Differences in the diagnostic yield of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in dyspeptic patients receiving proton-pump inhibitors and H2-receptor antagonists.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Patients attending for diagnostic oesophagogastroduodenoscopy (OGD) for dyspeptic symptoms are often receiving acid-suppression therapy that has not been discontinued prior to endoscopy, and this may reduce the diagnostic yield of endoscopy. The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic yield of OGD in uncomplicated dyspepsia in patients receiving no medication, those receiving acid-suppression therapy, and those receiving nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) at the time of endoscopy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 6825 diagnostic OGDs performed in our unit between 1993 and 2001 were analysed. Patients were excluded if they had sinister symptoms, were receiving NSAIDs, or were undergoing repeat or surveillance endoscopy. RESULTS: A total of 4233 OGDs (62 %) fulfilled the criteria for uncomplicated dyspepsia. Of the patients examined in these procedures, 1367 (32 %) were receiving acid-suppression therapy. A total of 724 patients (53 % of those on therapy) were receiving proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs), 393 of whom (54 %) had positive endoscopic findings (oesophagitis 31 %, gastritis 16 %, duodenal ulcer/duodenitis 16 %). A total of 643 (47 % of the patients on therapy) were receiving H 2 -receptor antagonists, 443 of whom (69 % of this group) had positive endoscopic findings (oesophagitis 30 %, gastritis 21 %, duodenal ulcer/duodenitis 31 %). A total of 2866 patients were not receiving acid-suppression therapy, 1805 of whom (63 %) had endoscopic findings (oesophagitis 37 %, gastritis 14 %, duodenal ulcer/duodenitis 24 %). The endoscopic yield was significantly lowest in the PPI group, except for the diagnosis of oesophagitis. Overall, 17 carcinomas were detected in patients referred with simple dyspepsia, and in five of these cases the patients were receiving acid suppression. CONCLUSIONS: The widespread use of acid suppression in the treatment of simple dyspepsia prior to endoscopy leads to a reduction in the endoscopic recognition of mucosal lesions caused by acid-peptic disease, but not to a high healing rate for these lesions, and it may mask malignancy.

Successful colonoscopy; completion rates and reasons for incompletion.

Factors such as poor bowel preparation or obstructing colonic disease may confound the reporting of colonoscopy completion rates, as these factors are outside of the control of the endoscopist performing the procedure. By adjusting for these factors when calculating a colonoscopy completion rate, it may be possible to make a more accurate assessment of a unit's or individuals' competence. Details of two thousand two hundred and sixteen colonoscopies performed by four consultants and their trainees between 1993-2000 were analysed retrospectively from a prospective endoscopy database. Crude (all cases) and adjusted (excluding poor bowel preparation and disease as causes of incompletion) rates were recorded for each sex, and by age according to cause. Overall crude and adjusted completion rates were 77.9% and 85.0% respectively. There was a significant difference between male and female completion rates due to a difference in the incidence of excess looping and intolerance of the procedure (adjusted rate 88.9% in males vs. 81.6% in females, p<0.05). There was a non-significant trend to lower completion rates in patients over 75 years of age compared to younger patients. Completion rates were significantly higher following bowel resection (adjusted rates 93.5% vs. 82.8%, p<0.05). There was no significant difference between completion rates for inpatient and outpatient referrals (P=0.36). Reporting colonoscopy completion rates by adjusting for factors such as poor bowel preparation and obstructing colonic disease allows for direct comparisons of completion rates reported by different units. Reporting completion rates in this way also highlights the effect of inadequate bowel preparation on successful colonoscopy.

Does prophylactic endoscopic sphincterotomy prevent recurrent biliary problems in patients with gallstones and a normal cholangiogram?

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) is indicated in patients with confirmed bile duct stones at endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The role of ES in patients with suspected bile duct stones but a normal cholangiogram, in the prevention of recurrent biliary symptoms, when cholecystectomy is not planned, is unclear. AIM: To determine if prophylactic ES prevents further biliary problems in such patients. METHODS: Patients were identified with gallbladder stones presenting with jaundice, abnormal liver function tests (LFTs) or dilated bile ducts on ultrasound, in whom cholecystectomy was not planned and who had a normal cholangiogram at ERCP. Patients were followed-up to determine the frequency of recurrent biliary problems or repeat investigations. RESULTS: Forty-one patients were included, of whom 20 had an ES. The frequency of pre-ERCP features did not differ between the two groups. Median follow-up was 32 months (range 15-66). Post-ERCP recurrent abdominal pain (5 vs 3; p=0.39), jaundice (3 vs 1; p=0.28), pancreatitis (0 vs 1; p=0.32), and repeat ultrasound (2 vs 1; p=0.52), ERCP (1 vs 1; p=0.97) or cholecystectomy (2 vs 3, p=0.82) did not differ between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with gallstones, suspected common bile duct (CBD) stones and a normal cholangiogram need not have a prophylactic sphincterotomy since there is no reduction in recurrent biliary problems and this potentially increases the morbidity.