History of negative colorectal endoscopy and risk of rectosigmoid neoplasms at screening flexible sigmoidoscopy.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Screening sigmoidoscopy can reduce incidence of colorectal cancer and mortality. The optimal re-screening interval has not yet been defined. This study is aimed at estimating the risk of distal advanced adenomas (diameter >/=10 mm, villous component >20%, high-grade dysplasia) and cancer at screening flexible sigmoidoscopy in subjects aged 55-64 years who reported pre-screening negative colorectal endoscopy. PATIENTS: Eight thousands two hundred two subjects aged 55-64 years who underwent screening flexible sigmoidoscopy within the SCORE trial in Italy and who were able to report their previous history of colorectal endoscopy. RESULTS: Eight hundred eighty three of 8,202 subjects (10.8%) reported at least one prescreening negative endoscopy: among them, after 3-5 years, 6-10 years and >10 years intervals between last reported examination and screening endoscopy, the Absolute Risk of advanced adenomas was 1.5%, 0.9% and 0.9%; one cancer was detected (0.1%). Among the 7,319 subjects who did not report prescreening endoscopy the risks of advanced adenoma and cancer were 3.2% and 0.4%, respectively. Subjects with a previous colorectal examination had a 65% decreased risk of advanced adenomas (OR=0.35, 95%CI 0.18-0.66) and a 71% decreased risk of cancer (OR=0.29, 95%CI 0.04-1.12) as compared to those who did not. For subjects without family history of colorectal cancer the statistically significant decrease of the risk persisted up to ten years. The observed benefit seems not to apply to subjects with family history of colorectal cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Our results are consistent with the hypothesis that the interval between screening sigmoidoscopies could be safely expanded beyond 5 years for subjects without specific risk factors for colorectal cancer.

Experts' opinions on the role of liver biopsy in HCV infection: a Delphi survey by the Italian Association of Hospital Gastroenterologists (A.I.G.O.).

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Liver biopsy represents the gold standard to establish a diagnosis in all liver patients, but its current position in chronic viral hepatitis is questioned. We aimed to create a consensus on best practice of use of liver biopsy in the management of chronic HCV infection. METHODS: We applied the Delphi method to 12 clinical scenarios of chronic HCV infection, to assess the extent of agreement (consensus measurement) and to resolve disagreement (consensus development) on the appropriateness of liver biopsy. RESULTS: Among 108 chosen hepatologists, 61 (56.5%) accepted to participate to the first-round survey. In four patients the majority of experts (from 61.4 to 86.2%) agreed not to perform liver biopsy; in two cases an equivalent opinion was found, and in the remaining six scenarios the majority of experts would have recommended a biopsy. No expert recommended liver biopsy in all cases, while most agreed for an histological evaluation of 4 to 8 cases. At the second round, 36 experts (59%) submitted ballots. Fifty-four out of 431 (12.6%) original judgments were changed with equal distribution among different scenarios. CONCLUSIONS: Our survey showed a great divergence of management of similar patients and should provide a stimulus for an evidence-based evaluation of liver histology in chronic HCV infection.

Predicting proximal advanced neoplasms at screening sigmoidoscopy.

PURPOSE: This study was designed to assess the predictive value for advanced proximal neoplasms (cancer, adenoma > or = 10 mm, or villous component > 20 percent, or severe dysplasia) of the characteristics of distal polyps. METHODS: The study was conducted among patients, aged 55 to 64 years, referred for colonoscopy in the Italian trial of sigmoidoscopy screening for colorectal cancer. Patients reporting a history of colorectal cancer, adenomas, inflammatory bowel disease, recent colorectal endoscopy, or two first-degree relatives with colorectal cancer were excluded. We compared the prevalence of advanced proximal neoplasia in patients with "low-risk" (1-2 tubular adenomas, < 10 mm, with low-grade dysplasia, or hyperplastic polyp) and in those with "high-risk" (size, > or = 10 mm, or > or = 3 adenomas, or villous component > 20 percent, or severe dysplasia) polyps in the distal colon. RESULTS: Of 426 patients with polyps > 5 mm, 29 (6.9 percent) were detected with an advanced proximal neoplasm (including 4 colorectal cancers). The prevalence of proximal advanced neoplasia was 9.4 percent among patients with high-risk distal polyps and 2.5 percent among those with low-risk lesions (adjusted odds ratio, 3.19; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.06-9.59). Approximately 40 people with low-risk distal polyps 6 to 9 mm should undergo colonoscopy to detect one proximal advanced neoplasm; the corresponding number for patients with high-risk distal polyps is 10. CONCLUSIONS: The 2.5 percent prevalence of proximal advanced neoplasms among people with low-risk 6-mm to 9-mm distal polyps is similar to the prevalence observed among people without distal polyps. Restricting colonoscopy referral to patients with high-risk distal polyps might represent a cost-effective strategy in a screening context.