Search

Prospective cohort studies have suggested that sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) intake is significantly associated with the risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). However, it remains unclear whether this observed association was susceptible to potential confounding factors due to the long-term development process of CRC, and the risk of CRC associated with sweet beverages has rarely been reported. We aimed to investigate the association between SSBs/sweet beverages and CRC risk.We performed two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis using independent genetic variants for SSBs and sweet beverages from a published genome-wide association study (GWAS). Summary statistics for instrument-outcome associations from two databases for malignant neoplasms of the colon and the rectum (FinnGen and UK Biobank). The inverse weighted method (IVW) meta-analysis was the main method used to estimate the relationship, and sensitivity analyses were performed with Cochran's Q test, leave-one-out analysis, MR-Egger regression, Steiger filtering, and the MR PRESSO test.Genetically predicted SSBs intake was associated with a higher colonic malignant neoplasms risk (odds ratio (OR): 1.013; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.001, 1.026; P = 0.036) in a combined sample size of 579,986 individuals (4029 cases). Such a significant causal effect of SSBs on rectal malignant neoplasms or sweet beverages on CRC was not observed.Our findings corroborated a causal association between SSBs and colonic malignant neoplasms risk but did not support such a relationship in the analysis of the rectal malignant neoplasms nor the sweet beverage intake, which might be interpreted with caution and further confirmed.

Background Water exchange colonoscopy is the least painful method for unsedated colonoscopies. Simplified left colon water exchange (LWE) reduces the cecal intubation time but it is difficult to avoid the use of an additional pump. Minimal water exchange (MWE) is an improved novel method that eliminates the need for pumps, but it is not clear whether MWE has the same efficiency as LWE. Methods This was a prospective, randomized, controlled, noninferiority trial conducted in a tertiary hospital. Enrolled patients were randomized 1:1 to the LWE group or MWE group. The primary outcome was recalled insertion pain measured by a 4-point verbal rating scale. Secondary outcomes included adenoma detection rate (ADR), cecal intubation time, volume of water used, and patient willingness to repeat unsedated colonoscopy. Results 226 patients were included (LWE n = 113, MWE n = 113). The MWE method showed noninferior moderate/severe pain rates compared with the LWE method (10.6 % vs. 9.7 %), with a difference of 0.9 percentage points (99 % confidence interval [CI] –9.5 to 11.3; threshold, 15 %). ADR, cecal intubation time, and willingness to repeat unsedated colonoscopy were not significantly different between the two groups, but the mean volume of water used was significantly less with MWE than with LWE (163.7 mL vs. 407.2 mL; 99 %CI –298.28 to –188.69). Conclusion Compared with LWE, MWE demonstrated a noninferior outcome for insertion pain, and comparable cecal intubation time and ADR, but reduced the volume of water used and eliminated the need for a water pump.

BACKGROUND Poor bowel preparation is commonly observed in inpatients undergoing colonoscopy, particularly those with higher risks for inadequate bowel preparation. AIMS The objective of this study was to determine whether personalized bowel preparation regimens combined with face-to-face instruction (FFI) could improve the quality of bowel preparation for inpatient. METHODS In this endoscopist-blinded, randomized controlled trial, 320 inpatients were enrolled and randomly allocated (1:1) to the control and intervention groups. The intervention group received FFI and personalized bowel preparation regimens, while the control group received the routine bowel preparation regimen and education. The primary outcome was adequate bowel preparation rate. Secondary outcomes included rates of procedure-related adverse events, incorrect diet restriction and laxative intake, etc. RESULTS: The adequate bowel preparation rate in the intervention group was significantly higher compared to control group [intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis: 70.0% vs 51.3%, P

Background: The prophylactic application of clips for large pedunculated colorectal polyp resection may prevent postpolypectomy bleeding (PPB) but carries the risk of tumor remnants. This study assessed the effectiveness and safety of underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) without clips before resecting large pedunculated polyps.Methods: Pedunculated polyps with a head diameter of 10-20 mm, a stalk diameter of ≥ 5 mm and a stalk length of ≥ 10 mm were eligible for inclusion and removed by UEMR without prophylactically clipping stem. The primary outcome was the rate of PPB, which included immediate PPB (IPPB) and delayed PPB (DPPB). The secondary outcomes included the rate of en bloc resection, complete resection, R0 resection and other adverse events.Results: Totally, 28 patients with 32 polyps were included in this study. The head diameter was 14.6 ± 3.5 mm. After polypectomy, two cases (6.3%) of nonactive spurting IPPB were observed, and no DPPB occurred during the follow-up period. All pedunculated polyps were successfully resected and achieved en bloc resection, complete resection and R0 resection. None of the polyps showed evidence of other severe adverse events.Conclusion: UEMR without the application of prophylactic clips has a low postpolypectomy bleeding rate and low risk of residual tumor and other severe adverse events. Therefore, it might be suitable and safe for resection of 10-20 mm pedunculated polyps.Trial registration: The study was registered on 08/04/2021 at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04837690).

Several models for predicting adequate bowel preparation are available but have never been externally validated. The aim of this study is to compare the available models in an independent population.This study prospectively recruited 500 consecutive patients from August to December 2020 from the Endoscopy Center of a tertiary hospital. All patients underwent the same bowel preparation regimen. The discrimination of the prediction models was quantified with the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), and the 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated for each AUC.Finally, 461 patients were eligible for this study. A total of 110 (23.9%) patients were deemed to show inadequate bowel preparation during colonoscopy. There were significant differences between patients with and without adequate bowel preparation in terms of current hospitalization, procedure time, comorbidities (including diabetes and constipation), American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Classification System score (ASA) ≥ 3, medication usage, and abdominal/pelvic surgery. The prediction models performed as follows: the Dik ≥ 2 model, the Dik ≥ 3 model, and the Antonio 1.225 model had AUCs of 0.660 (95% CI = 0.604-0.717), 0.691 (95% CI = 0.646-0.733), and 0.645 (95% CI = 0.615-0.704), respectively. Comparison of the two prediction models showed no significant improvement (Antonio 1.225 vs. Dik ≥ 3, 1.801, 95% CI = -0.004-0.096, P = 0.072).Both models are potentially helpful. However, it is necessary to develop or improve a prediction model to obtain a more suitable and detailed model.ClinicalTrials.gov, Number NCT04607161.

Background and aim: Previous observational studies have suggested a paradoxical relationship between iron status and the risk of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). Observed associations in these epidemiological studies fail to show sequential temporality and suffer from problems of confounding. Therefore, we performed a bidirectional two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) to evaluate the relationship between serum iron status and NAFLD. Methods: The inverse weighted method (IVW) meta-analysis with the fixed-effect model was the main method to estimate the relationship between iron status, including serum ferritin, iron, transferrin saturation (TSAT) and total iron-binding capacity (TIBC), and NAFLD. Weighted median, penalized weighted median, and MR Robust Adjusted Profile Score (MR RAPS) methods were used as additional analyses. Sensitivity analyses were performed with Cochran’s Q test, MR–Egger regression, Steiger filtering, and the MR PRESSO test. Results: Iron status, including serum ferritin, iron, and TSAT, was associated with an increased risk of NAFLD (odds ratio (OR) (95% confidence interval (CI)): 1.25 (1.06, 1.48); 1.24 (1.05, 1.46), 1.16 (1.02, 1.31), respectively). In contrast, minimal effects of NAFLD on serum ferritin, iron, TSAT, and TIBC were observed (OR (95% CI): 1.01 (1.00, 1.02), 1.01 (1.00, 1.02), 1.03 (1.01, 1.05), 1.03 (1.01, 1.05), respectively). Conclusions: Our findings corroborated the causal associations between serum ferritin, iron, TSAT, and NAFLD, which might suggest the potential benefits of iron-related therapy. In addition, NAFLD might, in turn, slightly affect iron homeostasis indicated as serum ferritin, iron, TSAT, and TIBC, but this needs to be further confirmed.

Background We performed a systematic review and pooled analysis to assess the effectiveness and safety of different endoscopic resection methods for 10- to 20-mm nonpedunculated colorectal polyps. Methods Articles in PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library related to the common endoscopic treatment of 10- to 20-mm nonpedunculated polyps published as of April 2020 were searched. Primary outcomes were the R0 resection rate and en bloc resection rate. Secondary outcomes were safety and the recurrence rate. Meta-regression and subgroup analysis were also performed. Results A total of 36 studies involving 3212 polyps were included in the final analysis. Overall, the effectiveness of resection methods with a submucosal uplifting effect, including endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), cold EMR and underwater EMR (UEMR), was better than that of methods without a nonsubmucosal uplifting effect [R0 resection rate, 90% (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81-0.94, I2 = 84%) vs 82% (95% CI 0.78-0.85, I2 = 0%); en bloc resection rate 85% (95% CI 0.79-0.91, I2 = 83%) vs 74% (95% CI 0.47-0.94, I2 = 94%)]. Regarding safety, the pooled data showed that hot resection [hot snare polypectomy, UEMR and EMR] had a higher risk of intraprocedural bleeding than cold resection [3% (95% CI 0.01-0.05, I2 = 68%) vs 0% (95% CI 0-0.01, I2 = 0%)], while the incidences of delayed bleeding, perforation and post-polypectomy syndrome were all low. Conclusions Methods with submucosal uplifting effects are more effective than those without for resecting 10- to 20-mm nonpedunculated colorectal polyps, and cold EMR is associated with a lower risk of intraprocedural bleeding than other methods. Additional research is needed to verify the advantages of these methods, especially cold EMR.