Endoscopic management of failed colonoscopy in clinical practice: to change endoscopist, instrument, or both?

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Caecal intubation fails up to 20% of colonoscopy in clinical practice. We aimed to assess whether (1) in patients with a prior incomplete colonoscopy with a standard adult colonoscope, a subsequent caecal intubation may be achieved with the same instrument; (2) there are factors predicting a repeated unsuccessful colonoscopy; and (3) how frequently completion can be further achieved by shifting to a standard gastroscope. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data of patients with a previously failed bowel examination referred to our community hospital for a further colonoscopy were reviewed. When caecal intubation still failed with standard colonoscope, complete colonoscopy was usually attempted by shifting to a gastroscope. RESULTS: Overall, 451 patients with a prior colonoscopy were considered. By using a standard colonoscope, caecal intubation rate was achieved in 285 out of 296 patients with prior complete examination and in 121 out of 155 patients with a prior failed colonoscopy (96.3% vs. 78.1%, p < .001). Caecum visualization was significantly lower when prior colonoscopy was stopped in the sigmoid tract as compared to any other proximal tract (65.1% vs. 86.9%, p < .001). After a second failed examination, colonoscopy was completed in 15 (51.7%) out of 29 cases by shifting to a standard gastroscope. No procedure-related complications were observed in the study. CONCLUSIONS: After incomplete colonoscopy with a standard adult colonoscope, a further colonoscopy may be completed with same standard colonoscope or by using a gastroscope in the same session. A prior failed colonoscopy, particularly when stopped in the sigmoid tract, is significantly associated with a lower caecal intubation rate at second colonoscopy.

Detection of colonic polyps according to insertion/withdrawal phases of colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Issues on colonoscopy quality are crucial to reduce the advanced neoplasia miss rate of colonoscopy. Recently, a >6-min withdrawal time has been recommended. However, the relative prevalence of polyp detected during insertion and withdrawal phases of colonoscopy is unknown. Therefore, we designed this prospective, endoscopic study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three hundred and sixty-eight patients with 396 adenomas were selected from a consecutive colonoscopic series of 1,205 cases. Detection rates of adenomas, advanced adenomas, and cancer according to withdrawal and insertion phases of colonoscopy, also subgrouping polyps for size and location, were compared. RESULTS: Thirty-two (74%) advanced adenomas and 21 (95%) cancers were detected during the insertion, being only 11 (26%) and one (5%) identified during withdrawal, respectively. This was mainly due to a higher detection of >10 mm polyps during insertion than during withdrawal (75% versus 25%). CONCLUSIONS: Most advanced neoplasia are detected during the insertion. Although withdrawal time has been shown to be important, the scope insertion phase related to polyp detection should be specifically addressed.

Diverticulosis and colorectal cancer: between lights and shadows.

The prevalence of diverticulosis and colorectal cancer (CRC) is markedly increased in the last century. Both diseases are highly frequent in Western countries and in aged people. Western diet--low in fiber and rich in dietary fat--has been largely regarded to play a major role in the pathogenesis of both conditions. A causal relationship between diverticulosis and CRC has been suggested in different studies. Epidemiologic series found a more frequent rectosigmoid localization of neoplastic lesions (advanced adenoma and CRC) in patients with diverticulosis as compared with controls, particularly in those with a previous diverticulitis episode or with an extensive disease. However, data are still controversial, with other studies failing to confirm this observation. Such discrepancy could be referred to the highly heterogeneous study design and setting in the different epidemiologic series. Pathologic studies showed that either macroscopic and microscopic chronic inflammation--which is regarded as risk factor for CRC development--is present in the colonic mucosa of some patients with diverticula. Moreover, alterations in the extracellular matrix, also involved in colorectal carcinogenesis, have been depicted in diverticulosis. In addition, an upward shifting of cell proliferation occurs in diverticular mucosa, and in nondiverticular patients with advanced adenomas. Finally, aberrant crypt foci--which are considered potential markers of CRC risk in ulcerative colitis--have been detected in colonic mucosa of patients with diverticulosis. Despite this substantial amount of evidence, however, the available data are not yet strong enough to suggest a more aggressive CRC prevention in diverticular as compared with nondiverticular subjects.

Bleeding peptic ulcer in the elderly: risk factors and prevention strategies.

Peptic ulcer bleeding is a frequent and dramatic event with both a high mortality rate and a substantial cost for healthcare systems worldwide. It has been found that age is an independent predisposing factor for gastrointestinal bleeding, with the risk increasing significantly in individuals aged>65 years and increasing further in those aged>75 years. Indeed, bleeding incidence and mortality are distinctly higher in elderly patients, especially in those with co-morbidities. NSAID therapy and Helicobacter pylori infection are the most prevalent aetiopathogenetic factors involved in peptic ulcer bleeding. The risk of bleeding seems to be higher for NSAID- than for H. pylori-related ulcers, most likely because the antiplatelet action of NSAIDs impairs the clotting process. NSAID users may be classified as low or high risk, according to the absence or presence of one or more of the following factors associated with an increased risk of bleeding: co-morbidities; corticosteroid or anticoagulant co-therapy; previous dyspepsia, peptic ulcer or ulcer bleeding; and alcohol consumption. Different types of NSAIDs have been associated with different bleeding risk, but no anti-inflammatory drug, including selective cyclo-oxygenase (COX)-2 inhibitors, is completely safe for the stomach. Furthermore, even low-dose aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid) [<325 mg/day] and a standard dose of non-aspirin antiplatelet treatment (clopidogrel or ticlopidine) have been found to cause bleeding and mortality. No clear risk factor favouring H. pylori-related ulcer bleeding has been identified. Peptic ulcer bleeding prevention remains a challenge for the physician, but data are now available on use of a safer and cheaper strategy for both low- and high-risk patients. Unfortunately, despite the fact that several society and national guidelines have been formulated, these are poorly followed in clinical practice. Proton pump inhibitor (PPI) or misoprostol therapy and H. pylori eradication in NSAID-naive patients are the most commonly proposed strategies. Selective COX-2 inhibitor therapy in high-risk patients has also been suggested, but concerns over the possible cardiovascular adverse effects of some of these agents should be taken into account. Moreover, switching to selective COX-2 inhibitors in patients with previous bleeding is not completely risk free, and concomitant PPI therapy is also needed. H. pylori eradication is mandatory in all patients with peptic ulcer, and such an approach has been found to be significantly superior to PPI maintenance therapy. H. pylori eradication is frequently achieved with sequential therapy in elderly patients with peptic ulcer. In conclusion, upper gastrointestinal bleeding is a dramatic event with a high mortality rate, particularly in the elderly. Some effective preventative strategies are now available that should be implemented in clinical practice.