These consensus guidelines were jointly commissioned by the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG), the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI) and Public Health England (PHE). They provide an evidence-based framework for the use of surveillance colonoscopy and non-colonoscopic colorectal imaging in people aged 18 years and over. They are the first guidelines that take into account the introduction of national bowel cancer screening. For the first time, they also incorporate surveillance of patients following resection of either adenomatous or serrated polyps and also post-colorectal cancer resection. They are primarily aimed at healthcare professionals, and aim to address:Which patients should commence surveillance post-polypectomy and post-cancer resection?What is the appropriate surveillance interval?When can surveillance be stopped?two or more premalignant polyps including at least one advanced colorectal polyp (defined as a serrated polyp of at least 10 mm in size or containing any grade of dysplasia, or an adenoma of at least 10 mm in size or containing high-grade dysplasia); orfive or more premalignant polypsThe Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument provided a methodological framework for the guidelines. The BSG’s guideline development process was used, which is National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) compliant.two or more premalignant polyps including at least one advanced colorectal polyp (defined as a serrated polyp of at least 10 mm in size or containing any grade of dysplasia, or an adenoma of at least 10 mm in size or containing high-grade dysplasia); orfive or more premalignant polypsThe key recommendations are that the high-risk criteria for future colorectal cancer (CRC) following polypectomy comprise either:two or more premalignant polyps including at least one advanced colorectal polyp (defined as a serrated polyp of at least 10 mm in size or containing any grade of dysplasia, or an adenoma of at least 10 mm in size or containing high-grade dysplasia); orfive or more premalignant polypsThis cohort should undergo a one-off surveillance colonoscopy at 3 years. Post-CRC resection patients should undergo a 1 year clearance colonoscopy, then a surveillance colonoscopy after 3 more years.
A 20-member international team has provided standardized methods for analysis of etiologies of PCCRCs and PICRCs and defines its use as a quality indicator. The team provides recommendations for clinicians, organizations, researchers, policy makers, and patients.
SummaryBackgroundMagnetic resonance enterography (MRE) and ultrasound are used to image Crohn's disease, but their comparative accuracy for assessing disease extent and activity is not known with certainty. Therefore, we did a multicentre trial to address this issue.MethodsWe recruited patients from eight UK hospitals. Eligible patients were 16 years or older, with newly diagnosed Crohn's disease or with established disease and suspected relapse. Consecutive patients had MRE and ultrasound in addition to standard investigations. Discrepancy between MRE and ultrasound for the presence of small bowel disease triggered an additional investigation, if not already available. The primary outcome was difference in per-patient sensitivity for small bowel disease extent (correct identification and segmental localisation) against a construct reference standard (panel diagnosis). This trial is registered with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN03982913, and has been completed.Findings284 patients completed the trial (133 in the newly diagnosed group, 151 in the relapse group). Based on the reference standard, 233 (82%) patients had small bowel Crohn's disease. The sensitivity of MRE for small bowel disease extent (80% [95% CI 72–86]) and presence (97% [91–99]) were significantly greater than that of ultrasound (70% [62–78] for disease extent, 92% [84–96] for disease presence); a 10% (95% CI 1–18; p=0·027) difference for extent, and 5% (1–9; p=0·025) difference for presence. The specificity of MRE for small bowel disease extent (95% [85–98]) was significantly greater than that of ultrasound (81% [64–91]); a difference of 14% (1–27; p=0·039). The specificity for small bowel disease presence was 96% (95% CI 86–99) with MRE and 84% (65–94) with ultrasound (difference 12% [0–25]; p=0·054). There were no serious adverse events.InterpretationBoth MRE and ultrasound have high sensitivity for detecting small bowel disease presence and both are valid first-line investigations, and viable alternatives to ileocolonoscopy. However, in a national health service setting, MRE is generally the preferred radiological investigation when available because its sensitivity and specificity exceed ultrasound significantly.FundingNational Institute of Health and Research Health Technology Assessment.
Anatomical models are important training and teaching tools in the clinical environment and are routinely used in medical imaging research. Advances in segmentation algorithms and increased availability of three-dimensional (3D) printers have made it possible to create cost-efficient patient-specific models without expert knowledge. We introduce a general workflow that can be used to convert volumetric medical imaging data (as generated by Computer Tomography (CT)) to 3D printed physical models. This process is broken up into three steps: image segmentation, mesh refinement and 3D printing. To lower the barrier to entry and provide the best options when aiming to 3D print an anatomical model from medical images, we provide an overview of relevant free and open-source image segmentation tools as well as 3D printing technologies. We demonstrate the utility of this streamlined workflow by creating models of ribs, liver, and lung using a Fused Deposition Modelling 3D printer.
Introduction Achalasia is a primary motor disorder of the oesophagus characterised by absence of peristalsis and insufficient lower oesophageal sphincter relaxation. With new advances and developments in achalasia management, there is an increasing demand for comprehensive evidence-based guidelines to assist clinicians in achalasia patient care. Methods Guidelines were established by a working group of representatives from United European Gastroenterology, European Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility, European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology and the European Association of Endoscopic Surgery in accordance with the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II instrument. A systematic review of the literature was performed, and the certainty of the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology. Recommendations were voted upon using a nominal group technique. Results These guidelines focus on the definition of achalasia, treatment aims, diagnostic tests, medical, endoscopic and surgical therapy, management of treatment failure, follow-up and oesophageal cancer risk. Conclusion These multidisciplinary guidelines provide a comprehensive evidence-based framework with recommendations on the diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of adult achalasia patients.
http://radiology.rsna.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1148/radiol.13130151/-/DC1.
ObjectivesEsophagogastric junction outflow obstruction (EGJOO) defined on high-resolution manometry (HRM) poses a management dilemma given marked variability in clinical manifestations. We hypothesized that findings from provocative testing (rapid drink challenge and solid swallows) could determine clinical relevance of EGJOO. MethodsIn a retrospective cohort study, we included consecutive patients between May 2016 and January 2020 with EGJOO. Standard HRM with 5mL water swallows was followed by provocative testing. Barium esophagography findings were obtained. Cases with structural obstruction were separated from functional EGJOO, with the latter categorized as symptom-positive or symptom-negative. Only symptom-positive subjects were considered for achalasia-type therapies. Sensitivity and specificity for clinically relevant EGJOO during 5mL water swallows, provocative testing and barium was calculated. ResultsOf the 121 EGJOO cases, 76% had dysphagia and 25% had holdup on barium. Ninetyseven (84%) were defined as functional EGJOO. Symptom-positive EGJOO subjects were more likely to demonstrate abnormal motility, pressurization patterns and to reproduce symptoms during provocative testing, but not with 5mL water swallows. Twenty-nine (30%) functional EGJOO patients underwent achalasia-type therapy, with symptomatic response in 26 (90%). Forty-eight (49%) functional EGJOO cases were managed conservatively, with symptom remission in 78%. While specificity was similar, 4 provocative testing demonstrated superior sensitivity in identifying treatment responders from spontaneously remitting EGJOO (85%) compared to both 5mL water swallows (54%; p<0.01) and barium esophagography (54%; p=0.02). ConclusionsProvocative testing during HRM is highly accurate in identifying clinically relevant EGJOO that benefits from therapy and should be routinely performed as part of the manometric protocol.
We describe a new head scanner developed for Proton Computed Tomography (pCT) in support of proton therapy treatment planning, aiming at reconstructing an accurate map of the stopping power (S.P.) in a phantom and, in the future, in patients. The system consists of two silicon telescopes which track the proton before and after the phantom/patient, and an energy detector which measures the residual energy or range of the proton to reconstruct the Water Equivalent Path Length (WEPL) in the phantom. Based on the experience of the existing prototype and extensive Geant4 simulations and CT reconstructions, the new pCT scanner will support clinically useful proton fluxes.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.