Search

Colonic diverticulitis is a painful gastrointestinal disease that recurs unpredictably and can lead to chronic gastrointestinal symptoms. Gastroenterologists commonly care for patients with this disease. The purpose of this Clinical Practice Update is to provide practical and evidence-based advice for management of diverticulitis. We reviewed systematic reviews, meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, and observational studies to develop 14 best practices. In brief, computed tomography is often necessary to make a diagnosis. Rarely, a colon malignancy is misdiagnosed as diverticulitis. Whether patients should have a colonoscopy after an episode of diverticulitis depends on the patient's history, most recent colonoscopy, and disease severity and course. In patients with a history of diverticulitis and chronic symptoms, alternative diagnoses should be excluded with both imaging and lower endoscopy. Antibiotic treatment can be used selectively rather than routinely in immunocompetent patients with mild acute uncomplicated diverticulitis. Antibiotic treatment is strongly advised in immunocompromised patients. To reduce the risk of recurrence, patients should consume a high-quality diet, have a normal body mass index, be physically active, not smoke, and avoid nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug use except aspirin prescribed for secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease. At the same time, patients should understand that genetic factors also contribute to diverticulitis risk. Patients should be educated that the risk of complicated diverticulitis is highest with the first presentation. An elective segmental resection should not be advised based on the number of episodes. Instead, a discussion of elective segmental resection should be personalized to consider severity of disease, patient preferences and values, as well as risks and benefits., (Copyright © 2021 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: Serrated polyp (SPs) are precursors to 20% to 30% of cases of colorectal tumors, but patients' long-term risk after removal of SPs is poorly understood. We investigated the risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) in individuals with a history of SPs., Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of Kaiser Permanente Northern California members who underwent colonoscopy from 2006 through 2016. Study participants were categorized based on the size and location of SPs. We used Cox proportional hazards modeling to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for the association of CRC diagnosed more than 1 year after colonoscopy, with polyp type vs no polyp after adjustment for year of colonoscopy, age, sex, race/ethnicity, and smoking history., Results: The study included 233,393 individuals, of whom 445 developed incident CRC. At 10 years, the cumulative incidence rates of CRC for individuals with no polyp, proximal small SPs, proximal large SPs, and distal SPs were 4.7 (95% CI, 4.0-5.6), 14.8 (95% CI, 9.0-24.3), 30.2 (95% CI, 13.2-68.4), and 5.9 (95% CI, 3.6-9.5) per 1000 persons, respectively. In patients with SPs, risk of CRC was not increased until 3 years or more after the first colonoscopy (HR for small proximal SPs 2.6; 95% CI, 1.7-3.9 and HR for large proximal SPs 8.0; 95% CI, 3.6-16.1). The presence of synchronous adenomas increased the risk for CRC (HR for proximal SPs with synchronous adenomas 4.0; 95% CI, 3.0-5.5 and HR for distal SPs with synchronous adenomas 2.4; 95% CI, 1.7-3.4)., Conclusions: In a retrospective analysis of a large cohort of individuals examined by colonoscopy, we found that risk of incident CRC increased in individuals with proximal SPs (large SPs in particular) 3 years or more after the colonoscopy. These findings support guidelines that recommend surveillance colonoscopy for individuals with SPs., (Copyright © 2020 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background & Aims: Few studies have evaluated long-term outcomes of ongoing colonoscopic screening and surveillance in a screening population. We aimed to determine the 10-year risk for advanced neoplasia (defined as adenomas ≥10mm, adenomas with villous histology or high-grade dysplasia, or colorectal cancer [CRC]) and assessed whether baseline colonoscopy findings were associated with long-term outcomes., Methods: We collected data from the Department of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Program Study on 3121 asymptomatic veterans (50-75 years old) who underwent a screening colonoscopy from 1994 through 1997 at 13 medical centers and were then followed for 10 years or until death. We included 1915 subjects with at least 1 surveillance colonoscopy and estimated cumulative incidence of advanced neoplasia by Kaplan-Meier curves. We then fit a longitudinal joint model to estimate risk of advanced neoplasia at each subsequent examination after baseline, adjusting for multiple colonoscopies within individuals., Results: Through 10 years of follow-up, there were 146 individuals among all baseline colonoscopy groups found to have at least 1 incident advanced neoplasia. The cumulative 10-year incidence of advanced neoplasia was highest among those with baseline CRC (43.7%; 95% CI 13.0%-74.4%), followed by those with baseline advanced adenoma (AA) (21.9%; 95% CI 15.7-28.1). The cumulative 10-year incidence of advanced neoplasia was 6.3% (95% CI 4.1%-8.5%) and 4.1% (95% CI 2.7%-5.4%) for baseline 1 to 2 small adenomas (<1cm, and without villous histology or high-grade dysplasia) and no neoplasia, respectively (log-rank P = .10). After adjusting for prior surveillance, the risk of advanced neoplasia at each subsequent examination was not significantly increased in veterans with 1 or 2 small adenomas at baseline (odds ratio 0.96; 95% CI 0.67-1.41) compared with veterans with no baseline neoplasia., Conclusions: Baseline screening colonoscopy findings associate with advanced neoplasia within 10 years. Individuals with only 1 or 2 small adenomas at baseline have a low risk of advanced neoplasia over 10 years. Alternative surveillance strategies, could be considered for these individuals., (Copyright © 2020 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: A low adenoma detection rate (ADR) increases risks of interval cancers (ICs). Proximal colon flat polyps, e.g. serrated lesions (SLs), are difficult to find. Missed proximal colon flat lesions likely contribute to IC., Aims: We compared chromoendoscopy with water exchange (CWE), water exchange (WE) and air insufflation (AI) in detecting adenomas in screening colonoscopy., Methods: After split-dose preparation, 480 veterans were randomized to AI, WE and CWE., Results: Primary outcome of proximal ADR (55.6% vs 53.4% vs 52.2%, respectively) were similar in all groups. Adenoma per colonoscopy (APC) and adenoma per positive colonoscopy (APPC) were comparable. Detection rate of proximal colon SLs was significantly higher for CWE and WE than AI (26.3%, 23.6% and 11.3%, respectively, p  = 0.002). Limitations: single operator; SLs only surrogate markers of but not IC., Conclusions: When an endoscopist achieves high-quality AI examinations with overall ADR twice (61.6%) the recommended standard (30%), use of WE and CWE does not produce further improvement in proximal or overall ADR. Comparable APC and APPC confirm equivalent withdrawal inspection techniques. WE alone is sufficient to significantly improve detection of proximal SLs. The impact of increased detection of proximal SLs by WE on prevention of IC deserves to be studied. This study is registered at ClinicalTrial.gov (NCT#01607255).