as bridge to surgery and emergency resection in patients with malignant left-sided colonic obstruction.

BACKGROUND: Although self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement as bridge to surgery (BTS) in patients with left-sided obstructing colonic cancer has shown promising short-term results, it is used infrequently owing to uncertainty about its oncological safety. This population study compared long-term oncological outcomes between emergency resection and SEMS placement as BTS. METHODS: Through a national collaborative research project, long-term outcome data were collected for all patients who underwent resection for left-sided obstructing colonic cancer between 2009 and 2016 in 75 Dutch hospitals. Patients were identified from the Dutch Colorectal Audit database. SEMS as BTS was compared with emergency resection in the curative setting after 1 : 2 propensity score matching. RESULTS: Some 222 patients who had a stent placed were matched to 444 who underwent emergency resection. The overall SEMS-related perforation rate was 7·7 per cent (17 of 222). Three-year locoregional recurrence rates after SEMS insertion and emergency resection were 11·4 and 13·6 per cent (P = 0·457), disease-free survival rates were 58·8 and 52·6 per cent (P = 0·175), and overall survival rates were 74·0 and 68·3 per cent (P = 0·231), respectively. SEMS placement resulted in significantly fewer permanent stomas (23·9 versus 45·3 per cent; P < 0·001), especially in elderly patients (29·0 versus 57·9 per cent; P < 0·001). For patients in the SEMS group with or without perforation, 3-year locoregional recurrence rates were 18 and 11·0 per cent (P = 0·432), disease-free survival rates were 49 and 59·6 per cent (P = 0·717), and overall survival rates 61 and 75·1 per cent (P = 0·529), respectively. CONCLUSION: Overall, SEMS as BTS seems an oncologically safe alternative to emergency resection with fewer permanent stomas. Nevertheless, the risk of SEMS-related perforation, as well as permanent stoma, might influence shared decision-making for individual patients.

Endoscopic resection of high-risk T1 colorectal carcinoma prior to surgical resection has no adverse effect on long-term outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: It is difficult to predict the presence of histological risk factors for lymph node metastasis (LNM) before endoscopic treatment of T1 colorectal cancer (CRC). Therefore, endoscopic therapy is propagated to obtain adequate histological staging. We examined whether secondary surgery following endoscopic resection of high-risk T1 CRC does not have a negative effect on patients' outcomes compared with primary surgery. DESIGN: Patients with T1 CRC with one or more histological risk factors for LNM (high risk) and treated with primary or secondary surgery between 2000 and 2014 in 13 hospitals were identified in the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Additional data were collected from hospital records, endoscopy, radiology and pathology reports. A propensity score analysis was performed using inverse probability weighting (IPW) to correct for confounding by indication. RESULTS: 602 patients were eligible for analysis (263 primary; 339 secondary surgery). Overall, 34 recurrences were observed (5.6%). After adjusting with IPW, no differences were observed between primary and secondary surgery for the presence of LNM (OR 0.97; 95% CI 0.49 to 1.93; p=0.940) and recurrence during follow-up (HR 0.97; 95% CI 0.41 to 2.34; p=0.954). Further adjusting for lymphovascular invasion, depth of invasion and number of retrieved lymph nodes did not alter this outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Our data do not support an increased risk of LNM or recurrence after secondary surgery compared with primary surgery. Therefore, an attempt for an en-bloc resection of a possible T1 CRC without evident signs of deep invasion seems justified in order to prevent surgery of low-risk T1 CRC in a significant proportion of patients.

Risk for Incomplete Resection after Macroscopic Radical Endoscopic Resection of T1 Colorectal Cancer: A Multicenter Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: The decision to perform secondary surgery after endoscopic resection of T1 colorectal cancer (CRC) depends on the risk of lymph node metastasis and the risk of incomplete resection. We aimed to examine the incidence and risk factors for incomplete endoscopic resection of T1 CRC after a macroscopic radical endoscopic resection. METHODS: Data from patients treated between 2000 and 2014 with macroscopic complete endoscopic resection of T1 CRC were collected from 13 hospitals. Incomplete resection was defined as local recurrence at the polypectomy site during follow-up or malignant tissue in the surgically resected specimen in case secondary surgery was performed. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to analyze factors associated with incomplete resection. RESULTS: In total, 877 patients with a median follow-up time of 36.5 months (interquartile range 16.0-68.3) were included, in whom secondary surgery was performed in 358 patients (40.8%). Incomplete resection was observed in 30 patients (3.4%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.3-4.6%). Incomplete resection rate was 0.7% (95% CI 0-2.1%) in low-risk T1 CRC vs. 4.4% (95% CI 2.7-6.5%) in high-risk T1 CRC (P=0.04). Overall adverse outcome rate (incomplete resection or metastasis) was 2.1% (95% CI 0-5.0%) in low-risk T1 CRC vs. 11.7% (95% CI 8.8-14.6%) in high-risk T1 CRC (P=0.001). Piecemeal resection (adjusted odds ratio 2.60; 95% CI 1.20-5.61, P=0.02) and non-pedunculated morphology (adjusted odds ratio 2.18; 95% CI 1.01-4.70, P=0.05) were independent risk factors for incomplete resection. Among patients in whom no additional surgery was performed, who developed recurrent cancer, 41.7% (95% CI 20.8-62.5%) died as a result of recurrent cancer. CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of histological high-risk factors, a 'wait-and-see' policy with limited follow-up is justified. Piecemeal resection and non-pedunculated morphology are independent risk factors for incomplete endoscopic resection of T1 CRC.

[Faecolithiasis: straightforward to detect, but often missed]. / Fecolithiase: goed te herkennen, maar vaak gemist.

Faecal impaction is a problem which is becoming more prevalent now that the number of elderly patients is increasing. When not detected and treated inadequately, it can lead to symptoms such as diarrhoea, faecal incontinence and other serious problems like anorexia, vomiting and rectal ulcers with bleeding or even a bowel perforation. We describe two patients with serious and less common complications of faecolithiasis. Patient A, a 79-year-old woman with signs of dementia, presented with faecal incontinence and unexplained worsening of her cognitive symptoms leading to a situation where she could no longer live in her own home. Patient B, a 52-year-old woman, presented with urinary retention, stomach ache and constipation, suggesting an obstructive tumour in the pelvis. In both patients a CT-scan showed no pathology. Neither of the patients responded to oral laxative treatment. Eventually, a faecolith was detected and treated through endoscopic inspection and fragmentation. Both patients recovered completely.

How the concept of biochemical response influenced the management of primary biliary cholangitis over time.

BACKGROUND: Criteria assessing biochemical response to ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) are established risk stratification tools in primary biliary cholangitis (PBC). We aimed to evaluate to what extent liver tests influenced patient management during a three decade period, and whether this changed over time. METHODS: 851 Dutch PBC patients diagnosed between 1988 and 2012 were reviewed to assess patient management in relation to liver test results during UDCA treatment. To do so, biochemical response at one year was analysed retrospectively according to Paris-1 criteria. RESULTS: Response was assessable for 687/851 (81%) patients; 157/687 non-responders. During a follow-up of 8.8 years (IQR 4.8-13.9), 141 died and 30 underwent liver transplantation. Transplant-free survival of non-responders (60%) was significantly worse compared with responders (87%) (p < 0.0001). Management was modified in 46/157 (29%) non-responders. The most frequent change observed, noted in 26/46 patients, was an increase in UDCA dosage. Subsequently, 9/26 (35%) non-responders became responders within the next two years. Steroid treatment was started in one patient; 19 patients were referred to a tertiary centre. No trend towards more frequent changes in management over time was observed (p = 0.10). CONCLUSION: Changes in medical management occurred in a minority of non-responders. This can largely be explained by the lack of accepted response criteria and of established second-line treatments for PBC. Nevertheless, the observation that response-guided management did not increase over time suggests that awareness of the concept of biochemical response requires further attention,particularly since new treatment options for PBC will soon become available.

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) versus endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for resection of large distal non-pedunculated colorectal adenomas (MATILDA-trial): rationale and design of a multicenter randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is currently the most used technique for resection of large distal colorectal polyps. However, in large lesions EMR can often only be performed in a piecemeal fashion resulting in relatively low radical (R0)-resection rates and high recurrence rates. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a newer procedure that is more difficult resulting in a longer procedural time, but is promising due to the high en-bloc resection rates and the very low recurrence rates. We aim to evaluate the (cost-)effectiveness of ESD against EMR on both short (i.e. 6 months) and long-term (i.e. 36 months). We hypothesize that in the short-run ESD is more time consuming resulting in higher healthcare costs, but is (cost-) effective on the long-term due to lower patients burden, a higher number of R0-resections and lower recurrence rates with less need for repeated procedures. METHODS: This is a multicenter randomized clinical trial in patients with a non-pedunculated polyp larger than 20 mm in the rectum, sigmoid, or descending colon suspected to be an adenoma by means of endoscopic assessment. Primary endpoint is recurrence rate at follow-up colonoscopy at 6 months. Secondary endpoints are R0-resection rate, perceived burden and quality of life, healthcare resources utilization and costs, surgical referral rate, complication rate and recurrence rate at 36 months. Quality-adjusted-life-year (QALY) will be estimated taking an area under the curve approach and using EQ-5D-indexes. Healthcare costs will be calculated by multiplying used healthcare services with unit prices. The cost-effectiveness of ESD against EMR will be expressed as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) showing additional costs per recurrence free patient and as ICER showing additional costs per QALY. DISCUSSION: If this trial confirms ESD to be favorable on the long-term, the burden of extra colonoscopies and repeated procedures can be prevented for future patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02657044 (Clinicaltrials.gov), registered January 8, 2016.

Long-term results of palliative stent placement for acute malignant colonic obstruction.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic placement of self-expanding-metal-stents (SEMS) is widely performed as palliative treatment for acute malignant colonic obstruction. There is ongoing debate regarding risks and benefits associated with SEMS placement. This study aimed to evaluate long-term outcomes of palliative SEMS placement in patients presenting with acute malignant colonic obstruction. METHODS: A prospectively collected patient cohort (2005-2013) from a general teaching hospital was used. In this hospital, all consecutive patients presenting with acute malignant large bowel obstruction are treated with endoscopic SEMS placement. Only colon cancer patients who underwent palliative SEMS placement were selected. RESULTS: In total, 48 patients were included. The technical and short-term clinical success rates were 91 % (44/48) and 85 % (36/48), respectively. SEMS-related mortality occurred in 6/48 patients (13 %) (early n = 4, late n = 2) and was caused by SEMS-related perforation in all cases. The SEMS-related morbidity rate was 38 % (18/48) (early n = 7, late n = 11). Endoscopic re-intervention was performed 14 times and 13 patients eventually underwent surgical treatment during follow-up. The stoma-formation rate was 15 % (7/48). Long-term clinical success was 48 % (23/48). The estimated stent patency rate (95 % confidence interval) was 69 % (52-79) at 1 month, 54 % (37-66) at 6 months and 50 % (33-62) at 12 months. CONCLUSION: Palliative SEMS placement provides rapid relief of obstruction and avoids a stoma in most patients with acute colonic obstruction caused by incurable or inoperable colon cancer. However, these benefits should be weighed against mortality and morbidity related to SEMS placement.

Bridge-to-surgery stent placement versus emergency surgery for acute malignant colonic obstruction.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) placement as a bridge to surgery is an option for acute malignant colonic obstruction. There is ongoing debate regarding the superiority and oncological safety of SEMS placement compared with emergency surgery. This retrospective study aimed to compare outcomes of these treatment approaches. METHODS: Patients were identified from cohorts treated between 2005 and 2012 in two teaching hospitals, of which one used emergency surgery only in patients with large bowel obstruction, whereas the other attempted SEMS placement. Only patients treated with curative intent were included. RESULTS: The study included 59 patients in whom SEMS placement was attempted and 51 who underwent surgery alone. The successful primary anastomosis rate was higher in the SEMS group than in the surgery-alone group among patients with left-sided obstruction (30 of 43 versus 10 of 34 respectively; P = 0.001), whereas stoma formation was less common (11 of 43 versus 23 of 34; P < 0.001). Such differences were not apparent in patients with right-sided obstruction. Secondary stoma rates were comparable between treatment approaches (left-sided: 11 of 43 versus 13 of 34, P = 0.322; right-sided: 1 of 16 versus 1 of 17, P = 1.000). There were no significant differences in morbidity, mortality, recurrence or survival. CONCLUSION: Endoscopic SEMS placement increased the primary anastomosis rate in patients with left-sided large bowel obstruction.

Triage of colonoscopies: open access endoscopy versus outpatient consultation with a gastroenterologist.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: In many Dutch hospitals, open access referral for colonoscopy is authorized by a gastroenterologist after screening a standard referral letter (SRL) without face-to-face contact with the patient. We investigated the added value of a 7.5 min outpatient consultation with a gastroenterologist (OC), regarding the patient indications, priority for colonoscopy, and the frequency of correct information about patient medications and comorbidities on SRLs. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a prospective, blinded, single-center study, gastroenterologists assessed SRLs for the accuracy and priority of the colonoscopy request (SRL). These data were compared to results from the OC, and primary outcomes were the number of patients who were not recommended for colonoscopy and priority scheduling of colonoscopy for suspicion of cancer. RESULTS: Patients were analyzed using both SRL and OC and, of 255 patients, 224 of them underwent colonoscopy. Colonoscopy was not recommended for 6.3 % and 11.4 % of patients using the SRL and OC, respectively (P = 0.02). Using the SRL, gastroenterologists did not recommend colonoscopy for seven patients, but the same patients were recommended for colonoscopy when OC was available. This was explained because the indications on the SRL did not match the information obtained from OC. Compared to OC , more colonoscopies were prioritized when the SRL was used to make decisions. Cancer was detected in 7/112 (SRL ) versus 7/65 (OC ) of priority-scheduled patients. SRLs did not report the use of coumarins and insulin in 1.6 % of patients or the prevalence of serious comorbid conditions in 52 % of patients. CONCLUSIONS: A 7.5 min outpatient consultation with a gastroenterologist improved the identification of indications for colonoscopy, decreased priority scheduling of patients, and increased the number of patients diagnosed with cancer in the prioritized group. SRLs frequently omitted patients' medications and comorbidities.

Follow-up of premalignant lesions in patients at risk for progression to gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: A recent international guideline recommends surveillance of premalignant gastric lesions for patients at risk of progression to gastric cancer. The aim of this study was to identify the role of the distribution and severity of premalignant lesions in risk categorization. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with a previous diagnosis of atrophic gastritis, intestinal metaplasia, or low grade dysplasia were invited for surveillance endoscopy with non-targeted biopsy sampling. Biopsy specimens were evaluated by pathologists (four general and one expert) using the Sydney and the operative link for gastric intestinal metaplasia (OLGIM) systems, and scores were compared using kappa statistics. RESULTS: 140 patients were included. In 37 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 29 % - 45 %) the severity of premalignant lesions was less than at baseline, while 6 % (95 %CI 2 % - 10 %) showed progression to more severe lesions. Intestinal metaplasia in the corpus was most likely to progress to more than one location (57 %; 95 %CI 36 % - 76 %). The proportion of patients with multilocated premalignant lesions increased from 24 % at baseline to 31 % at surveillance (P = 0.014). Intestinal metaplasia was the premalignant lesion most frequently identified in subsequent endoscopies. Intestinal metaplasia regressed in 27 % compared with 44 % for atrophic gastritis and 100 % for low grade dysplasia. Interobserver agreement was excellent for intestinal metaplasia (k = 0.81), moderate for dysplasia (k = 0.42), and poor for atrophic gastritis (k < 0). CONCLUSIONS: Premalignant gastric lesions found in the corpus have the highest risk of progression, especially intestinal metaplasia, which has excellent interobserver agreement. This supports the importance of intestinal metaplasia as marker for follow-up in patients with premalignant gastric lesions.

Nurse endoscopists perform colonoscopies according to the international standard and with high patient satisfaction.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Colonoscopy is increasingly performed by nurse endoscopists. We aimed to assess the endoscopic quality and patient experience of these procedures. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective multicenter study analyzed 100 consecutive colonoscopies each for 10 trained nurse endoscopists with respect to endoscopic quality and patient experience. Colonoscopies were performed under the supervision of a gastroenterologist, using the techniques and protocols of the participating hospitals. Patient experience was assessed using a questionnaire. RESULTS: Most nurse endoscopists were female (90 %; median age 43 [range 35 - 49]). Before the start of the study, they had performed a median of 528 colonoscopies (range 208 - 2103). For the 1000 patients, mean age was 56 ± 15 years; 55 % were women; and 96 % were in class I or II according to the American Society of Anesthesiologists' physical status classification system. Colonoscopies were performed for screening or surveillance in 42 %; for symptomatic indications in 58 % of patients. The unassisted cecal intubation rate was 94 %; the mean withdrawal time was 10 ±â€Š5 minutes. The adenoma detection rate was 26.7 %. In 229 of the colonoscopies (23 %), the nurse endoscopists required assistance from the supervising gastroenterologist. The complication rate was 0.2 %: one perforation and one cardiopulmonary complication. The questionnaire was completed by 734 /1000 patients (73 %) and of these 694 /734 (95 %) were satisfied with the endoscopic procedure. Among the respondents 530 /734 (72 %) had no specific preference for a physician or nurse endoscopist, whereas 113 /734 (15 %) preferred a physician endoscopist, and 91 /734 (12 %) preferred a nurse endoscopist. CONCLUSION: The nurse endoscopists performed colonoscopies according to the internationally recognized quality standards and with high patient satisfaction.

Benchmarking patient experiences in colonoscopy using the Global Rating Scale.

INTRODUCTION: The Global Rating Scale (GRS) is a quality assurance program that was developed in England to assess patient-centered care in endoscopy. The aim of the current study was to evaluate patient experiences of colonoscopy using the GRS in order to compare different departments and to provide benchmarks. The study also evaluated factors associated with patient satisfaction. METHODS: A GRS questionnaire was used both before and after the procedure in outpatients undergoing colonoscopy. The questionnaire assessed the processes associated with the colonoscopy, from making the appointment up until discharge. Mean values and ranges of 12 endoscopy departments were calculated together with P values in order to assess heterogeneity. RESULTS: In total, 1904 pre-procedure and 1532 (80 %) post-procedure questionnaires were returned from 12 endoscopy departments. The mean time patients had to wait for their procedure was 4.3 weeks (range 3.1 - 5.8 weeks), and 54 % (range 35 - 64 %; P < 0.001) reported being given a choice of appointment dates/times. Discomfort during colonoscopy was reported by 20 % (range 8 - 40 %; P < 0.001). Recovery room privacy was satisfactory for 76 % of patients (range 66 - 90 %; P < 0.05). The majority of patients reported being sufficiently informed about what to do in case of problems after discharge (79 %, range 43 - 98 %; P < 0.001), and 85 % of individuals stated that they would be willing to repeat the colonoscopy procedure (range 72 - 92 %; P < 0.001). Factors associated with a decreased willingness to return were the burdensome bowel preparation (odds ratio [OR] = 0.25; P < 0.001), "rushing staff" attitude (OR = 0.57; P < 0.05), low acceptance of the procedure (OR = 0.42; P < 0.01), and more discomfort than expected (OR = 0.54; P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Overall patient experiences with colonoscopy were satisfactory, but they also showed considerable variation. This study shows that use of a GRS patient questionnaire is feasible in the Dutch endoscopy setting for the assessment of patient experience. The significant variability between endoscopy units can be used to benchmark services and enable shortcomings to be identified.

Low morbidity and mortality after stenting for malignant bowel obstruction.

BACKGROUND: The difference in mortality between emergency and elective surgery for malignant colonic obstruction is more than 5% in healthy patients below the age of 65 and increases with age to around 20%. Emergency surgery can be avoided by endoscopic placement of a self-expandable metal stent (SEMS). AIM: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of SEMS as 'bridge to surgery'. METHOD: Between January 2001 and July 2008, SEMS were placed for acute malignant colonic obstruction in 45 patients (median age 72 years, range 35-91). RESULTS: The procedure was technically successful in 43 patients (94%) with resolution of obstructive symptoms within 48 h in 87% of the patients. No perforations occurred during the procedure or while awaiting surgery. Two (4%) patients required a second endoscopic procedure. All patients underwent a single-stage surgical procedure. Postoperative mortality was 2.2% (n = 1). Histology showed advanced colorectal cancer (T3-4N1-2M0-1) in 75% of the patients. CONCLUSION: SEMS placement is a safe and effective procedure as bridge to surgery in patients presenting with colonic obstruction due to colorectal malignancy. This procedure carries a risk of serious complications well below that of the reported difference in mortality between emergency an elective surgery.

Predictors for neoplastic progression in patients with Barrett's Esophagus: a prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: Patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE) have an increased risk of developing esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). As the absolute risk remains low, there is a need for predictors of neoplastic progression to tailor more individualized surveillance programs. The aim of this study was to identify such predictors of progression to high-grade dysplasia (HGD) and EAC in patients with BE after 4 years of surveillance and to develop a prediction model based on these factors. METHODS: We included 713 patients with BE (≥ 2 cm) with no dysplasia (ND) or low-grade dysplasia (LGD) in a multicenter, prospective cohort study. Data on age, gender, body mass index (BMI), reflux symptoms, tobacco and alcohol use, medication use, upper gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy findings, and histology were prospectively collected. As part of this study, patients with ND underwent surveillance every 2 years, whereas those with LGD were followed on a yearly basis. Log linear regression analysis was performed to identify risk factors associated with the development of HGD or EAC during surveillance. RESULTS: After 4 years of follow-up, 26/713 (3.4%) patients developed HGD or EAC, with the remaining 687 patients remaining stable with ND or LGD. Multivariable analysis showed that a known duration of BE of ≥ 10 years (risk ratio (RR) 3.2; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.3-7.8), length of BE (RR 1.11 per cm increase in length; 95% CI 1.01-1.2), esophagitis (RR 3.5; 95% CI 1.3-9.5), and LGD (RR 9.7; 95% CI 4.4-21.5) were significant predictors of progression to HGD or EAC. In a prediction model, we found that the annual risk of developing HGD or EAC in BE varied between 0.3% and up to 40%. Patients with ND and no other risk factors had the lowest risk of developing HGD or EAC (<1%), whereas those with LGD and at least one other risk factor had the highest risk of neoplastic progression (18-40%). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with BE, the risk of developing HGD or EAC is predominantly determined by the presence of LGD, a known duration of BE of ≥10 years, longer length of BE, and presence of esophagitis. One or combinations of these risk factors are able to identify patients with a low or high risk of neoplastic progression and could therefore be used to individualize surveillance intervals in BE.