Asia-Pacific survey on green endoscopy.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Greenhouse gas emissions are the fundamental cause of global warming, with CO2 being the most contributive. Carbon reduction has been widely advocated to mitigate the climate crisis. The endoscopy unit is the third highest waste-generating department in a hospital. The awareness and acceptance of the practice of green endoscopy among healthcare workers is unclear. METHOD: An online survey was conducted over a 5-week period from July to August 2023 in the Asia-Pacific region, which targeted endoscopists, nurses, and other healthcare professionals of the endoscopy unit. The primary outcome was the agreement to adopt green endoscopy. The secondary outcomes included views on sustainable practices, factors associated with increased acceptance of green endoscopy, the acceptance of different carbon reduction measures, and the perceived barriers to implementation. RESULTS: A total of 259 valid responses were received. Overall, 79.5% of participants agreed to incorporate green endoscopy into their practice. Nevertheless, existing green policies were only reported by 12.7% of respondents. The level of understanding of green endoscopy is the only significant factor associated with its acceptance (odds ratio 3.10, P < 0.007). Potential barriers to implementation include healthcare cost increment, infection risk, inadequate awareness, and lack of policy and industrial support. CONCLUSION: Green endoscopy is well accepted among healthcare workers but not widely implemented. The level of understanding is highly associated with its acceptance, highlighting the importance of education. A reliable assessment tool is needed to quantify the environmental impact of endoscopy. Further studies are needed to ascertain its benefit and cost effectiveness.

Effect of Real-Time Computer-Aided Polyp Detection System (ENDO-AID) on Adenoma Detection in Endoscopists-in-Training: A Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: The effect of computer-aided polyp detection (CADe) on adenoma detection rate (ADR) among endoscopists-in-training remains unknown. METHODS: We performed a single-blind, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial in Hong Kong between April 2021 and July 2022 (NCT04838951). Eligible subjects undergoing screening/surveillance/diagnostic colonoscopies were randomized 1:1 to receive colonoscopies with CADe (ENDO-AID[OIP-1]) or not (control) during withdrawal. Procedures were performed by endoscopists-in-training with <500 procedures and <3 years' experience. Randomization was stratified by patient age, sex, and endoscopist experience (beginner vs intermediate level, <200 vs 200-500 procedures). Image enhancement and distal attachment devices were disallowed. Subjects with incomplete colonoscopies or inadequate bowel preparation were excluded. Treatment allocation was blinded to outcome assessors. The primary outcome was ADR. Secondary outcomes were ADR for different adenoma sizes and locations, mean number of adenomas, and non-neoplastic resection rate. RESULTS: A total of 386 and 380 subjects were randomized to CADe and control groups, respectively. The overall ADR was significantly higher in the CADe group than in the control group (57.5% vs 44.5%; adjusted relative risk, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.17-1.72; P < .001). The ADRs for <5 mm (40.4% vs 25.0%) and 5- to 10-mm adenomas (36.8% vs 29.2%) were higher in the CADe group. The ADRs were higher in the CADe group in both the right colon (42.0% vs 30.8%) and left colon (34.5% vs 27.6%), but there was no significant difference in advanced ADR. The ADRs were higher in the CADe group among beginner (60.0% vs 41.9%) and intermediate-level (56.5% vs 45.5%) endoscopists. Mean number of adenomas (1.48 vs 0.86) and non-neoplastic resection rate (52.1% vs 35.0%) were higher in the CADe group. CONCLUSIONS: Among endoscopists-in-training, the use of CADe during colonoscopies was associated with increased overall ADR. (ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT04838951).

Risk of alanine aminotransferase flare in patients with previous hepatitis B virus exposure on biological modifier therapies-A population-based study.

BACKGROUND: It is uncertain whether biological therapies would increase the risk of hepatitis among patients with past hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. This study aimed to evaluate the risk of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) flare in patients with past HBV infection while using biological therapies. METHODOLOGY: Patients who received biological therapies for ≥3 months from 2000 to 2019 were identified from a population-based database in Hong Kong. Patients with past HBV infection were compared with a control group without prior HBV exposure. The primary endpoint was development of ALT flare within 5 years of starting biological therapies, defined as ALT >80 IU/L. RESULTS: There were 2471 and 2394 patients with and without past HBV infection respectively. There was a non-significant increase in risk of ALT flare among the HBV-exposed group (27.6% vs. 23.7%, p = .055). In multivariable analysis, using prednisolone-equivalent dose of >20 mg daily, male sex and concomitant immunosuppressants were risk factors for ALT flare. The risk of ALT flare was significantly higher with anti-CD20 when compared to other biological agents (36.1% vs. 14.5%, p < .01), but was not significantly different among anti-tumour necrosis factor, anti-cytokine, Janus kinase inhibitors and T cell/B cell inhibitors or anti-integrin (15.2% vs. 14.6% vs. 11.7% vs. 11.1%, p = .82). Among patients with documented hepatitis B surface antigen seroreversion, 96% were on anti-CD20. CONCLUSIONS: Our study further supports the current suggestion of prophylactic anti-viral before starting anti-CD20 in HBV-exposed patients. While other biological therapies appear to have a lower risk for ALT flare, this result needs further confirmation.

Indications, Postoperative Management, and Long-term Prognosis of Crohn's Disease After Ileocecal Resection: A Multicenter Study Comparing the East and West.

BACKGROUND: The Crohn's disease (CD) phenotype differs between Asian and Western countries and may affect disease management, including decisions on surgery. This study aimed to compare the indications, postoperative management, and long-term prognosis after ileocecal resection (ICR) in Hong Kong (HK) and the Netherlands (NL). METHODS: CD patients with primary ICR between 2000 and 2019 were included. The endpoints were endoscopic (Rutgeerts score ≥i2b and/or radiologic recurrence), clinical (start or switch of inflammatory bowel disease medication), and surgical recurrences. Cumulative incidences of recurrence were estimated with a Bayesian multivariable proportional hazards model. RESULTS: Eighty HK and 822 NL patients were included. The most common indication for ICR was penetrating disease (HK: 32.5%, NL: 22.5%) in HK vs stricturing disease (HK: 32.5%, NL: 48.8%) in the NL (P < .001). Postoperative prophylaxis was prescribed to 65 (81.3%) HK patients (28 [35.0%] aminosalicylates [5-aminosalicylic acid]; 30 [37.5%] immunomodulators; 0 biologicals) vs 388 (47.1%) NL patients (67 [8.2%] 5-aminosalicylic acid; 187 [22.8%] immunomodulators; 69 [8.4%] biologicals; 50 [6.1%] combination therapy) (P < .001). Endoscopic or radiologic evaluation within 18 months was performed in 36.3% HK vs 64.1% NL (P < .001) patients. No differences between both populations were observed for endoscopic (hazard ratio [HR], 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.24-1.21), clinical (HR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.62-1.32), or surgical (HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.31-1.13) recurrence risks. CONCLUSION: The main indication for ICR in CD patients is penetrating disease in HK patients and stricturing disease in NL patients. Although considerable pre- and postoperative management differences were observed between the two geographical areas, the long-term prognosis after ICR is similar.

This is the first study reporting similar long-term prognoses after ileocecal resection in Crohn's disease in low- and high-incidence countries despite differences in Crohn's disease phenotype at diagnosis, surgical approach, indications, and pre- and postoperative management including prophylactic medication.