Search

Introduction: Artificial intelligence (AI) could minimize the operator-dependent variation in colonoscopy quality. Computer-aided detection (CADe) has improved adenoma detection rate (ADR) and adenomas per colonoscopy (APC) in randomized controlled trials. There is a need to assess the impact of CADe in real-world settings., Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science for nonrandomized real-world studies of CADe in colonoscopy. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to examine the effect of CADe on ADR and APC. The study is registered under PROSPERO (CRD42023424037). There was no funding for this study., Results: Twelve of 1,314 studies met inclusion criteria. Overall, ADR was statistically significantly higher with vs without CADe (36.3% vs 35.8%, risk ratio [RR] 1.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.28). This difference remained significant in subgroup analyses evaluating 6 prospective (37.3% vs 35.2%, RR 1.15, 95% CI 1.01-1.32) but not 6 retrospective (35.7% vs 36.2%, RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.92-1.36) studies. Among 6 studies with APC data, APC rate ratio with vs without CADe was 1.12 (95% CI 0.95-1.33). In 4 studies with GI Genius (Medtronic), there was no difference in ADR with vs without CADe (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.85-1.07)., Discussion: ADR, but not APC, was slightly higher with vs without CADe among all available real-world studies. This difference was attributed to the results of prospective but not retrospective studies. The discrepancies between these findings and those of randomized controlled trials call for future research on the true impact of current AI technology on colonoscopy quality and the subtleties of human-AI interactions., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of The American College of Gastroenterology.)

Introduction: The rates of serious cardiac, neurologic, and pulmonary events attributable to colonoscopy are poorly characterized, and background event rates are usually not accounted for., Methods: We performed a multistate population-based study using changepoint analysis to determine the rates and timing of serious gastrointestinal and nongastrointestinal adverse events associated with screening/surveillance colonoscopy, including analyses by age (45 to <55, 55 to <65, 65 to <75, and ≥75 years). Among 4.5 million persons in the Ambulatory Surgery and Services Databases of California, Florida, and New York who underwent screening/surveillance colonoscopy in 2005-2015, we ascertained serious postcolonoscopy events in excess of background rates in Emergency Department (SEDD) and Inpatient Databases (SID)., Results: Most serious nongastrointestinal postcolonoscopy events were expected based on the background rate and not associated with colonoscopy itself. However, associated nongastrointestinal events predominated over gastrointestinal events at ages ≥65 years, including more myocardial infarctions plus ischemic strokes than perforations at ages ≥75 years (361 [95% confidence intervals {CI} 312-419] plus 1,279 [95% CI 1,182-1,384] vs 912 [95% CI 831-1,002] per million). At all ages, the observed-to-expected ratios for days 0-7, 0-30, and 0-60 after colonoscopy were substantially >1 for gastrointestinal bleeding and perforation, but minimally >1 for most nongastrointestinal complications. Risk periods ranged from 1 to 125 days depending on complication type and age. No excess postcolonoscopy in-hospital deaths were observed., Discussion: Although crude counts substantially overestimate nongastrointestinal events associated with colonoscopy, nongastrointestinal complications exceed bleeding and perforation risk in older persons. The inability to ascertain modifications to antiplatelet therapy was a study limitation. Our results can inform benefit-to-risk determinations for preventive colonoscopy., (Copyright © 2021 by The American College of Gastroenterology.)

Introduction: Risk stratification has been proposed as a strategy to improve participation in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, but evidence is lacking. We performed a randomized controlled trial of risk stratification using the National Cancer Institute's Colorectal Cancer Risk Assessment Tool (CCRAT) on screening intent and completion., Methods: A total of 230 primary care patients eligible for first-time CRC screening were randomized to risk assessment via CCRAT or education control. Follow-up of screening intent and completion was performed by record review and phone at 6 and 12 months. We analyzed change in intent after intervention, time to screening, overall screening completion rates, and screening completion by CCRAT risk score tertile., Results: Of the patients, 61.7% of patients were aged <60 years, 58.7% female, and 94.3% with college or higher education. Time to screening did not differ between arms (hazard ratio 0.78 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.52-1.18], P = 0.24). At 12 months, screening completion was 38.6% with CCRAT vs 44.0% with education (odds ratio [OR] 0.80 [95% CI 0.47-1.37], P = 0.41). Changes in screening intent did not differ between the risk assessment and education arms (precontemplation to contemplation: OR 1.52 [95% CI 0.81-2.86], P = 0.19; contemplation to precontemplation: OR 1.93 [95% CI 0.45-8.34], P = 0.38). There were higher screening completion rates at 12 months in the top CCRAT risk tertile (52.6%) vs the bottom (32.4%) and middle (31.6%) tertiles (P = 0.10)., Discussion: CCRAT risk assessment did not increase screening participation or intent. Risk stratification might motivate persons classified as higher CRC risk to complete screening, but unintentionally discourage screening among persons not identified as higher risk., (Copyright © 2020 by The American College of Gastroenterology.)

Objectives: Most cost-effectiveness analyses of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening assume Medicare payment rates and a lifetime horizon. Our aims were to examine the implications of differential payment levels and time horizons for commercial insurers vs. Medicare on the cost-effectiveness of CRC screening., Methods: We used our validated Markov cohort simulation of CRC screening in the average risk US population to examine CRC screening at ages 50-64 under commercial insurance, and at ages 65-80 under Medicare, using a health-care sector perspective. Model outcomes included discounted quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and costs per person, and incremental cost/QALY gained., Results: Lifetime costs/person were 20-44% higher when assuming commercial payment rates rather than Medicare rates for people under 65. Most of the substantial clinical benefit of screening at ages 50-64 was realized at ages ≥65. For commercial payers with a time horizon of ages 50-64, fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) and fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) were cost-effective (<$61,000/QALY gained), but colonoscopy was costly (>$185,000/QALY gained). Medicare experienced substantial clinical benefits and cost-savings from screening done at ages <65, even if screening was not continued. Among those previously screened, continuing FOBT and FIT under Medicare was cost-saving and continuing colonoscopy was highly cost-effective (<$30,000/QALY gained), and initiating any screening in those previously unscreened was highly effective and cost-saving., Conclusions: Modeling suggests that CRC screening is highly cost-effective over a lifetime even when considering higher payment rates by commercial payers vs. Medicare. Screening may appear relatively costly for commercial payers if only a time horizon of ages 50-64 is considered, but it is predicted to yield substantial clinical and economic benefits that accrue primarily at ages ≥65 under Medicare.

Objectives: Gastric intestinal metaplasia and dysplasia are precursor lesions for adenocarcinoma. The risks of progression to malignancy from these lesions are not well characterized, particularly in the US populations., Methods: We identified 4,331 Kaiser Permanente Northern California members who were diagnosed with gastric intestinal metaplasia or dysplasia between 1997 and 2006 and followed them through December 2013. The incident rates of gastric adenocarcinoma, relative risks in comparison with the Kaiser Permanente general population, and predictors of progression to malignancy were investigated., Results: Among 4,146 individuals with gastric intestinal metaplasia and 141 with low-grade dysplasia with 24,440 person-years follow-up, 17 and 6 cases of gastric adenocarcinoma were diagnosed, respectively, after 1 year from the index endoscopy. The incidence rate of gastric adenocarcinoma was 0.72/1,000 person-years in patients with intestinal metaplasia, with a relative risk of 2.56 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.49-4.10) compared with the Kaiser Permanente member population, and 7.7/1,000 person-years for low-grade dysplasia, with a relative risk of 25.6 (95% CI, 9.4-55.7). The median time for gastric intestinal metaplasia to progress to adenocarcinoma was 6.1 years, and for low-grade dysplasia, 2.6 years. Hispanic race/ethnicity and history of dysplasia were associated with significantly higher risk of progression to gastric adenocarcinoma., Conclusions: Gastric intestinal metaplasia and dysplasia are significant predictors for gastric adenocarcinoma. The low risk for malignancy associated with intestinal metaplasia does not support routine endoscopic surveillance. However, surveillance should be considered in patients at higher risks, including those with suspicious endoscopic features, presence of dysplasia, and Hispanic race/ethnicity.

Objectives: Seventy percent of patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) identify certain foods as triggers for their symptom flare-ups. To help identify potential trigger foods, practitioners often rely on patient food and gastrointestinal (GI) symptom journaling. The aim of the study was to evaluate the feasibility and usability of a novel food and symptom journal app, specifically designed for patients with IBS. Secondary aims were to explore the effect of using the app on GI symptoms and to describe associations between diet and GI symptoms suggested by individual patient data., Methods: The feasibility and usability of the novel app was studied in 11 IBS patients (8 women), aged 21-65 years. Participants were asked to log GI symptoms (abdominal pain, bloating, diarrhea, constipation) using a 100-point color-graded sliding scale (green=none, red=severe) four times a day and to log every meal/snack they ate (at least three times a day) over a 2-week period. The app's feasibility as a data collection tool was evaluated by daily completion, compliance, data hoarding, and fatigability rates. Usability was evaluated with the System Usability Scale (SUS). To explore potential impact of using the app on bowel distress, we compared before and after intervention IBS-Symptom Severity Scale (IBS-SSS) scores. Meal entries were analyzed for nutrients using the Nutrition Data System for Research. Regression analyses were conducted for each participant journal to explore relationships between meal nutrients and subsequent GI symptoms., Results: Daily average completion rates of the minimum requested entries for meal and GI symptoms were 112±47% and 78±44%, respectively. Average 24-h compliance rates were 90±19% and 94±12%, respectively. The SUS score was above average (mean 83, range 65-97.5; n=10). Most participants did not have a clinically significant decrease in IBS-SSS. At least one strong association (P≤0.05) between GI symptoms and a meal nutrient was found in 73% of participants. The mean number of associations was 2 (range 0-7; n=11). Patterns of associations differed between individual participants., Conclusions: Our app appeared to be a feasible and usable tool for IBS patients. Our findings are in line with anecdotes that most IBS patients have food triggers and that these vary by individual. Future studies can explore whether individualized dietary changes guided by an app can result in IBS symptom improvement.

Objectives: Screening decreases colorectal cancer (CRC) mortality. The national press has scrutinized colonoscopy charges. Little systematic evidence exists on colorectal testing and payments among commercially insured persons. Our aim was to characterize outpatient colorectal testing utilization and payments among commercially insured US adults., Methods: We conducted an observational cohort study of outpatient colorectal test utilization rates, indications, and payments among 21 million 18-64-year-old employees and dependants with noncapitated group health insurance provided by 160 self-insured employers in the 2009 Truven MarketScan Databases., Results: Colonoscopy was the predominant colorectal test. Among 50-64-year olds, 12% underwent colonoscopy in 1 year. Most fecal tests and colonoscopies were associated with screening/surveillance indications. Testing rates were higher in women, and increased with age. Mean payments for fecal occult blood and immunochemical tests were $5 and $21, respectively. Colonoscopy payments varied between and within sites of service. Mean payments for diagnostic colonoscopy in an office, outpatient hospital facility, and ambulatory surgical center were $586 (s.d. $259), $1,400 (s.d. $681), and $1,074 (s.d. $549), respectively. Anesthesia and pathology services accompanied 35 and 52% of colonoscopies, with mean payments of $494 (s.d. $354) and $272 (s.d. $284), respectively. Mean payments for the most prevalent colonoscopy codes were 1.4- to 1.9-fold the average Medicare payments., Conclusions: Most outpatient colorectal testing among commercially insured adults was associated with screening or surveillance. Payments varied widely across sites of service, and payments for anesthesia and pathology services contributed substantially to total payments. Cost-effectiveness analyses of CRC screening have relied on Medicare payments as proxies for costs, but cost-effectiveness may differ when analyzed from the perspectives of Medicare or commercial insurers.

Objectives: Heritable and environmental factors may contribute to differences in colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence across populations. We capitalized on the resources of the California Cancer Registry (CCR) and California's diverse Asian population to perform a cohort study exploring the relationships between CRC incidence, nativity, and neighborhood-level factors across Asian subgroups., Methods: We identified CRC cases in the CCR from 1990 to 2004 and calculated age-adjusted CRC incidence rates for non-Hispanic Whites and US-born vs. foreign-born Asian ethnic subgroups, stratified by neighborhood socioeconomic status (SES) and "ethnic enclave." Trends were studied with joinpoint analysis., Results: CRC incidence was lowest among foreign-born South Asians (22.0/100,000; 95% confidence interval (CI): 19.7-24.5/100,000) and highest among foreign-born Japanese (74.6/100,000; 95% CI: 70.1-79.2/100,000). Women in all Asian subgroups except Japanese, and men in all Asian subgroups except Japanese and US-born Chinese, had lower CRC incidence than non-Hispanic Whites. Among Chinese men and Filipino women and men, CRC incidence was lower among foreign-born than US-born persons; the opposite was observed for Japanese women and men. Among non-Hispanic Whites, but not most Asian subgroups, CRC incidence decreased over time. CRC incidence was inversely associated with neighborhood SES among non-Hispanic Whites, and level of ethnic enclave among Asians., Conclusions: CRC incidence rates differ substantially across Asian subgroups in California. The significant associations between CRC incidence and nativity and residence in an ethnic enclave suggest a substantial effect of acquired environmental factors. The absence of declines in CRC incidence rates among most Asians during our study period may point to disparities in screening compared with Whites.

Objectives: Gastrointestinal (GI) emergencies may cause substantial morbidity. Our aims were to characterize the national clinical and economic burden of GI visits to emergency departments (EDs) in the United States., Methods: We performed an observational cross-sectional study using the 2007 Nationwide Emergency Department Sample, the largest US all-payer ED database, to identify the leading causes for ED visits due to GI diseases and their associated charges, stratified by age and sex. Logistic regression was used to analyze predictors of hospitalization after an ED visit., Results: Of the 122 million ED visits in 2007, 15 million (12%) had a primary GI diagnosis. The leading primary GI diagnoses were abdominal pain (4.7 million visits), nausea and vomiting (1.6 million visits), and functional disorders of the digestive system (0.7 million visits). The leading diagnoses differed by age group. The fraction of ED visits resulting in hospitalization was 21.6% for primary GI diagnoses vs. 14.7% for non-GI visits. Women had more ED visits with a primary GI diagnosis than men (58.5 (95% CI 56.0-60.9) vs. 41.6 (95% CI 39.8-43.3) per 1000 persons), but lower rates of subsequent hospitalization (20.0% (95% CI 19.4-20.7%) vs. 24.0% (95% CI 23.3-24.6%)). There were no differences in hospitalization rates between sexes after adjustment by age, primary GI diagnosis, and Charlson Comorbidity Score. The total charges for ED visits with a primary GI diagnosis in 2007 were $27.9 billion., Conclusions: GI illnesses account for substantial clinical and economic burdens on US emergency medical services.

Objectives: Fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) and sigmoidoscopy are proven to decrease colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality. Sigmoidoscopy's benefit is limited to the distal colon. Observational data are conflicting regarding the degree to which colonoscopy affords protection against proximal CRC. Our aim was to explore the comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of colonoscopy vs. sigmoidoscopy and alternative CRC screening strategies in light of the latest published data., Methods: We performed a contemporary cost-utility analysis using a Markov model validated against data from randomized controlled trials of FOBT and sigmoidoscopy. Persons at average CRC risk within the general US population were modeled. Screening strategies included those recommended by the United States (US) Preventive Services Task Force, including colonoscopy every 10 years (COLO), flexible sigmoidoscopy every 5 years (FS), annual fecal occult blood testing, annual fecal immunochemical testing (FIT), and the combination FS/FIT. The main outcome measures were quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and costs., Results: In the base case, FIT dominated other strategies. The advantage of FIT over FS and COLO was contingent on rates of uptake and adherence that are well above current US rates. Compared with FIT, FS and COLO both cost <$50,000/QALY gained when FIT per-cycle adherence was <50%. COLO cost $56,800/QALY gained vs. FS in the base case. COLO cost <$100,000/QALY gained vs. FS when COLO yielded a relative risk of proximal CRC of <0.5 vs. no screening. In probabilistic analyses, COLO was cost-effective vs. FS at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY gained in 84% of iterations., Conclusions: Screening colonoscopy may be cost-effective compared with FIT and sigmoidoscopy, depending on the relative rates of screening uptake and adherence and the protective benefit of colonoscopy in the proximal colon. Colonoscopy's cost-effectiveness compared with sigmoidoscopy is contingent on the ability to deliver ~50% protection against CRC in the proximal colon.

Objectives: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a feared complication of chronic ulcerative colitis (UC). Annual endoscopic surveillance is recommended for the detection of early neoplasia. 5-Aminosalicylates (5-ASAs) may prevent some UC-associated CRC. Therefore, in patients prescribed 5-ASAs for maintenance of remission, annual surveillance might be overly burdensome and inefficient. We aimed to determine the ideal frequency of surveillance in patients with UC maintained on 5-ASAs., Methods: We performed systematic reviews of the literature, and created a Markov computer model simulating a cohort of 35-year-old men with chronic UC, followed until the age of 90 years. Twenty-two strategies were modeled: natural history (no 5-ASA or surveillance), surveillance without 5-ASA at intervals of 1-10 years, 5-ASA plus surveillance every 1-10 years, and 5-ASA alone. The primary outcome was the ideal interval of surveillance in the setting of 5-ASA maintenance, assuming a third-party payer was willing to pay $100,000 for each quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained., Results: In the natural history strategy, the CRC incidence was 30%. Without 5-ASA, annual surveillance was the ideal strategy, preventing 89% of CRC and costing $69,100 per QALY gained compared with surveillance every 2 years. 5-ASA alone prevented 49% of CRC. In the setting of 5-ASA, surveillance every 3 years was ideal, preventing 87% of CRC. 5-ASA with surveillance every 2 years cost an additional $147,500 per QALY gained, and 5-ASA with annual surveillance cost nearly $1 million additional per QALY gained compared with every 2 years. In Monte Carlo simulations, surveillance every 2 years or less often was ideal in 95% of simulations., Conclusions: If 5-ASA is efficacious chemoprevention for UC-associated CRC, endoscopic surveillance might be safely performed every 2 years or less often. Such practice could decrease burdens to patients and on endoscopic resources with a minimal decrease in quality-adjusted length of life, because 5-ASA with annual surveillance may cost nearly $1 million per additional QALY gained.

Objectives: Oral 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA, mesalamine) is effective in inducing and maintaining remission in ulcerative colitis (UC). The relative benefits and costs of maintenance 5-ASA therapy are uncertain. Our aims were to evaluate this strategy's potential cost-effectiveness., Methods: We constructed a Markov model to compare two strategies over 2 yr: (a) no maintenance 5-ASA, with 5-ASA 4.8 g/day given for flares, (b) maintenance 5-ASA 2.4 g/day, escalated and maintained at 4.8 g/day after the first flare. In both arms, the failure to induce remission led to other treatments, as needed: prednisone, parenteral corticosteroids, cyclosporine, 6-mercaptopurine, infliximab, and colectomy., Results: Without maintenance 5-ASA, the mean flares per person were 1.92, and the mean cost per person was $3,402. With maintenance 5-ASA providing a relative risk of flare of 0.7 at 5-ASA cost of $198/month, flares per person decreased to 1.38 at a cost of $8,810/flare prevented. Maintenance 5-ASA increased discounted quality-adjusted life-years per person (QALYs per person) from 1.75 to 1.77 at a discounted cost of $224,000/QALY gained. The results were most sensitive to the flare risk reduction and cost of 5-ASA, the utilities of being in remission without or with 5-ASA, and the colectomy rates. At $15/month (the cost of sulfasalazine), maintenance 5-ASA cost $640/flare prevented and $16,300/QALY gained., Conclusion: Maintenance 5-ASA therapy decreases UC flares, but its cost may be substantial, depending on society's willingness to pay. If sulfasalazine can be tolerated and yields comparable benefits, sulfasalazine maintenance therapy is likely to be cost-effective. The cost per QALY gained by 5-ASA maintenance is highly dependent on the quality of life while taking versus not taking maintenance 5-ASA, highlighting the importance of patients' preferences.

Objectives: [corrected] The Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) "test-and-treat" strategy in uninvestigated dyspepsia is an effective alternative to prompt endoscopy. Our aims were to determine whether the combination of an educational session and availability of office-based H. pylori testing (test-and-treat intervention [TTI]) increases use of the test-and-treat strategy by primary care practitioners and whether it improves patient outcomes., Methods: We conducted a 1-yr prospective trial of patients with suspected peptic ulcer disease in six primary care centers, three with TTI and three designated as usual care controls (UCC)., Results: H. pylori testing was performed in 81% of 54 TTI patients and in 49% of 39 UCC patients (p = 0.004). TTI and UCC patients had similar gastroenterology referral rates (24% vs 33%, p = 0.33), endoscopy or upper GI radiography rates (30% vs 31%, p = 0.91), and primary care visits per patient (3.1 +/- 2.8 vs 3.1 +/- 2.6, p = 0.92). TTI patients were less likely than UCC patients to receive repeated antisecretory medication prescriptions (35% vs 66%, p = 0.003). Symptomatic status at 1 yr and satisfaction with medical care did not differ between groups. Median (and interquartile range) annualized disease-related expenditures per patient were $454 ($162-932) for TTI and $576 ($327-1,435) for UCC patients (p = 0.17)., Conclusions: The combination of an educational session and availability of office-based H. pylori testing may increase acceptance of the test-and-treat strategy by primary care providers. It remains to be determined whether increased use of the test-and-treat strategy yields significant improvements in clinical and economic outcomes compared to usual care.

Objective: Recent European trials demonstrate that testing and treatment for Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) is an effective alternative to prompt endoscopy in uninvestigated dyspepsia. The eventual endoscopy rate after H. pylori testing, which is a key determinant of cost-effectiveness, is unknown in the United States. Our aim was to determine the endoscopy rate after H. pylori testing in primary care practice in the United States and to compare outcomes among seropositive and seronegative patients., Methods: We performed a retrospective review with mean 13 month follow-up of primary care patients with dyspeptic symptoms tested with office-based H. pylori serology., Results: Of 268 adults tested (37+/-11 yr, 58% women), 57 (21%) were seropositive and 49/57 (86%) received eradication therapy. Endoscopy or contrast radiography was performed on 19% of seropositive and 19% of seronegative patients (p = 0.97). Annualized median disease-related expenditures were similar among seropositive and seronegative patients ($228 [$93-$654] vs $366 [$107-$1268], p = 0.19). However, aggregate expenditures were substantially lower than the cost of endoscopy alone ($816 [$296-$970]). On follow-up, seropositive and seronegative patients had similar numbers of primary care visits (2.9+/-3.2 vs 3.5+/-3.6, p = 0.23), prolonged antisecretory medication use (25 vs 33%, p = 0.27), and specialist referrals (23 vs 24%, p = 0.83)., Conclusion: In a United States center, 81% of primary care patients tested for H. pylori did not undergo endoscopy, and patients incurred significantly lower median expenditures after noninvasive H. pylori testing than the cost of endoscopy alone. Seropositive and seronegative patients experienced comparable outcomes after H. pylori testing.