ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: COVID-19 pandemic had a negative impact on colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs. OBJECTIVE: The care strategy was modified throughout the pandemic, this paper evaluates its impact and short-term consequences. METHODS: A retrospective, descriptive and cross-sectional study was carried out in a private ambulatory endoscopic center, in average risk subjects. The study compared two periods: pre-pandemic and pandemic (subdivided into pre-vaccination and vaccination). RESULTS: During this period, 54.4% of scheduled colonoscopies were due to the screening program. The average age was 60.4 ± 7 years. Women were 52.0%. The overall cancellation rate was 41.1%, higher during pre-vaccination period. There were no differences in the degree of colonic cleansing, colonoscope exit time, and patient satisfaction. The adenoma detection rate (38.4% vs. 42.8% vs. 36.4%; p = 0.8) and the total number of adenomas (p = 0.02) was statistically significant during the pre-vaccination period. The rate of adenoma/patient showed a higher trend during this period (p = 0.06). The number of colorectal cancers was 10, without differences between periods. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, the impact of the decrease in screening colonoscopy procedures for CRC detection was similar to what was seen worldwide. In this period no increase in cancer cases, although this effect may be observed in the long term.
ANTECEDENTES: La pandemia de COVID-19 tuvo un impacto negativo en el programa de detección del cáncer colorrectal (CCR). OBJETIVO: La estrategia de atención cambió y se evaluó su impacto a corto plazo. MÉTODO: Se realizó un estudio retrospectivo, descriptivo y transversal, en un centro endoscópico ambulatorio privado, en sujetos con riesgo promedio de CCR. El estudio comparó dos períodos: prepandemia y pandemia (subdividido en prevacunación y vacunación). RESULTADOS: El 54.4% de las colonoscopias fueron por escrutinio. La edad promedio fue de 60.4 ± 7 años. El 52.0% fueron mujeres. La tasa de cancelaciones fue del 41.1%, siendo mayor durante el período prevacunación. No hubo diferencias en el grado de limpieza colónica, el tiempo de salida ni la satisfacción del paciente. La tasa de detección de adenomas (38.4% vs. 42.8% vs. 36.4%; p = 0.8) y el número total de adenomas (p = 0.02) tuvieron una significancia en el período prevacunación. El índice adenoma/paciente fue mayor durante este período (p = 0.06). El número de CCR fue de 10 (1.9%), sin diferencias entre los períodos. CONCLUSIÓN: Se concluye que la repercusión por la disminución en los procedimientos de escrutinio fue similar a lo visto en todo el mundo y no se encontró un aumento de los casos de cáncer, aunque este efecto podrá observarse a largo plazo.
Subject(s)
Adenoma , COVID-19 , Colonic Neoplasms , Colorectal Neoplasms , Humans , Female , Middle Aged , Aged , Retrospective Studies , Pandemics , Cross-Sectional Studies , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Colorectal Neoplasms/epidemiology , Colonic Neoplasms/diagnosis , Colonic Neoplasms/epidemiologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Screening colonoscopy requires quality parameters to determine its efficacy to detect cancerous or precancerous lesions. Limitations of the procedure are the patient's rejection, difficulty for its preparation or lack of preparation. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether patient satisfaction correlates with the quality of the procedure. METHOD: 100 consecutive patients for a screening colonoscopy were included, they were randomized to use a preparation with polyethylene glycol (PEG) or sodium picosulfate (P). In addition, a second parameter evaluated was related to a follow-up phone call performed to half of the patients prior to the study, during the preparation time. RESULTS: P was better tolerated and qualified, however, there was no difference with the quality of preparation, adenomatous polyps detection rate, cecum insertion rate and patient satisfaction. A difference was found in whom had a follow-up phone call. DISCUSSION: A good colon preparation is a key factor to have a quality colonoscopy, and it has been shown important that a good relationship for explain the doubts and follow the preparation. CONCLUSION: It was found that the type of preparation and patient follow-up during the study correlate with the quality of the study and patient satisfaction.
ANTECEDENTES: La colonoscopia de escrutinio requiere parámetros de calificación para determinar su eficiencia en la detección de lesiones cancerosas o precancerosas. Sus limitantes son su rechazo, la dificultad durante su preparación o la falta de preparación. OBJETIVO: Evaluar la satisfacción del paciente y los criterios de calidad del estudio. MÉTODO: Se incluyeron 100 pacientes enviados para colonoscopia de escrutinio asignados aleatoriamente a uno de dos grupos de preparación colónica: polietilenglicol (PEG) o picosulfato de sodio (P), para evaluar la satisfacción y la limpieza colónica. Otra evaluación fue por medio de llamada de refuerzo al momento de la preparación. RESULTADOS: Con P se tuvieron mejores tolerabilidad y calificaciones de satisfacción, en comparación con PEG. No hubo diferencia para la calidad de la limpieza, la tasa de detección de pólipos adenomatosos ni la intubación cecal. La llamada telefónica de reforzamiento incrementó la satisfacción, la limpieza colónica y la tasa de detección de adenomas. DISCUSIÓN: Una relación estrecha con el paciente durante su proceso de limpieza y explicación del procedimiento se ha visto como uno de los factores más importantes para lograr una colonoscopia de alta calidad. CONCLUSIÓN: El tipo de preparación colónica y la intervención durante la preparación se relacionaron con una mejor calidad del estudio y una mayor satisfacción del paciente.
Subject(s)
Adenomatous Polyps/diagnostic imaging , Cathartics , Citrates , Colonoscopy/psychology , Organometallic Compounds , Patient Satisfaction , Picolines , Polyethylene Glycols , Aged , Colonoscopy/standards , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective StudiesABSTRACT
GOALS: We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of PB+S (pinaverium bromide 100 mg plus simethicone 300 mg) in patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). BACKGROUND: IBS is a multifactorial disorder; thus, combination therapy with different mechanisms of action is expected to be useful. PB+S has shown effectiveness in an open-label clinical study in IBS. However, there are no placebo-controlled trials. MATERIALS AND METHODS: IBS-Rome III patients with abdominal pain/discomfort for at least 2 days within the week prior to baseline assessment were included in this 12-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of PB+S versus placebo, bid. The primary endpoint was overall symptom improvement, evaluated weekly by the patient (Likert Scale). Secondary endpoints included the weekly improvement in the severity of abdominal pain and bloating assessed both by patients (10-cm Visual Analogue Scale) and investigators (Likert Scale); frequency of Bristol Scale stool types (consistency) evaluated by patients and the IBS Quality of Life scores. RESULTS: A total of 285 patients (female: 83%; 36.5±8.9 y old) received at least 1 dose of PB+S (n=140) or placebo (n=145). No difference was observed in overall symptom improvement between the groups (P=0.13). However, PB+S was superior in abdominal pain (effect size: 31%, P=0.038) and bloating (33%, P=0.019). Patients with IBS-C and IBS-M showed the best improvement in the frequency of stool types with PB+S. No differences were observed in IBS Quality of Life scores and adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: PB+S was superior to placebo in improving abdominal pain and bloating in patients with active IBS. The effect on the frequency of stool consistency was particularly significant in IBS-C and IBS-M.
Subject(s)
Irritable Bowel Syndrome , Abdominal Pain/drug therapy , Abdominal Pain/etiology , Adult , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Irritable Bowel Syndrome/complications , Irritable Bowel Syndrome/drug therapy , Male , Morpholines , Quality of Life , Simethicone/adverse effects , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
Se estudiaron 200 niños con infección de vías urinarias. A todos se les practicó urocultivos y estudios radiológicos, con el fin de descartar malformación de vías urinarias; el sexo feminino fue el más afectado y las bacterias gémenes encontradas fueron E. coli, Enterobacter sp y Klebsiella sp; Streptococcus gamma, Proteus sp y Staphylococcus sp y Streptococcus pneumoniae. Se recomienda que a todos los pacientes con enfermedades cardiovasculares congénitas, tumorales e inmunosuprimidos se les efectúen urocultivos, debido a la frecuencia de esta infección urinaria por gérmenes oportunistas y que clínicamente pasan inadvertidos
