Oliver Takach

Effect of longer battery life on small bowel capsule endoscopy

AIM To determine if longer battery life improves capsule endoscopy (CE) completion rates. METHODS A retrospective study was performed at a tertiary, university-affiliated hospital in Vancouver, Canada. Patients who underwent CE with either PillCam™ SB2 or SB2U between 01/2010 and 12/2013 were considered for inclusion. SB2 and SB2U share identical physical dimensions but differ in their battery lives (8 h vs 12 h). Exclusion criteria included history of gastric or small bowel surgery, endoscopic placement of CE, interrupted view of major landmarks due to technical difficulty or significant amount of debris, and repeat CE using same system. Basic demographics, comorbidities, medications, baseline bowel habits, and previous surgeries were reviewed. Timing of major landmarks in CE were recorded, and used to calculate gastric transit time, small bowel transit time, and total recording time. A complete CE study was defined as visualization of cecum. Transit times and completion rates were compared. RESULTS Four hundred and eight patients, including 208 (51.0%) males, were included for analysis. The mean age was 55.5 ± 19.3 years. The most common indication for CE was gastrointestinal bleeding (n = 254, 62.3%), followed by inflammatory bowel disease (n = 86, 21.1%). There was no difference in gastric transit times (group difference 0.90, 95%CI: 0.72-1.13, P = 0.352) and small bowel transit times (group difference 1.07, 95%CI: 0.95-1.19, P = 0.261) between SB2U and SB2, but total recording time was about 14% longer in the SB2U group (95%CI: 10%-18%, P < 0.001) and there was a corresponding trend toward higher completion rate (88.2% vs 93.2%, OR = 1.78, 95%CI 0.88-3.63, P = 0.111). There was no statistically significant difference in the rates of positive findings (OR = 0.98, 95%CI: 0.64-1.51, P = 0.918). CONCLUSION Extending the operating time of CE may be a simple method to improve completion rate although it does not affect the rate of positive findings.

Time to Endoscopy in Patients with Colorectal Cancer: Analysis of Wait-Times

Objective. The Canadian Association of Gastroenterology Wait Time Consensus Group recommends that patients with symptoms associated with colorectal cancer (CRC) should have an endoscopic examination within 2 months. However, in a recent survey of Canadian gastroenterologists, wait-times for endoscopy were considerably longer than the current guidelines recommend. The purpose of this study was to evaluate wait-times for colonoscopy in patients who were subsequently found to have CRC through the Division of Gastroenterology at St. Pauls Hospital (SPH). Methods. This study was a retrospective chart review of outpatients seen for consultation and endoscopy ultimately diagnosed with CRC. Subjects were identified through the SPH pathology database for the inclusion period 2010 through 2013. Data collected included wait-times, subject characteristics, cancer characteristics, and outcomes. Results. 246 subjects met inclusion criteria for this study. The mean wait-time from primary care referral to first office visit was 63 days; the mean wait-time to first endoscopy was 94 days. Patients with symptoms waited a mean of 86 days to first endoscopy, considerably longer than the national recommended guideline of 60 days. There was no apparent effect of length of wait-time on node positivity or presence of distant metastases at the time of diagnosis. Conclusion. Wait-times for outpatient consultation and endoscopic evaluation at the St. Pauls Hospital Division of Gastroenterology exceed current guidelines.

Identification of factors associated with sedation tolerance in 5000 patients undergoing outpatient colonoscopy: Canadian tertiary center experience

AIM To develop a prediction model aimed at identifying patients that may require higher than usual sedation doses during colonoscopy. METHODS A retrospective chart review on 5000 patients who underwent an outpatient colonoscopy at St. Paul’s Hospital from 2009 to 2010 was conducted in order to develop a model for identifying patients who will require increased doses of sedatives. Potential predictor variables including age, gender, endoscopy indication, high sedation requirements during previous endoscopies, difficulty of the procedure, bowel preparation quality, interventions, findings as well as current use of benzodiazepines, opioids and alcohol were analyzed. The outcome of study was the use of high dose of sedation agents for the procedure. In particular, the high dose of sedation was defined as fentanyl greater than 50 mcg and midazolam greater than 3 mg. RESULTS Analysis of 5282 patients (mean age 57 ± 12, 49% female) was performed. Most common indication for the procedure was screening colonoscopy (57%). Almost half of our patients received doses exceeding Fentanyl 50 mcg and Midazolam 3 mg. Logistic regression models identified the following variables associated with high sedation: Younger age (OR = 0.95 95%CI: 0.94-0.95; P < 0.0001); abdominal pain (OR = 1.45, 95%CI: 1.08-1.96); P = 0.01) and Inflammatory Bowel Disease (OR = 1.45, 95%CI: 1.04-2.03; P = 0.02) as indications for the procedure; difficult procedure as defined by gastroenterologist (OR = 1.73, 95%CI: 1.48-2.03; P < 0.0001); past history of abdominal surgery (OR = 1.33, 95%CI: 1.17-1.52; P <0.0001) and previous colonoscopy (OR = 1.39, 95%CI: 1.21-1.60; P = 0.0001) and alcohol use (OR = 1.26, 95%CI: 1.03-1.54; P = 0.02). Age and gender adjusted analysis yielded inflammatory bowel disease as an indication (OR = 3.17, 95%CI: 1.58-6.37; P = 0.002); difficult procedure as defined by an endoscopist (OR = 5.13 95%CI: 2.97-8.85; P = 0.0001) and current use of opioids, benzodiazepines or antidepressants (OR = 2.88, 95%CI: 1.74-4.77; P = 0.001) having the highest predictive value of high sedation requirements. Our prediction model using the following pre-procedural variables including age, gender, indication for the procedure, medication/substance use, previous surgeries, previous high sedation requirements for colonoscopy yielded an area under the curve of 0.76 for Fentanyl ≥ 100 mcg and Midazolam ≥ 3 mg. CONCLUSION Pre-procedural planning is the key in conducting successful, efficient colonoscopy. Logistic regression analysis of 5000 patients who underwent out-patient colonoscopy revealed the following factors associated with increased sedation requirement: Younger age, female gender, difficult endoscopy, specific indications as well as cardiopulmonary complications and current use of opioids/benzodiazepines. Age and gender adjusted analysis yielded similar results. These patients are more likely to need a longer recovery periods post-endoscopy, which could result in additional time and personnel requirements. The final predictive model has good predictive ability for Fentanyl ≥ 100 mcg and Midazolam ≥ 3 mg and fair predictive ability for Fentanyl ≥ 50 mcg and Midazolam ≥ 2 mg. The external validity of this model is planned to be tested in another center.

Diagnosis and Management of Barrett’s Esophagus: A Retrospective Study Comparing the Endoscopic Assessment of Early Esophageal Lesions in the Community versus a Specialized Center

Specialized endoscopic evaluation for patients with Barretts esophagus (BE) is well supported; however, no studies have shown that centers with expertise provide better quality care for BE with high-grade dysplasia or early adenocarcinoma. In this study, the investigators aimed to evaluate the management and clinical course for patients treated in a community practice versus a specialized BE center. Methods. A retrospective analysis of referrals from the community to our specialized center for evaluation of BE at St Pauls Hospital Division of Gastroenterology between January 2007 and February 2014 was performed. Subjects were patients who were referred for BE and dysplasia and subsequently reevaluated by endoscopy. The pathology and endoscopy reports from the community and our center were reviewed. Inclusion criteria were as follows: being ≥ 19 years old and pathologic diagnosis of BE or dysplasia in the community. Exclusion criteria were as follows: incomplete pathology data or incomplete endoscopy reports from the community physicians. Results. A total of 77 patients were reviewed. The staging of 28.9% of patients referred from the community was changed from the initial pathological diagnosis. 18.4% of these patients were upstaged. Using Fischers exact test, we showed that, in our specialized center, endoscopic impressions correlated significantly with pathology results (p < 0.0001).

FOCUS: Future of fecal calprotectin utility study in inflammatory bowel disease

AIM To evaluate the perspective of gastroenterologists regarding the impact of fecal calprotectin (FC) on the management of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). METHODS Patients with known IBD or symptoms suggestive of IBD for whom the physician identified that FC would be clinically useful were recruited. Physicians completed an online “pre survey” outlining their rationale for the test. After receipt of the test results, the physicians completed an online “post survey” to portray their perceived impact of the test result on patient management. Clinical outcomes for a subset of patients with follow-up data available beyond the completion of the “post survey” were collected and analyzed. RESULTS Of 373 test kits distributed, 290 were returned, resulting in 279 fully completed surveys. One hundred and ninety patients were known to have IBD; 147 (77%) with Crohn’s Disease, 43 (21%) Ulcerative Colitis and 5 (2%) IBD unclassified. Indications for FC testing included: 90 (32.2%) to differentiate a new diagnosis of IBD from Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS), 85 (30.5%) to distinguish symptoms of IBS from IBD in those known to have IBD and 104 (37.2%) as an objective measure of inflammation. FC levels resulted in a change in management 51.3% (143/279) of the time which included a significant reduction in the number of colonoscopies (118) performed (P < 0.001). Overall, 97.5% (272/279) of the time, the physicians found the test sufficiently useful that they would order it again in similar situations. Follow-up data was available for 172 patients with further support for the clinical utility of FC provided. CONCLUSION The FC test effected a change in management 51.3% of the time and receipt of the result was associated with a reduction in the number of colonoscopies performed.