Perception and Practices of Colonoscopy Procedure: A Nationwide Survey of Indian Gastroenterologists

Introduction There is a lack of data and consensus about the practices and policies regarding performing colonoscopy in India. We surveyed gastroenterologists to assess their practices and policies of performing colonoscopy. Methodology A questionnaire was presented to gastroenterologists all over India regarding their preference of bowel preparation and method of sedation, completeness of cecal and ileal intubation rates, preferences for inflation, use of carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide, and complications faced. Results Of the 350 surveys, 307 had completely responded (88%). Only 18% of the centers were conducting more than 100 colonoscopies a month and 46% denied following a colon cancer screening policy. Two bottles of liquid polyethylene glycol were the most preferred preparation. A total of 21% did not prefer any sedation at all. Nitrous oxide was used by only 5.6% of doctors. Ileal intubation rate was >96% in 34% of centers and cecal intubation rate >96% in 58% of centers. Air was used for inflation by 58%, while 39% used CO2. A total of 40% of the respondents believe CO2 inflation would improve cecal intubation rate, while 9.4% believed otherwise. While one third found CO2 inflation unnecessary and 14% not cost-effective, three fourths were still interested in setting up a CO2 facility. Reasons for not using nitrous oxide were practical/administrative difficulty (46.6%), side effects (20%), and cost (16%). Still more than half surveyed would consider using Entonox in future. Perforation was the most noted complication faced by respondents. Conclusions This survey of real-world clinical practices will help to formulate practice guideline regarding colonoscopy in India.

Management of Asymptomatic Terminal Ileitis

Ileal intubation is often performed during screening colonoscopies. This had led to the recognition of mild ileitis in many asymptomatic patients. The natural history and clinical significance of this finding are not well established, and there are no guidelines on whether these patients merit further work-up or an interval surveillance colonoscopy. This conundrum was presented and discussed on @MondayNightIBD. In this article, we review the specific literature on the topic and make reference to the informed opinions of the convo participants. We propose an #IBDAlgorithm for management of asymptomatic ileitis.

The Efficacy of Cap-Assisted Colonoscopy as Compared to Conventional in a Pediatric Population: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background: The use of cap-assisted colonoscopy (CAC) in adults reportedly shortens cecal and ileal intubation times (CIT and IIT, respectively) and improves cecal and ileal intubation rates (CIR and IIR, respectively) as compared with the standard colonoscopy (SC). However, no study to date has assessed the efficacy of CAC in children. Materials and Methods: Thirty-nine children were randomized to CAC (n=22) or SC (n=17) and 22 colonoscopy procedure were done per group. Quality indicators were evaluated. Results: The median ages of the CAC and SC groups were 9.5 years (range 4.3 to 16.0) and 9.7 years (range 3.9 to 13.5), respectively. The most common indication was hematochezia (38.6%). The median CIT in the CAC and SC groups were 13.5 (range 8 to 19) and 13.7 (range 10 to 18) minutes, respectively (p=0.621). The IIT in the CAC and SC group were 60 (range 55 to 95) and 59 (range 35 to 95) seconds, respectively (p=0.438). The overall CIR was 100% and did not differ between groups. The IIR of the CAC and SC groups were 100% and 95.5%, respectively (p>0.999). Good CIR and IIR were achieved and no complications occurred in either group. Conclusion: There were no intergroup differences in quality indicators. Keywords: Cap-assisted colonoscopy, Quality indicators for colonoscopy, Pediatric

Diagnostic Yield Variation with Colonoscopy among Pediatric Endoscopists

Background: The primary aim of our study was to determine provider variation in diagnostic yield in a pediatric endoscopy center. Secondary aims were to examine ileal intubation rates as well as procedural complications at the provider level. Methods: A retrospective review of sequential pediatric patients who underwent a colonoscopy, completed by June 2018, determined the rates of endoscopically abnormal (EA) and isolated histologically abnormal (IHA) colonoscopies; the overall diagnostic yield was the combination of EA and IHA. Results: In total, 374 charts were reviewed. This study found high variability in diagnostic yield among the 16 clinicians ranging from as low as 22% to as high as 86% (p = 0.11) with an overall diagnostic yield of 48% for colonoscopy; excluding follow-up colonoscopies, the diagnostic yield was 42%. Abnormal calprotectin and abnormal blood tests were associated with higher diagnostic yields of 83 and 65%, respectively, compared with symptoms such as abdominal pain, diarrhea, and rectal bleeding which had yields of 39, 43, and 61%. Ileal intubation rates averaged 90% (range ­63–100%, p = 0.06). In patients with a normal colon, there were 21 (6%) patients with an EA ileum and an additional 16 (4%) with an IHA ileum. Prep quality was rated excellent, good, or average in 97%. In addition, there was a low rate of serious complications (1 of 374). Conclusions: This study highlights the individual variability in diagnostic yield and ileal intubation rates in a pediatric gastroenterology practice. Goals for pediatric endoscopy could include ileal intubation rates of >90% and provider diagnostic yields of >40%.

Ileal intubation is not associated with higher detection rate of right-sided conventional adenomas and serrated polyps compared to cecal intubation after adjustment for overall adenoma detection rate

Background High cecal intubation rate (CIR) is associated with significant improved adenoma detection rate (ADR), however, self-reported CIR may be overestimated and inadequate documentation of cecal intubation is associated with a lower polyp detection rate compared to clear documentation. We aimed to investigate if ileal intubation may be associated with higher detection rates (DR) for right-sided conventional adenomas (cAD) and serrated polyps (SP) compared to cecal intubation in a large screening colonoscopy cohort. Material and methods Retrospective analysis of individuals ≥50 years with average risk for colorectal cancer (CRC) who underwent screening colonoscopy between 01/01/2012 and 14/12/2016 at a tertiary academic hospital and six community-based private practices. Exclusion criteria were conditions with increased risk for CRC (e.g. inflammatory bowel disease, history of CRC, hereditary cancer syndromes), previous colonoscopy at the same institution, and incomplete procedures. Right-sided colon was defined as caecum and ascending colon. Results 4.138 individuals were analysed (mean age 62 years, 52.1% female). DR for right-sided cADs and SPs were significantly higher after ileal compared to cecal intubation in univariate (12.5% vs. 6.8%, p < 0.001, and 6.3% vs. 3.3%, p < 0.001), but not in multivariate analysis (OR 1.025, 95%-CI 0.639–1.646, p = 0.918, and OR 0.937, 95%-CI 0.671–1.309, p = 0.704). DRs did not differ between ileal and cecal intubation for endoscopists with ADR ≥25 and < 25%, respectively. ADR ≥25% was significantly associated with ileal intubation (OR 21.862, 95%-CI 18.049–26.481, p < 0.001). Conclusion Ileal intubation may not provide any benefit over cecal intubation concerning the detection of cADs and SPs in the right-sided colon.

Etiology of isolated terminal ileal ulcers in symptomatic patients

Introduction: Isolated terminal ileal ulcers (ITIUs) are being frequently encountered by the clinicians with the increasing numbers of ileal intubation during colonoscopies. This study was aimed at finding the etiologies of these ulcers in symptomatic patients and their association with various clinical features. Methods: This was a hospital based prospective, observational, descriptive study performed on all consecutive patients who underwent ileocolonoscopy for various gastrointestinal symptoms between 1 July 2018 and 30 June 2019. Clinical, endoscopic and histopathological findings were analyzed to determine the etiology of ITIUs in symptomatic patients. Statistical analysis was done by SPSS 20. Results: Among 60 (7.67%) of 782 symptomatic patients who had ITIUs on ileocolonoscopy, specific etiologies were established in 28 (46.67%) of them. Intestinal TB was the most common specific diagnosis, which was seen in 18 (30%) patients. Chronic abdominal pain with or without chronic diarrhea was the most common indication for ileocolonoscopy. Conclusions: Specific etiologies like tuberculosis, Crohn’s disease, NSAID-induced ulcer and intestinal spirochetosis were seen in 28 (46.67%) of patients with isolated terminal ileal ulcers. The most common clinical features were chronic abdominal pain (65%) and abdominal pain with diarrhea (16.7%). No clinical presentation was significantly associated with any specific etiology, thus emphasizing the need for routine ileal intubation and tissue sampling for histopathological examination in all symptomatic patients undergoing colonoscopy.