scholarly journals S3580 Purulent Acute Appendicitis Diagnosed on Routine Screening Colonoscopy in an Asymptomatic Patient

2021 ◽  
Vol 116 (1) ◽  
pp. S1469-S1469
Author(s):  
Nandakumar Mohan ◽  
Maria Lagarde
2010 ◽  
Vol 24 (11) ◽  
pp. 656-660 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maida J Sewitch ◽  
Dara Stein ◽  
Lawrence Joseph ◽  
Alain Bitton ◽  
Robert J Hilsden ◽  
...  

BACKGROUND: Determining whether a colonoscopy is performed for screening or nonscreening purposes can facilitate clinical practice and research. However, there is no simple method to determine the colonoscopy indication using patient medical files or health administrative databases.OBJECTIVE: To determine patient-endoscopist agreement on the colonoscopy indication.METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among staff endoscopists and their patients at seven university-affiliated hospitals in Montreal, Quebec. The study participants were 50 to 75 years of age, they were able to understand English or French, and were about to undergo colonoscopy. Self- (endoscopist) and interviewer-administered (patient) questionnaires ascertained information that permitted classification of the colonoscopy indication. Patient colonoscopy indication was defined as the following: perceived screening (routine screening, family history, age); perceived nonscreening (follow-up); medical history that implied nonscreening; and a combination of the three preceding indications. Agreement between patient and endoscopist indications was measured using concordance and Kappa statistic.RESULTS: In total, 702 patients and 38 endoscopists participated. The three most common reasons for undergoing colonoscopy were routine screening/regular check-up (33.8%), follow-up to a previous problem (30.2%) and other problem (24.6%). Concordance (range 0.79 to 0.85) and Kappa (range 0.58 to 0.70) were highest for perceived nonscreening colonoscopy. Recent large bowel symptoms accounted for 120 occurrences of disagreement in which the patient perceived a nonscreening colonoscopy while the endoscopist perceived a screening colonoscopy.CONCLUSIONS: Patient self-report may be an acceptable means for rapidly assessing whether a colonoscopy is performed for screening or nonscreening purposes. Delivery of patient-centred care may help patients and endoscopists reach a shared understanding of the reason for colonoscopy.


2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 6-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Idrees Suliman ◽  
John Guirguis ◽  
Iryna Chyshkevych ◽  
Nemer F. Dabage

Colorectal cancer is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. As such, there are recognized guidelines in the screening of this preventable cancer. There are differences in opinion regarding screening recommendations between the European and United States Cancer Prevention Societies. Screening colonoscopy is an option for routine screening for colorectal cancer in asymptomatic adults. It is a day procedure that is conducted both in hospital and specialized outpatient endoscopy suites. Serious harm is in the region of 3 per 1,000 examinations [Am J Gastroenterol. 2016 Aug; 111(8): 1092–101]. Splenic injury is a rare complication of colonoscopy whose frequency is unclear. Conservative management of splenic injury is desirable in order to preserve immunocompetence. We present a case in which a previously healthy 59-year-old female developed a splenic injury and later pleural effusion after screening colonoscopy.


2017 ◽  
Vol 112 ◽  
pp. S1528-S1529
Author(s):  
Ahmad Nakshabandi ◽  
Andrew C. Berry ◽  
Magdy El-Din ◽  
Kristen Powell ◽  
Rahman Nakshabendi ◽  
...  

Endoscopy ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 41 (S 02) ◽  
pp. E100-E100 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Kao ◽  
A. Jain ◽  
A. Sheinbaum

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. e00293
Author(s):  
Xavier Pereira ◽  
Gustavo Romero-Velez ◽  
Gregory Dickinson ◽  
Cosman Camilo Mandujano

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document