Digestive System
Online Learning Platform

According to the  2020 BSG  post-polypectomy surveillance guidelines   we recommend no surveillance if life expectancy is less than 10 y or patient older than 75 yo.  However this can be flexible depending on the patient situation. For example, if histology show incomplete resection margins or colonoscopy was suboptimally prepared then it could be reasonable to repeat the test in 1 year.

If this same case was in a fit and younger patient (e.g  65 yo patient ) then given that we removed 5  adenomas (premalignant) - this would be the cutoff to have another colonoscopy in 3 years

In fact, the majority of the guidelines suggest 3 year follow up if 5 or more small(<10mm)  adenomas are removed.  2020 AGA recommend 3 years followup if 5-10 adenomas, 5 years if 3-4 adenomas and up to 7-10 years if only 1-2 adenomas (or SSL).

For example, if a 65 yo patient had only 4 small adenomas with en bloc resection and good bowel cleaning,  no further surveillance and return to bowel screening according to the British guidelines but would need 5 year colonoscopy according to the AGA guidelines. 

The lower cutoff for FIB 4   >1.3.  Less than 1.3 rules out advanced fibrosis, and >1.3 needs further investigations.

In elderly patients (>65 yo) this threlsholds has low especificity (many false positive patients who do not really have advanced fibrosis) therefore the cutoff proposed in those is 2 (Fib 4 <2 rules out significant fibrosis)

>2.67 is the upper threshold for advanced fibrosis. Patients scoring this have high chance of advance fibrosis and should be referred to liver clinic

Check AGA guidelines and ESGE, BSG  and Asia Pacific and  international consensus group

This is a Forrest III (clean based) duodenal ulcer in a healthy and stable patient. (Rebleeding risk <5% )

Patient could be discharged if stable and toleranting oral diet (AGA recommends in low risk endoscopic findings considerning discharge in stable cases with stable vitals and Hb and  no other reason for hospitalization).  PPI should be initiated orally, but given it is a low risk finding (F-III) only standard dose would be enough.  If it was a high risk such as Forrest I-IIa, then 72h of  IV PPI (Or oral high dose PPI in selected cases) is recommended as well as keeping the patient under observation.

In high risk (Forrest I-IIb) American and International guidelines advise commencing a two week course of twice daily high dose PPI,  based on a trial that showed 40 mg esomeprazole BD significantly reduced rebleeding compared  40 mg esomeprazole once daily  ( 10.8% v 28.7%,)

So the endoscopist gave good advice in general. So why is it false then? Because:

•  ESGE recommends in bleeding secondary to peptic ulceration,H pylori test at index endoscopy.   In the event of a negative result,  like this case, advise  retesting within four weeks and eradication of H pylori if positive (given the low-ish sensitivity of clotest or histology in acute bleeding, about 0.7)
• Do not forget iron replacement, either orally or if patient does not tolerate, then iron infusion to correct the anaemia.
• Smoke cessation is advised too!  Especially if Hpylori is really negative, then smoking could be a main trigger factor.

Scores of 8-14 represent Hazardous or Harmful range. In those cases, the recommendation is to explain to the patient that they may be drinking too much on occasions, and the likely negative impact the alcohol can cause as it is carcinogenic, can help developing cardiovascular disease, can cause dependence and can put you or others at risk.

Any  score of 15 or above associates high risk (drinking could cause harm and it is important a clear determination to cut down or stop alcohol). Any score of 20 or above indicates likely dependence and needs referral to specialist and supervised detoxification

It is expected that up to 1 in 2 patients who are positive in faecal inmunochemistry test  (FIT) can have pathology (polyps or cancer) This can be seen in  results such as the QUALISCOPIA group or the UK bowel screening  report

It has always been agreed that High grade dysplasia should merit ablation, however clasically LGD would be offered endoscopic surveillance until progressed to HGD. This approach has changed over the last years to the point that Both ESGE and AGA suggest eradication with ablation to prevent progression to HGD/cancer. BSG recommends repeating endoscopy in 6 months and if confirmed again, offering eradication vs 6 -monthly surveillance.  The AGA 2024 guidelines favous ablation over surveillance.

All societies agree that he biopsies should be reviewed by an expert pathologist (ESGE suggest 2 experts) before embarking into eradication.  Remember that the incidence of progression (to HGD or adenoca) is estimated around   9.1%/year  with reported incidence of adenocarcinoma of 0.54% per year. The overall yearly incidence of Eosphageal adenocarcinoma is 0.3% (0.19 in short segment )