Prevalence of Peptic Ulcer Disease and Associated Factors Among Dyspeptic Patients At Endoscopy Unit, University of Gondar Hospital, Northwest Ethiopia

Background: Dyspepsia is a common complaint in upper gastrointestinal disorders. It is described as predominant epigastric pain lasting for at least one month. Peptic Ulcer Disease (PUD) occurs in 5-15% of patients with dyspepsia. Helicobacter pylori (H.pylori) infection and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs)/aspirin (ASA) use are widely known risk factors for PUD. This research article aimed to determine the prevalence of PUD and associated factors among dyspeptic patients at the endoscopy unit, University of Gondar hospital, Northwest Ethiopia.Methods: A hospital-based cross-sectional study was conducted at University of Gondar hospital. A sample of 218 adults who presented with the complaint of dyspepsia, and underwent endoscopic evaluation were interviewed from June 1 to November 30, 2020. A consecutive sampling method was used to recruit the study subjects. Relevant clinical history was obtained from patients’ medical records. Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy was used to confirm the presence of peptic ulcer disease. The Data were entered into EpiData version 4.6.0.2 and exported to SPSS version 20 for analysis. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify associated factors with the occurrence of PUD among dyspeptic patients. P-value <0.05 was used to declare a statistically significant association.Results: A total of 218 dyspeptic patients who underwent upper gastrointestinal endoscopic evaluations were included in the study. The PUD was diagnosed in one-third of patients with dyspepsia. Dyspeptic patients with active H. pylori infection (AOR=6.3, 95%CI: 2.96-13.38) and NSAIDs/ASA use (AOR=6.2, 95%CI: 2.93-13.36) were at higher risk of developing PUD.Conclusion: The magnitude of active H. pylori infection among symptomatic PUD patients was high. So then, a “test-and-treat” strategy is advised. Cautious use of NSAIDs/ASA is required as it is readily available over-the-counter.

Impact of Mobile Endoscopy Unit for Rendering Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Services at Two Community Health Centers in Western India

Background Patients with gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms in remote areas do not have access to standard medical care with the issues related to cost of medical care, transportation, health literacy, lack of healthcare insurance—all preventing healthcare access in a timely manner. To overcome this, we designed a mobile endoscopy van with the intent to provide free essential medical services to the rural population. Methods This is a retrospective study of patients with predominantly upper GI symptoms at two community health centers (each 2 days camp). This is an audit of endoscopy findings in a community set up using a Mobile Endoscopy Unit (MEU). Patients' details were collected in a pre-designed questionnaire. Only those patients with alarm symptoms and suspicion of any pathological state underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) in MEU. Data analysis was done using descriptive statistics. Results A total of 724 patients (424 [58.5%] males; mean [SD] age 48.5 [5.2] years) were included. The commonest presenting symptom was heartburn in 377 (52.1%) patients. The median duration of symptoms was 6.5 (range: 2–36) months. Gastroesophageal reflux disease was seen in 16 (6.8%) patients, ulceroproliferative growth was noted in the stomach in 3 (1.3%) patients. Eighteen (7.6%) patients had a positive rapid urease test and received Helicobacter pylori eradication therapy. The most commonly prescribed drugs were proton-pump inhibitors in 692 (95.6%) patients. Nine (1.2%) patients had chronic liver disease secondary to alcoholism and were counseled for abstinence. All procedures were safely performed without any immediate adverse events. Conclusions Community outreach strategies such as the use of mobile endoscopy unit were found to be very useful in the diagnosis of GI symptoms. More research is needed in low-income countries to treat complex pathological states in rural patients.

Impact of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on turnover time and revenue in the endoscopy unit: single-center experience

Background and study aims The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic heavily impacted the New York metro area causing most institutions to either reduce case volume or fully close remaining open units incorporated specific guidelines for procedures lockdown potentially leading to a greater turn-over time. We analyzed the quantitative and financial impact of this lost time on our tertiary care center’s endoscopy unit. Patients and methods This single-center, retrospective study included demographics, procedure details and turn-over times (TOT) from all endoscopic procedures between December 1, 2019 to June 30, 2020. Cases were categorized as pre-COVID-19 group from December 1, 2019 to March 15, 2020 and during COVID-19 (lockdown) group from March 16, 2020 to June 30, 2020. The financial impact was assessed using national averages for reimbursement of outpatient endoscopic procedures provided by Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Results A total of 3622 procedures were performed during the study period: 2297 in the pre-COVID-19 period, 1325 in the COVID-19 period, representing a 42.32 % decrease. In the COVID-19 lockdown group, there was a significant increase in TOT in both the general endoscopy cases (18.11 minutes, P = 0.000) and advanced endoscopy cases (17.7 minutes, P = 0.000). The 42.3 % decrease in volume equated to at least $1.6 million USD in lost revenue during the lockdown. Conclusions COVID-19 pandemic led to an increase in TOT with overall reduced procedure volume and a negative effect on revenue. Providing continued endoscopic management during a pandemic avoids delays in reopening the endoscopy unit and hampers the post-pandemic surge of delayed cases and its financial impact.

Effectiveness Between Daily and After-Each-Case Room Disinfection of the Endoscopy Unit

Background: To evaluate the effectiveness between daily and after-each-case room disinfection in the endoscopy unit.Methods: This study was conducted in an endoscopy unit of the First Affiliation of Zhejiang Chinese Medical University. We cultured samples from the surface of endoscopy unit items, including operation unit air, isolation gown of an endoscopist, control panel buttons, workstation mouse, and the bed head of the patient. All the samples were divided into daily and after-each-case room disinfection groups. In addition, each group was subdivided into sedation and nonsedation gastroscopy with and without ventilation room groups.Results: The qualified rate of bed head samples of the patient were lower in the daily room disinfection group (76.67%) compared with the after-each-case group (100%). The isolation gown, mouse at the workstation, and the bed head of the patient demonstrated the lowest bacterial and fungal load in the after-each-case room disinfection group compared with the daily room disinfection group (p &lt; 0.05). In the subgroup analysis, a higher microbial load was observed for the isolation gown of the endoscopist used during nonsedation gastroscopy in an unventilated room under the after-each-case room disinfection pattern (p &lt; 0.05); a higher microbial load was observed for the control panel buttons used during nonsedation gastroscopy under the after-each-case room disinfection pattern (p &lt; 0.05).Conclusions: For risk-free or low-risk patients, daily room disinfection provides the basic health requirements of the endoscopy procedure. However, it is better to adopt the after-each-case room disinfection for the isolation gown of the endoscopist and bed head of the patient. For the patients with high risk, the after-each-case room disinfection is more suitable for every endoscopy unit (www.ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04399005).

Evaluation of the ESGE recommendations for COVID-19 pre-endoscopy risk-stratification in a high-volume center in Germany

Background and study aims The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) has defined COVID-19 infection prevention and control strategies within the endoscopy unit. These include pre-endoscopic questionnaire-based risk-stratification as well as pre-procedure viral testing. Real-life data on the effectiveness of these measures are presented here. Patients and methods Data from the outpatient endoscopic unit of the University Hospital Augsburg between July 1, 2020 and December 31, 2020 including the second pandemic wave were reviewed retrospectively. All patients were assessed with a pre-endoscopic risk-stratification questionnaire as well as viral testing using an antigen point-of-care test (Ag-POCT) in conjunction with a standard polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test. Highly elective procedures were postponed. The theoretically expected number of SARS-CoV-2-positive patients was simulated and compared with the actual number. In addition, endoscopy staff was evaluated with a rapid antibody test to determine the number of infections among the personnel. Results In total, 1029 procedures, 591 questionnaires, 591 Ag-POCTs, and 529 standard PCR tests were performed in 591 patients. 247 procedures in 142 patients were postponed. One Ag-POCT was positive but with a negative PCR test, while one PCR test was positive but with a negative Ag-POCT. This was lower than the theoretically expected number of COVID-19-positive patients (n = 15). One of 43 employees (2.3 %) in the outpatient endoscopy unit was seropositive. Conclusions Pre-endoscopic risk management including questionnaire-based risk stratification and viral testing seems to be an effective tool in combination with personal protective equipment for SARS-CoV-2 infection prevention and control within the endoscopy unit even in a high-prevalence setting.