Factors predictive of high-risk adenomas at the third colonoscopy after initial adenoma removal

Colorectal cancer incidence after the first surveillance colonoscopy and the need for ongoing surveillance: a retrospective, cohort analysis

BACKGROUND

Recommendations for the first postpolypectomy surveillance colonoscopy (SC1), based on stratifying postpolypectomy colorectal cancer (CRC) risk, are well established. Limited data inform recommendations for surveillance beyond SC1.

OBJECTIVE

We investigated which patient groups need surveillance beyond SC1.

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of patients who underwent colonoscopy with polypectomy at 17 UK hospitals, mostly from 2000 to 2010, and had ≥1 surveillance colonoscopies. Cancer and death data were collected through 2017. We examined patients in groups defined by risk at baseline and SC1, applying risk definitions from the 2020 UK postpolypectomy surveillance guidelines: 'low risk, low risk' (LR-LR), 'high risk, low risk' (HR-LR), 'low risk, high risk' (LR-HR) and 'high risk, high risk' (HR-HR). We examined CRC incidence after SC1, censoring at any second surveillance colonoscopy (SC2), and after SC2 through end of follow-up. We compared incidence with general population incidence using standardised incidence ratios (SIRs).

RESULTS

Analyses included 10 508 patients: LR-LR=6587 (63%), HR-LR=3272 (31%), LR-HR=248 (2%) and HR-HR=401 (4%). Median follow-up from SC1 was 8.0 years and 151 CRCs were diagnosed. Compared with the general population, CRC incidence after SC1 was lower in the LR-LR group (SIR 0.48, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.67), non-significantly different in the HR-LR (SIR 1.17, 0.85 to 1.58) or LR-HR (SIR 2.51, 0.81 to 5.85) groups, but higher in the HR-HR group (SIR 2.84, 1.30 to 5.39). After SC2, CRC incidence in the HR-HR group was no longer higher than in the general population (SIR 1.86, 0.89 to 3.42).

CONCLUSION

Patients with high-risk findings at both baseline and SC1 needed an SC2, while those with low-risk findings at SC1 did not, regardless of their baseline findings.

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of sodium phosphate tablets and polyethylene glycol solution for bowel cleansing in healthy Korean adults

PURPOSE

Bowel cleansing is generally regarded as time-consuming and unpleasant among patients. Patients commonly state that bowel preparation provokes more discomfort than the actual colonoscopic examination. The purpose of this study was to compare two regimens of sodium phosphate (NaP) tablets versus polyethylene glycol (PEG) solution for bowel preparation in healthy Korean adults.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a single center, prospective, open-label, investigator-blinded, randomized, controlled-pilot study. A total of 62 healthy Korean subjects were randomly assigned to two groups (NaP vs. PEG). Efficacy, safety, and patient-related outcomes, as well as procedural parameters, were evaluated.

RESULTS

Although there were no significant differences in total Ottawa bowel quality score, fluid scores and the rate of adequate bowel preparation were significantly better in the NaP group than the PEG group. Additionally, the NaP group showed better results regarding patient tolerance, satisfaction, preference, and rate of adverse events than the PEG group. Significant fluctuations in specific serum electrolytes were common and of a greater magnitude in the NaP group than the PEG group. However, these abnormalities were transient and did not result in serious complications and side effects.

CONCLUSION

In this study, NaP tablets were shown to be an effective, well-tolerated, and acceptable regimen for bowel preparation. Also, our study suggests that NaP tablets may be safe and can be used as a bowel cleansing agent in healthy adults undergoing elective colonoscopy. Further multicenter, large scale studies are needed to confirm these findings.