Displaying all 20 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Koo JH, Leong RW, Ching J, Yeoh KG, Wu DC, Murdani A, et al.
    Gastrointest. Endosc., 2012 Jul;76(1):126-35.
    PMID: 22726471 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2012.03.168
    BACKGROUND: The rapid increase in the incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) in the Asia-Pacific region in the past decade has resulted in recommendations to implement mass CRC screening programs. However, the knowledge of screening and population screening behaviors between countries is largely lacking.
    OBJECTIVE: This multicenter, international study investigated the association of screening test participation with knowledge of, attitudes toward, and barriers to CRC and screening tests in different cultural and sociopolitical contexts.
    METHODS: Person-to-person interviews by using a standardized survey instrument were conducted with subjects from 14 Asia-Pacific countries/regions to assess the prevailing screening participation rates, knowledge of and attitudes toward and barriers to CRC and screening tests, intent to participate, and cues to action. Independent predictors of the primary endpoint, screening participation was determined from subanalyses performed for high-, medium-, and low-participation countries.
    RESULTS: A total of 7915 subjects (49% male, 37.8% aged 50 years and older) were recruited. Of the respondents aged 50 years and older, 809 (27%) had undergone previous CRC testing; the Philippines (69%), Australia (48%), and Japan (38%) had the highest participation rates, whereas India (1.5%), Malaysia (3%), Indonesia (3%), Pakistan (7.5%), and Brunei (13.7%) had the lowest rates. Physician recommendation and knowledge of screening tests were significant predictors of CRC test uptake. In countries with low-test participation, lower perceived access barriers and higher perceived severity were independent predictors of participation. Respondents from low-participation countries had the least knowledge of symptoms, risk factors, and tests and reported the lowest physician recommendation rates. "Intent to undergo screening" and "perceived need for screening" was positively correlated in most countries; however, this was offset by financial and access barriers.
    LIMITATIONS: Ethnic heterogeneity may exist in each country that was not addressed. In addition, the participation tests and physician recommendation recalls were self-reported.
    CONCLUSIONS: In the Asia-Pacific region, considerable differences were evident in the participation of CRC tests, physician recommendations, and knowledge of, attitudes toward, and barriers to CRC screening. Physician recommendation was the uniform predictor of screening behavior in all countries. Before implementing mass screening programs, improving awareness of CRC and promoting the physicians' role are necessary to increase the screening participation rates.
  2. Lee SY, Tang SJ, Rockey DC, Weinstein D, Lara L, Sreenarasimhaiah J, et al.
    Gastrointest. Endosc., 2008 Jun;67(7):1076-81.
    PMID: 18384789 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2007.11.037
    Anticoagulation and antiplatelet medications may potentiate GI bleeding, and their use may lead to an increased need for a GI endoscopy. We hypothesized that there might be different practice patterns among international endoscopists.
  3. Liao WC, Angsuwatcharakon P, Isayama H, Dhir V, Devereaux B, Khor CJ, et al.
    Gastrointest. Endosc., 2017 Feb;85(2):295-304.
    PMID: 27720741 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2016.09.037
  4. Chan YM, Goh KL
    Gastrointest. Endosc., 2004 Apr;59(4):517-24.
    PMID: 15044888
    BACKGROUND: The appropriateness has become an important issue as the use of EGD becomes more widespread. No study of the appropriateness of EGD has been performed in the Asia-Pacific region. This study examined the appropriateness of EGD in a large Asian hospital by using the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 2000 guidelines. A secondary aim was to correlate appropriateness with the presence of positive findings at EGD.

    METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted of consecutive diagnostic EGDs performed at a university-affiliated, teaching hospital, which has an open-access endoscopy system for doctors who work in the hospital. The main indication(s) for EGD was recorded and assessed as appropriate or inappropriate by using American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy criteria. EGD findings were recorded and classified as positive or negative. Referrals were categorized as being from endoscopists, primary care physicians, and others.

    RESULTS: Of 1076 referrals for EGD, 88.3% were deemed appropriate. The group with the highest rate of appropriate referral was endoscopists (90.2%), followed by primary care physicians (89.6%) and "others" (81.9%). The rate of appropriate referrals was significantly higher for endoscopists and primary care physicians compared with "others" (respectively, p=0.001 and p=0.022). The most common appropriate indication was "upper abdominal distress that persists despite an appropriate trial of therapy" (35.4%). The most common inappropriate indication was "dyspepsia in patients aged 45 years or below without adequate empirical medical treatment" (48.4%); 42.2% with an appropriate indication had positive findings compared with only 25.6% of those with inappropriate indications (p=0.006). On multivariate analysis, the following were identified as independent predictive factors for positive findings at EGD: male gender (p=0.005), age over 45 years (p=0.011), smoking (p=0.005), none/primary education (p<0.001), and secondary education (p=0.026).

    CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of patients referred for open-access EGD with an appropriate indication(s) was high for all doctor groups in a large university-affiliated medical center in Asia. EGDs performed for appropriate indications had a higher yield of positive findings. Independent predictive factors of positive findings were male gender, age over 45 years, lower education level, and referral by an endoscopist.

  5. Tan YM, Goh KL, Kamarulzaman A, Tan PS, Ranjeev P, Salem O, et al.
    Gastrointest. Endosc., 2002 Feb;55(2):276-8.
    PMID: 11818941
  6. Mahadeva S, Prabakharan R, Goh KL
    Gastrointest. Endosc., 2003 Aug;58(2):279-82.
    PMID: 12872105
    Hepatolithiasis (intrahepatic stones) is common in Asian patients. Hepatolithiasis with intrahepatic strictures and sharp ductal angulation poses a particularly difficult management problem.
  7. Meng Boey CC, Goh KL, Sithasanan N, Goh DW
    Gastrointest. Endosc., 2002 Apr;55(4):607-8.
    PMID: 11923788
  8. Bassan MS, Sundaralingam P, Fanning SB, Lau J, Menon J, Ong E, et al.
    Gastrointest. Endosc., 2018 Jun;87(6):1454-1460.
    PMID: 29317269 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2017.11.037
    BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Wire-guided biliary cannulation has been demonstrated to improve cannulation rates and reduce post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP), but the impact of wire caliber has not been studied. This study compares successful cannulation rates and ERCP adverse events by using a 0.025-inch and 0.035-inch guidewire.

    METHODS: A randomized, single blinded, prospective, multicenter trial at 9 high-volume tertiary-care referral centers in the Asia-Pacific region was performed. Patients with an intact papilla and conventional anatomy who did not have malignancy in the head of the pancreas or ampulla and were undergoing ERCP were recruited. ERCP was performed by using a standardized cannulation algorithm, and patients were randomized to either a 0.025-inch or 0.035-inch guidewire. The primary outcomes of the study were successful wire-guided cannulation and the incidence of PEP. Overall successful cannulation and ERCP adverse events also were studied.

    RESULTS: A total of 710 patients were enrolled in the study. The primary wire-guided biliary cannulation rate was similar in 0.025-inch and 0.035-inch wire groups (80.7% vs 80.3%; P = .90). The rate of PEP between the 0.025-inch and the 0.035-inch wire groups did not differ significantly (7.8% vs 9.3%; P = .51). No differences were noted in secondary outcomes.

    CONCLUSION: Similar rates of successful cannulation and PEP were demonstrated in the use of 0.025-inch and 0.035-inch guidewires. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT01408264.).

  9. Zorron Cheng Tao Pu L, Chiam KH, Yamamura T, Nakamura M, Berzin TM, Mir FF, et al.
    Gastrointest. Endosc., 2019 Sep 05.
    PMID: 31494134 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2019.08.036
    BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Surveillance post-endoscopic resection (ER) currently warrants biopsy samples from the resection site scar in most cases, although clinical practice is variable. A classification with standard criteria for scars has not yet been established. We aimed to create and validate a novel classification for post-ER scars by using specific criteria based on advanced imaging.

    METHODS: Key endoscopic features for scars with and without recurrence were (1) dark brown color, elongated/branched pit pattern, and dense capillary pattern and (2) whitish, pale appearance, round/slightly large pits, and irregular sparse vessels. Scars were first assessed with high-definition white-light endoscopy (HD-WLE) followed by interrogation with narrow-band imaging (NBI). Scars with at least 2 concordant characteristics were diagnosed with "high confidence" for NBI for scar (NBI-SCAR) classification. The final endoscopic predictions were correlated with histopathology. The primary outcome was the difference in sensitivity between NBI-SCAR and HD-WLE predictions. Secondary outcomes included the validation of our findings in 6 different endoscopy settings (Australia, United States, Japan, Brazil, Singapore, and Malaysia). The validation took place in 2 sessions separated by 2 to 3 weeks, each with 10 one-minute videos of post-ER scars on underwater NBI with dual focus. Inter-rater and intrarater reliability were calculated with Fleiss' free-marginal kappa and Bennett et al. S score (as discussed below in a similar case) S score, respectively.

    RESULTS: One hundred scars from 82 patients were included. Ninety-five scars were accurately predicted with high confidence by NBI-SCAR in the exploratory phase. NBI-SCAR sensitivity was significantly higher compared with HD-WLE (100% vs 73.7%, P < .05). In the validation phase, similar results were found for endoscopists who routinely perform colonoscopies and use NBI (sensitivity of 96.4%). The inter-rater and intrarater reliability throughout all centers were, respectively, substantial (κ = .61) and moderate (average S = .52) for this subset.

    CONCLUSIONS: NBI-SCAR has a high sensitivity and negative predictive value for excluding recurrence for endoscopists experienced in colonoscopy and NBI. In this setting, this approach may help to accurately evaluate or resect scars and potentially mitigate the burden of unnecessary biopsy samples.

Related Terms
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (tengcl@gmail.com)

External Links