Cancer Biology or Ineffective Surveillance? A multicentre retrospective analysis of colitis-associated post-colonoscopy colorectal cancers.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is associated with high rates of post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer (PCCRC), but further in-depth qualitative analyses are required to determine whether they result from inadequate surveillance or aggressive IBD cancer evolution. METHODS: All IBD patients who had a colorectal cancer (CRC) diagnosed between January 2015 to July 2019 and a recent (<4 years) surveillance colonoscopy at one of four English hospital trusts underwent root cause analyses as recommended by the World Endoscopy Organisation to identify plausible PCCRC causative factors. RESULTS: 61% (n=22/36) of the included IBD CRCs were PCCRCs. They developed in patients with high cancer risk factors (77.8%; n=28/36) requiring annual surveillance, yet 57.1% (n=20/35) had inappropriately delayed surveillance. Most PCCRCs developed in situations where (i) an endoscopically unresectable lesion was detected (40.9%; n=9/22), (ii) there was a deviation from the planned management pathway (40.9%; n=9/22) e.g. service, clinician or patient-related delays in acting on a detected lesion, or (iii) lesions were potentially missed as they were typically located within areas of active inflammation or post-inflammatory change (36.4%; n=8/22). CONCLUSIONS: IBD PCCRC prevention will require more proactive strategies to reduce endoscopic inflammatory burden, improve lesion optical characterisation, adherence to recommended surveillance intervals and patient acceptance of prophylactic colectomy. However, the significant proportion appearing to originate from non-adenomatous-looking mucosa which fail to yield neoplasia on biopsy yet display aggressive cancer evolution highlight the limitations of current surveillance. Emerging molecular biomarkers may play a role in enhancing cancer risk stratification in future clinical practice.

Evaluation of bowel preparation regimens for colonoscopy including a novel low volume regimen (Plenvu): CLEANSE study.

BACKGROUND: Poor bowel preparation is the leading cause of failed colonoscopies and increases costs significantly. Several, split preparation, 2 day regimens are available and recently, Plenvu, a low-volume preparation which can be given on 1 day has been introduced. AIMS: Assess efficacy and tolerability of commonly used purgative regimens including Plenvu. METHOD: In this service evaluation, patients undergoing screening colonoscopy at St Mark's Hospital, London (February 2020-December 2021) were provided Plenvu (1 or 2 days), Moviprep (2 days) or Senna & Citramag (2 days).Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) score, fluid volumes and procedure times were recorded. A patient experience questionnaire evaluated taste, volume acceptability, completion and side effects. RESULTS: 563 patients were invited to participate and 553 included: 218 Moviprep 2 days, 108 Senna & Citramag 2 days, 152 Plenvu 2 days and 75 Plenvu 1 day.BBPS scores were higher with Plenvu 1 and 2 days vs Senna & Citramag (p=0.003 and 0.002, respectively) and vs Moviprep (p=0.003 and 0.001, respectively). No other significant pairwise BBPS differences and no difference in preparation adequacy was seen between the groups.Patients rated taste as most pleasant with Senna & Citramag and this achieved significance versus Plenvu 1 day and 2 days (p=0.002 and p<0.001, respectively) and versus Moviprep (p=0.04). CONCLUSION: BBPS score was higher for 1 day and 2 days Plenvu versus both Senna & Citramag and Moviprep. Taste was not highly rated for Plenvu but it appears to offer effective cleansing even when given as a same day preparation.

Economic impact of implementing optical diagnosis with a "resect and discard" strategy within the English Bowel Cancer Screening Programme: findings from the DISCARD3 study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Advances in endoscopic technology, such as narrow-band imaging and high-definition colonoscopes, offer the potential for optical diagnosis (OD) with a "resect and discard" (RD) strategy for diminutive (≤5 mm) and small (6-9 mm) colorectal polyps. This could help alleviate the huge cost and time burden required for histopathology. The aim of this study was to conduct an economic analysis of an RD strategy within the English Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP). METHODS: A decision tree was designed to compare an RD strategy with standard histopathology for patients included in the DISCARD3 study (Detect InSpect ChAracterise Resect and Discard 3) and was extrapolated to a national BCSP patient cohort. RESULTS: Of the 525 patients in the DISCARD3 study, 354 were assessed for surveillance intervals (after excluding cases with colorectal cancer and at least 1 polyp >10 mm). Of 354 patients, 269 had polyps, of which 182 had only diminutive polyps, 77 had both small and diminutive polyps, and 10 had only small polyps. Surveillance interval concordance was 97.9% in patients with at least 1 diminutive polyp and 98.7% in patients with at least 1 diminutive or small polyp. In DISCARD3, an RD approach was found to reduce overall direct healthcare costs by $44,285.63 (-72.3%) for patients with diminutive polyps or by $66,129.13 (-75.0%) for patients with diminutive or small polyps. When extrapolated to the entire English BCSP, the annual savings were almost $3 million for patients with diminutive polyps or $4.3 million for patients with diminutive or small polyps, after adjusting for the costs of an OD quality assurance process. CONCLUSIONS: OD with an RD strategy for diminutive and small polyps during BCSP colonoscopy would offer substantial cost savings without adversely affecting surveillance interval concordance.

NBI International Colorectal Endoscopic-derived high-confidence optical diagnosis of small polyps compared with histology: understanding errors to improve diagnostic accuracy.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Developments in image-enhancing endoscopy and polyp classification systems have led to a number of gastroenterology societies endorsing an optical diagnosis (OD) approach for small polyps at colonoscopy. In this study we performed a root-cause analysis of ODs to determine the most likely causes of OD error. METHODS: As part of a prospective feasibility study, DISCARD3 (Detect InSpect ChAracterise Resect and Discard 3), evaluating implementation and quality assurance of a "resect and discard" strategy for consecutive small polyps <10 mm, a root-cause analysis of 184 cases of high-confidence OD error was performed. In all cases, histopathology underwent a second blinded review and, where discrepancy persisted, further review with deeper levels. RESULTS: After a root-cause analysis, 133 of 184 true OD errors were identified and classified into 4 types: A (OD, adenoma; histology, serrated), 45/133 (33.8%); B (OD, serrated; histology, adenoma), 55/133 (41.4%); C (OD, adenoma; histology, normal), 19/133 (14.3%); and D (OD, serrated; histology, normal), 14/133 (10.5%). The remaining 51 of 184 errors were because of a pathology error requiring deeper levels (43/184), pathology observer or laboratory error (7/184), or other error (1/184). CONCLUSIONS: OD errors can be related to endoscopist-related factors such as poor photodocumentation, failures of current classification systems, and incomplete histology. We identified a subset of serrated polyps frequently misdiagnosed as adenomas ("pseudoadenomas") using the NBI International Colorectal Endoscopic (NICE) classification. An enhanced algorithm for OD is proposed based on the NICE classification including morphologic and adjunct polyp features.

Evaluation of a real-time computer-aided polyp detection system during screening colonoscopy: AI-DETECT study.

BACKGROUND: Polyp detection and resection during colonoscopy significantly reduce long-term colorectal cancer risk. Computer-aided detection (CADe) may increase polyp identification but has undergone limited clinical evaluation. Our aim was to assess the effectiveness of CADe at colonoscopy within a bowel cancer screening program (BCSP). METHODS: This prospective, randomized controlled trial involved all eight screening-accredited colonoscopists at an English National Health Service (NHS) BCSP center (February 2020 to December 2021). Patients were randomized to CADe or standard colonoscopy. Patients meeting NHS criteria for bowel cancer screening were included. The primary outcome of interest was polyp detection rate (PDR). RESULTS: 658 patients were invited and 44 were excluded. A total of 614 patients were randomized to CADe (n = 308) or standard colonoscopy (n = 306); 35 cases were excluded from the per-protocol analysis due to poor bowel preparation (n = 10), an incomplete procedure (n = 24), or a data issue (n = 1). Endocuff Vision was frequently used and evenly distributed (71.7 % CADe and 69.2 % standard). On intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis, there was a borderline significant difference in PDR (85.7 % vs. 79.7 %; P = 0.05) but no significant difference in adenoma detection rate (ADR; 71.4 % vs. 65.0 %; P = 0.09) for CADe vs. standard groups, respectively. On per-protocol analysis, no significant difference was observed in these rates. There was no significant difference in procedure times. CONCLUSIONS: In high-performing colonoscopists in a BCSP who routinely used Endocuff Vision, CADe improved PDR but not ADR. CADe appeared to have limited benefit in a BCSP setting where procedures are performed by experienced colonoscopists.

Validation of post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer (PCCRC) cases reported at national level following local root cause analysis: REFLECT study.

Objective: Our aim was to determine aetiology of post-colonoscopy colorectal cancers (PCCRCs) identified from population-based data through local root cause analysis at a high-volume mixed secondary and tertiary referral centre. Design/method: A subset of national cancer registration data, collected by the National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, was used to determine PCCRCs diagnosed between 2005 and 2013 at our centre.Root cause analysis was performed for each identified PCCRC, using World Endoscopy Organisation recommendations, to validate it and assess most plausible explanation. We also assessed whether patient, clinician and/or service factors were primarily responsible. Results: Of 107 'PCCRC' cases provided from the national dataset, 20 were excluded (16 missing data, 4 duplicates). 87 'PCCRC' cases were included of which 58 were true PCCRCs and 29 false PCCRCs.False PCCRCs comprised 17 detected cancers (cancer diagnosed within 6 months of negative colonoscopy) and 12 cases did not meet PCCRC criteria. Inflammatory bowel disease was the most common risk factor (18/58) and the most common site was rectum (19/58). The most common explanation was 'possible missed lesion, prior examination negative but inadequate' (23/58) and clinician factors were primarily responsible for PCCRC occurrence in most cases (37/58). Conclusion: Our single-centre study shows, after local analysis, there was misclassification of PCCRCs identified from a population-based registry. The degree of such error will vary between registries. Most PCCRCs occurred in cases of sub-optimal examination as indicated by poor photodocumentation. Effective mechanisms to feedback root cause analyses are critical for quality improvement.

Implementation of optical diagnosis with a "resect and discard" strategy in clinical practice: DISCARD3 study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Optical diagnosis (OD) of polyps can be performed with advanced endoscopic imaging. For high-confidence diagnoses, a "resect and discard" strategy could offer significant histopathology time and cost savings. The implementation threshold is a ≥90% OD-histology surveillance interval concordance. Here we assessed the OD learning curve and feasibility of a resect and discard strategy for ≤5-mm and <10-mm polyps in a bowel cancer screening setting. METHODS: In this prospective feasibility study, 8 bowel cancer screening endoscopists completed a validated OD training module and performed procedures. All <10-mm consecutive polyps had white-light and narrow-band images taken and were given high- or low-confidence diagnoses until 120 high-confidence ≤5-mm polyp diagnoses had been performed. All polyps had standard histology. High-confidence OD errors underwent root-cause analysis. Histology and OD-derived surveillance intervals were calculated. RESULTS: Of 565 invited patients, 525 patients were included. A total of 1560 <10-mm polyps underwent OD and were resected and retrieved (1329 ≤5 mm and 231 6-9 mm). There were no <10-mm polyp cancers. High-confidence OD was accurate in 81.5% of ≤5-mm and 92.8% of 6-9-mm polyps. Sensitivity for OD of a ≤5-mm adenoma was 93.0% with a positive predictive value of 90.8%. OD-histology surveillance interval concordance for ≤5-mm OD was 91.3% (209/229) for U.S. Multi-Society Task Force, 98.3% (225/229) for European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, and 98.7% (226/229) for British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A resect and discard strategy for high-confidence ≤5-mm polyp OD in a group of bowel cancer screening colonoscopists is feasible and safe, with performance exceeding the 90% surveillance interval concordance required for implementation in clinical practice. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT04710693.).

Changing nationwide trends in endoscopic, medical and surgical admissions for inflammatory bowel disease: 2003-2013.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: In the last decade, there have been major advances in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) management but their impact on hospital admissions requires evaluation. We aim to investigate nationwide trends in IBD surgical/medical elective and emergency admissions, including endoscopy and cytokine inhibitor infusions, between 2003 and 2013. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We used Hospital Episode Statistics and population data from the UK Office for National Statistics. RESULTS: Age-sex standardised admission rates increased from 76.5 to 202.9/100 000 (p<0.001) and from 69.5 to 149.5/100 000 (p<0.001) for Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) between 2003-2004 and 2012-2013, respectively. Mean length of stay (days) fell significantly for elective (from 2.6 to 0.7 and from 2.0 to 0.7 for CD and UC, respectively) and emergency admissions (from 9.2 to 6.8 and from 10.8 to 7.6 for CD and UC, respectively). Elective lower gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy rates decreased from 6.3% to 3.7% (p<0.001) and from 18.4% to 17.6% (p=0.002) for CD and UC, respectively. Elective major abdominal surgery rates decreased from 2.8% to 1.0% (p<0.001) and from 4.9 to 2.4 (p=0.010) for CD and UC, respectively, with emergency rates also decreasing significantly for CD. Between 2006-2007 and 2012-2013, elective admission rates for cytokine-inhibitor infusions increased from 11.1 to 57.2/100 000 and from 1.4 to 12.1/100 000 for CD and UC, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Rising IBD hospital admission rates in the past decade have been driven by an increase in the incidence and prevalence of IBD. Lower GI endoscopy and surgery rates have fallen, while cytokine inhibitor infusion rates have risen. There has been a concurrent shift from emergency care to shorter elective hospital stays. These trends indicate a move towards more elective medical management and may reflect improvements in disease control.

Eligibility for bariatric surgery among adults in England: analysis of a national cross-sectional survey.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine the number eligible for bariatric surgery and their sociodemographic characteristics. DESIGN: We used Health Survey for England 2006 data, representative of the non-institutionalized English population. SETTING: The number of people eligible for bariatric surgery in England based on national guidance is unknown. The UK National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence criteria for eligibility are those with body mass index (BMI) 35-40 kg/m(2) with at least one comorbidity potentially improved by losing weight or a BMI > 40 kg/m(2). PARTICIPANTS: Of 13,742 adult respondents (≥18 years), we excluded participants with invalid BMI (n = 2103), comorbidities (n = 2187) or sociodemographic variables (n = 27) data, for a final study sample of 9425 participants. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The comorbidities examined were hypertension, type 2 diabetes, stroke, coronary heart disease and osteoarthritis. Sociodemographic variables assessed included age, sex, employment status, highest educational qualification, social class and smoking status. RESULTS: 5.4% (95% CI 5.0-5.9) of the non-institutionalized adult population in England could meet criteria for having bariatric surgery after accounting for survey weights. Those eligible were more likely than the general population to be women (60.1% vs. 39.9%, p<0.01), retired (22.4% vs. 12.8% p<0.01), and have no formal educational qualifications (35.7% vs. 21.3%, p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The number of adults potentially eligible for bariatric surgery in England (2,147,683 people based on these results and 2006 population estimates) far exceeds previous estimates of eligibility. In view of the sociodemographic characteristics of this group, careful resource allocation is required to ensure equitable access on the basis of need.

Republished: instigating change: trainee doctors' perspective.

In the 21st century, the core skills of trainee doctors are evolving as clinicians, leaders and innovators. Leadership skills are an essential tool for all doctors and need to be an integral part of their training and learning as set out in the General Medical Council's Good Medical Practice. It is essential to develop these skills at an early stage and continually improve them. A group of junior doctors participated in a pilot programme for leadership with the aim of executing a quality improvement (QI) project. This article describes our experiences of both the course itself and the project undertaken by our group. As part of the process of implementing change, we faced a number of challenges which contributed to our learning. These have been explored as well as potential ways to overcome them to enable the swift and smooth development of future QI projects. Using an example of a QI project looking at handover, this article demonstrates how a trainee doctor can implement their project for both professional and institutional improvement.

Instigating change: trainee doctors' perspective.

In the 21st century, the core skills of trainee doctors are evolving as clinicians, leaders and innovators. Leadership skills are an essential tool for all doctors and need to be an integral part of their training and learning as set out in the General Medical Council's Good Medical Practice. It is essential to develop these skills at an early stage and continually improve them. A group of junior doctors participated in a pilot programme for leadership with the aim of executing a quality improvement (QI) project. This article describes our experiences of both the course itself and the project undertaken by our group. As part of the process of implementing change, we faced a number of challenges which contributed to our learning. These have been explored as well as potential ways to overcome them to enable the swift and smooth development of future QI projects. Using an example of a QI project looking at handover, this article demonstrates how a trainee doctor can implement their project for both professional and institutional improvement.