scholarly journals Comparison of the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale with an Auditable Application of the US Multi-Society Task Force Guidelines

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 57-62 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valérie Heron ◽  
Myriam Martel ◽  
Talat Bessissow ◽  
Yen-I Chen ◽  
Etienne Désilets ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bowel Preparation ◽  
Task Force ◽  
The Us

Lower Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Parakkal Deepak ◽  
David H. Bruining
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Endoscopic Ultrasonography ◽  
Bowel Preparation ◽  
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy ◽  
Task Force ◽  
Screening Colonoscopy ◽  
Average Risk ◽  
The Us ◽  
Lower Endoscopy

Since the advent of the first flexible fiberoptic sigmoidoscope in 1967, lower gastrointestinal endoscopy equipment has technologically advanced and is used for a number of diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. This review covers the definition of and indications for lower endoscopy; diagnostic and screening colonoscopy, bowel preparation for colonoscopy, special considerations for patients on anticoagulants and antiplatelet agents; endocarditis prophylaxis; general technique; diagnostic and therapeutic techniques during colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, anoscopy, endoscopic ultrasonography, balloon-assisted colonoscopy, and lower endoscopy training; and innovations on the horizon. Figures show room setup and patient positioning for colonoscopy; technique for insertion of a colonoscope and endoluminal view of rectum, descending colon, transverse colon, and cecum; pinch biopsy and hot biopsy forceps; snare polypectomy and endomucosal resection of a polyp using the lift and cut and suction cap techniques; Haggitt classification of tissue invasion in a pedunculated polyp; endoscopic clips and their application; self-expanding uncovered metal stents and their method of deployment; an anoscope; and rigid endorectal probes for endoscopic ultrasonography. Tables list indications for colonoscopy, recommendations for screening for colorectal cancer (average risk) from the US Preventive Services Task Force, recommendations from the US Multi-Society Task Force for surveillance after baseline colonoscopy in average-risk individuals, recommendations from the US Multi-Society Task Force for screening and surveillance in colorectal cancer (high risk), bowel preparation scales, agents for bowel preparation prior to colonoscopy, and Haggitt classification of tumor invasiveness in an adenomatous polyp.   This review contains 10 highly rendered figures, 7 tables, and 60 references.

scholarly journals A51 COMPARISON OF THE BOSTON BOWEL PREPARATION SCALE WITH AN AUDITABLE APPLICATION OF THE US MULTI-SOCIETY TASK FORCE GUIDELINES

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (suppl_1) ◽  
pp. 86-87
Author(s):  
V Heron ◽  
M Martel ◽  
T Bessissow ◽  
Y Chen ◽  
E Desilets ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bowel Preparation ◽  
Task Force ◽  
The Us

Palestine Unbound

2018 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 130-134
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Task Force ◽  
The United States ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Tel Aviv ◽  
The Us ◽  
Intention To Move ◽  
Arab Israeli Conflict ◽  
The U.S

This section, updated regularly on the blog Palestine Square, covers popular conversations related to the Palestinians and the Arab-Israeli conflict during the quarter 16 November 2017 to 15 February 2018: #JerusalemIstheCapitalofPalestine went viral after U.S. president Donald Trump recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and announced his intention to move the U.S. embassy there from Tel Aviv. The arrest of Palestinian teenager Ahed Tamimi for slapping an Israeli soldier also prompted a viral campaign under the hashtag #FreeAhed. A smaller campaign protested the exclusion of Palestinian human rights from the agenda of the annual Creating Change conference organized by the US-based National LGBTQ Task Force in Washington. And, UNRWA publicized its emergency funding appeal, following the decision of the United States to slash funding to the organization, with the hashtag #DignityIsPriceless.

scholarly journals Antiplatelet Agents for Cancer Prevention: Current Evidences and Continuing Controversies

Cancers ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (11) ◽  
pp. 1639 ◽  
Author(s):  
Corinne Frere ◽  
Manon Lejeune ◽  
Pierre Kubicek ◽  
Dorothée Faille ◽  
Zora Marjanovic ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Evidence ◽  
Task Force ◽  
Cardiovascular Prevention ◽  
Antiplatelet Agents ◽  
Mortality Data ◽  
Low Dose Aspirin ◽  
The Us ◽  
Secondary Analyses ◽  
Prevention Trials ◽  
Related Mortality

Over the past two decades, aspirin has emerged as a promising chemoprotective agent to prevent colorectal cancer (CRC). In 2016, the mounting evidence supporting its chemoprotective effect, from both basic science and clinical research, led the US Preventive Services Task Force to recommend regular use of low-dose aspirin in some subgroups of patients for whom the benefits are deemed to outweigh the risks. In contrast, data on the chemoprotective effect of aspirin against other cancers are less clear and remain controversial. Most data come from secondary analyses of cardiovascular prevention trials, with only a limited number reporting cancer outcomes as a prespecified endpoint, and overall unclear findings. Moreover, the potential chemoprotective effect of aspirin against other cancers has been recently questioned with the publication of 3 long-awaited trials of aspirin in the primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases reporting no benefit of aspirin on overall cancer incidence and cancer-related mortality. Data on the chemoprotective effects of other antiplatelet agents remain scarce and inconclusive, and further research to examine their benefit are warranted. In this narrative review, we summarize current clinical evidence and continuing controversies on the potential chemoprotective properties of antiplatelet agents against cancer.

Su1528 Practice Patterns in the Use of Bowel Preparation Regimens During Colonoscopy Among Gastroenterologists in the US: Results From a National Survey

2015 ◽  
Vol 81 (5) ◽  
pp. AB316-AB317
Author(s):  
Sumalatha Muthineni ◽  
Diego Lim ◽  
Prashanth Vennalaganti ◽  
Neil Gupta ◽  
Sravanthi Parasa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
National Survey ◽  
Bowel Preparation ◽  
Practice Patterns ◽  
The Us

JAMA and the US Preventive Services Task Force

JAMA ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 326 (24) ◽  
pp. 2477
Author(s):  
Phil B. Fontanarosa ◽  
Robert M. Golub
Keyword(s):  
Task Force ◽  
Preventive Services ◽  
The Us

scholarly journals Colorectal Cancer Surveillance after Index Colonoscopy: Guidance from the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology

2013 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 224-228 ◽  
Author(s):  
Desmond Leddin ◽  
Robert Enns ◽  
Robert Hilsden ◽  
Carlo A Fallone ◽  
Linda Rabeneck ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Task Force ◽  
Cancer Surveillance ◽  
Screening Tests ◽  
Average Risk ◽  
Health Care Environment ◽  
Canadian Association ◽  
The Us ◽  
Colonoscopy Surveillance

BACKGROUND: Differences between American (United States [US]) and European guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance may create confusion for the practicing clinician. Under- or overutilization of surveillance colonoscopy can impact patient care.METHODS: The Canadian Association of Gastroenterology (CAG) convened a working group (CAG-WG) to review available guidelines and provide unified guidance to Canadian clinicians regarding appropriate follow-up for colorectal cancer (CRC) surveillance after index colonoscopy. A literature search was conducted for relevant data that postdated the published guidelines.RESULTS: The CAG-WG chose the 2012 US Multi-Society Task Force (MSTF) on Colorectal Cancer to serve as the basis for the Canadian position, primarily because the US approach was the simplest and comprehensively addressed the issue of serrated polyps. Aspects of other guidelines were incorporated where relevant. The CAG-WG recommendations differed from the US MSTF guidelines in three main areas: patients with negative index colonoscopy should be followed-up at 10 years using any of the appropriate screening tests, including colonos-copy, for average-risk individuals; among patients with >10 adenomas, a one-year interval for subsequent colonoscopy is recommended; and for long-term follow-up, patients with low-risk adenomas on both the index and first follow-up procedures can undergo second follow-up colonos-copy at an interval of five to 10 years.DISCUSSION: The CAG-WG adapted the US MSTF guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance to the Canadian health care environment with a few modifications. It is anticipated that the present article will provide unified guidance that will enhance physician acceptance and encourage appropriate utilization of recommended surveillance intervals.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document