Predictive value of the Diverticular Inflammation and Complication Assessment (DICA) endoscopic classification on the outcome of diverticular disease of the colon: An international study.

BACKGROUND: Diverticular Inflammation and Complication Assessment (DICA) endoscopic classification has been recently developed for patients suffering from diverticulosis and diverticular disease. AIMS: We assessed retrospectively the predictive value of DICA in patients for whom endoscopic data and clinical follow-up were available. METHODS: For each patient, we recorded: age, severity of DICA, presence of abdominal pain, C-reactive protein and faecal calprotectin test (if available) at the time of diagnosis; months of follow-up; therapy taken during the follow-up to maintain remission (if any); occurrence/recurrence of diverticulitis; need of surgery. RESULTS: We enrolled 1651 patients (793 M, 858 F, mean age 66.6 ± 11.1 years): 939 (56.9%) patients were classified as DICA 1, 501 (30.3%) patients as DICA 2 and 211 (12.8%) patients as DICA 3. The median follow-up was 24 (9-38) months. Acute diverticulitis (AD) occurred/recurred in 263 (15.9%) patients; surgery was necessary in 57 (21.7%) cases. DICA was the only factor significantly associated to the occurrence/recurrence of diverticulitis and surgery either at univariate (χ(2 )= 405.029; p < 0.0001) or multivariate analysis (hazard ratio = 4.319, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.639-5.126; p < 0.0001). Only in DICA 2 patients was therapy effective for prevention of AD occurrence/recurrence with a hazard ratio (95% CI) of 0.598 (0.391-0.914) (p = 0.006, log rank test). Mesalazine-based therapies reduced the risk of AD occurrence/recurrence and needs of surgery with a hazard ratio (95% CI) of 0.2103 (0.122-0.364) and 0.459 (0.258-0.818), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: DICA classification is a valid parameter to predict the risk of diverticulitis occurrence/recurrence in patients suffering from diverticular disease of the colon.

Development and validation of an endoscopic classification of diverticular disease of the colon: the DICA classification.

BACKGROUND: A validated endoscopic classification of diverticular disease (DD) of the colon is lacking at present. Our aim was to develop a simple endoscopic score of DD: the Diverticular Inflammation and Complication Assessment (DICA) score. METHODS: The DICA score for DD resulted in the sum of the scores for the extension of diverticulosis, the number of diverticula per region, the presence and type of inflammation, and the presence and type of complications: DICA 1 (≤ 3), DICA 2 (4-7) and DICA 3 (>7). A comparison with abdominal pain and inflammatory marker expression was also performed. A total of 50 videos of DD patients were reassessed in order to investigate the predictive role of DICA on the outcome of the disease. RESULTS: Overall agreement in using DICA was 0.847 (95% confidence interval, CI, 0.812-0.893): 0.878 (95% CI 0.832-0.895) for DICA 1, 0.765 (95% CI 0.735-0.786) for DICA 2 and 0.891 (95% CI 0.845-0.7923) for DICA 3. Intra-observer agreement (kappa) was 0.91 (95% CI 0.886-0.947). A significant correlation was found between the DICA score and C-reactive protein values (p = 0.0001), as well as between the median pain score and the DICA score (p = 0.0001). With respect to the 50 patients retrospectively reassessed, occurrence/recurrence of disease complications was recorded in 29 patients (58%): 10 (34.5%) were classified as DICA 1 and 19 (65.5%) as DICA 2 (p = 0.036). CONCLUSIONS: The DICA score is a simple, reproducible, validated and easy-to-use endoscopic scoring system for DD of the colon.

Developing a decision-making model based on an interdisciplinary oncological care group for the management of colorectal cancer.

AIM: To report our experience on implementation and preliminary results of a decision-making model based on the recommendations of an Interdisciplinary Oncological Care Group developed for the management of colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The multidisciplinary team identified a reference guideline using appraisal of guidelines for research and evaluation (AGREE) tool based on a sequential assessment of the guideline quality. Thereafter, internal guidelines with diagnostic and therapeutic management for early, locally advanced and metastatic colonic and rectal cancer were drafted; organizational aspects, responsibility matrices, protocol actions for each area of specialty involved and indicators for performing audits were also defined. RESULTS: The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) UK guideline was the reference for drafting the internal guideline document; from February to November 2013, 125 patients with colorectal cancer were discussed by and taken under the care of the Interdisciplinary Oncological Care Group. The first audit performed in December 2013 revealed optimal adherence to the internal guideline, mainly in terms of uniformity and accuracy of perioperative staging, coordination and timing of multi-modal therapies. To date, all patients under observation are within the diagnostic and therapeutic course, no patient came out from the multidisciplinary "path" and only in 14% of cases have the first recommendations proposed been changed. The selected indicators appear effective and reliable, while at the moment, it is not yet possible to assess the impact of the multidisciplinary team on clinical outcome. CONCLUSION: Although having a short observation period, our model seems capable of determining optimal uniformity of diagnostic and therapeutic management, to a high degree of patient satisfaction. A longer observation period is necessary in order to confirm these observations and for assessing the impact on clinical outcome.

Diagnosis, treatment and survival of patients with hepatorenal syndrome: a survey on daily medical practice.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is a severe complication of cirrhosis with ascites. The International Ascites Club recommended strict diagnostic criteria and treatment with vasoconstrictors and albumin. Aim of this prospective cohort study was to investigate the prevalence of HRS, diagnostic criteria, treatment and 3-month outcome in the daily-clinical-practice. METHODS: Two-hundred-fifty-three patients with cirrhosis and renal failure consecutively admitted to 21 Italian hospitals were recruited. RESULTS: The prevalence of HRS was 45.8% (30% type-1 and 15.8% type-2). In 36% of cases HRS was presumed because not all diagnostic criteria could be fulfilled. In 8% of cases HRS was superimposed on an organic nephropathy. Patients with HRS type-1 were younger and showed higher leukocyte count, higher respiratory rates, and worse liver function scores. Sixty-four patients with HRS type-1 received vasoconstrictors (40 terlipressin and 24 midodrine/octreotide). A complete response was obtained in 19 cases (30%) and a partial response in 13 (20%). Age was the only independent predictor of response (p=0.033). Three-month survival of patients with HRS type-1 was 19.7%. Survival was better in patients who responded to therapy. Age (p=0.017), bilirubin (p=0.012), and creatinine increase after diagnostic volume expansion (p=0.02) independently predicted death. The mortality rate was 97% among patients with at least two negative predictors. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnostic criteria of HRS in our daily-clinical-practice could not be completely fulfilled in one third of cases. The treatment with vasoconstrictors and albumin was widely implemented. Mortality was strongly predicted by simple baseline variables.

Risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis in high- and low-volume centers and among expert and non-expert operators: a prospective multicenter study.

OBJECTIVES: Prospective studies have identified a number of patient- and procedure-related independent risk factors for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis, with different conclusions, so various questions are still open. The endoscopist's expertise, case volume, and case mix can all significantly influence the outcome of ERCP procedures, but have been investigated little to date. METHODS: We identified patient- and procedure-related risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis and the impact of the endoscopist's experience and the center's case volume, using univariate and multivariate analysis, in a multicenter, prospective study involving low- and high-volume centers, over a 6-month period. RESULTS: A total of 3,635 ERCP procedures were included; 2,838 (78%) ERCPs were performed in the 11 high-volume centers (median 257 each) and 797 in the 10 low-volume centers (median 45 each). Overall, 3,331 ERCPs were carried out by expert operators and 304 by less-skilled operators. There were significantly more grade 3 difficulty procedures in high-volume centers than in low-volume ones (P<0.0001). Post-ERCP pancreatitis occurred in 137 patients (3.8%); the rates did not differ between high- and low-volume centers (3.9% vs. 3.1%) and expert and non-expert operators (3.8% vs. 5.5%). However, in high-volume centers, there were 25% more patients with patient- and procedure-related risk factors, and the pancreatitis rate was one-third higher among non-expert operators. Univariate analysis found a significant association with pancreatitis for history of acute pancreatitis, either non-ERCP- or ERCP-related and recurrent, young age, absence of bile duct stones, and biliary pain among patient-related risk factors, and >10 attempts to cannulate the Vater's papilla, pancreatic duct cannulation, contrast injection of the pancreatic ductal system, pre-cut technique, and pancreatic sphincterotomy, among procedure-related risk factors. Multivariate analysis also showed that a history of post-ERCP pancreatitis, biliary pain, >10 attempts to cannulate the Vater's papilla, main pancreatic duct cannulation, and pre-cut technique were significantly associated with the complication. CONCLUSIONS: A history of pancreatitis among patient-related factors, and multiple attempts at cannulation among procedure-related factors, were associated with the highest rates of post-ERCP pancreatitis. Pre-cut sphincterotomy, although identified as another significant risk factor, appeared safer when done early (fewer than 10 attempts at cannulating), compared with repeated multiple cannulation. The risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis was not associated with the case volume of either the single endoscopist or the center; however, high-volume centers treated a larger proportion of patients at high risk of pancreatitis and did a significantly greater number of difficult procedures.

High- versus low-dose proton pump inhibitors after endoscopic hemostasis in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding: a multicentre, randomized study.

BACKGROUND: The most effective schedule of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) administration following endoscopic hemostasis of bleeding ulcers remains uncertain. METHODS: Patients with actively bleeding ulcers and those with nonbleeding visible vessel or adherent clot were treated with epinephrine injection and/or thermal coagulation, and randomized to receive intravenous PPIs according to an intensive regimen (80 mg bolus followed by 8 mg/h as continuous infusion for 72 h) or a standard regimen (40 mg bolus daily followed by saline infusion for 72 h). After the infusion, all patients were given 20 mg PPI twice daily orally. The primary end point was the in-hospital rebleeding rate, as ascertained at the repeat endoscopy. RESULTS: Bleeding recurred in 28 of 238 patients (11.8%) receiving the intensive regimen, and in 19 of 236 (8.1%) patients receiving the standard regimen (P= 0.18). Most rebleeding episodes occurred during the initial 72-h infusion: 18 (7.6%) and 19 events (8.1%) in the intensive and standard groups, respectively (P= 0.32). Mean units of blood transfused were 1.7 +/- 2.1 in the intensive and 1.5 +/- 2.1 in the standard regimen group (P= 0.34). The duration of hospital stay was <5 days for 88 (37.0%) and 111 patients (47.0%) in the intensive and standard groups (P= 0.03). There were fewer surgical interventions in the standard versus intensive regimen (1 vs 3). Five patients in each treatment group died. CONCLUSIONS: Following endoscopic hemostasis of bleeding ulcers, standard-dose PPIs infusion was as effective as a high-dose regimen in reducing the risk of recurrent bleeding. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00374101).

Clinical usefulness of gastric-juice analysis in 2007: the stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone.

BACKGROUND: Gastric juice is usually discarded during upper-GI endoscopy. OBJECTIVE: By using a novel device, the Mt 21-42, we evaluated the potential of this important organic fluid in clinical practice, exploring its contribution to the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection and atrophic gastritis of the oxyntic mucosa (AGOM). DESIGN AND PATIENTS: A multicenter study (17,907 patients; 10 endoscopy units) estimated the frequency of diagnosis of AGOM and H pylori infection in routine endoscopic practice. A prospective study (216 patients) at 1 of these units aimed to determine the real prevalence of these conditions and the possible benefits of gastric juice analysis. We considered gastric juice pH and ammonium concentration, endoscopic and histologic features, serologic parameters for atrophy and H pylori, gastric acid secretion, and costs. RESULTS: We found that H pylori infection and, even more markedly, AGOM were greatly underdiagnosed in routine endoscopic practice (20.1% and 0.8% vs 49.1% and 12.5% in the prospective study, respectively), because of the intrinsic limitations of the conventional tests and lack/inappropriateness of biopsy planning. Gastric-juice analysis proved to be a cheap, simple, and effective way to prevent such underdiagnosis and allowed detection of atrophic gastritis and H pylori in 96% and 98% of cases, and saved costs (cost-effectiveness ratio 209 vs 274-5047). CONCLUSIONS: Gastric juice provided a valuable source of clinicopathologic information that, properly analyzed, allowed detection of the main risk factors for gastric cancer (H pylori and atrophic gastritis), overcoming the diagnostic limitations associated with these conditions and also producing time and cost savings.

Management of patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage before and after the adoption of the Rockall score, in the Italian Gastroenterology Units.

OBJECTIVES: Nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage is a frequent reason for ordinary hospital admission. In Italy the use of prognostic scores to stratify the risk has not been adequately validated: the impact on clinical management of a rating system like the Rockall score remains to be established. RING is a 'register' that has been collecting hospital discharge files from hospital gastroenterology units, giving a broad picture of the patients admitted for this pathology. METHODS: We analyzed the hospital discharge files collected between 2001 and 2005 from 12 gastroenterology units, which issued more than 26,000 hospital discharge files for ordinary hospital admission and have been using the Rockall score for defining nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage since 2003. RESULTS: There were 2832 hospital discharge files with a main diagnosis of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage: 1335 'before' the Rockall score was introduced, 1497 'after' the introduction. Patients' mean age was 67.7+/-16.7 years, with a male/female ratio of 1.7 and no significant changes over the years. There were no differences in the distribution of diagnoses in nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage patients before/after the introduction of the Rockall score, though the mean hospital stay became shorter (7.1+/-5.0 vs. 6.3+/-4.5 days), and mortality declined (2.8 vs. 2.3%), in parallel with the caselist as a whole. For 1102 ordinary hospital admission Rockall score was calculated. Diagnoses were more accurate: significantly fewer undefined causes and an increase in peptic ulcer. The mean Rockall score was 4.6+/-2.2: 17.8% low (0-2), 48.7% intermediate (3-5), and 33.5% high (>or=6). Mean hospital stay, rebleeding, and mortality were correlated with the severity of the score. CONCLUSION: The Rockall score enables the clinician to formulate a more precise diagnosis and substantially shortens the time in hospital, especially for patients at low-risk of rebleeding and death, so more resources can be dedicated to critically ill patients.