No abstract

Among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who have high risk of bleeding secondary to haematologic disorders, left atrial appendage (LAA) occlusion therapy has been shown to be an excellent alternative to long-term use of oral anticoagulation for thromboembolic stroke prevention. However, there remains a major concern of device-associated thrombosis post-procedure, that can lead to life-threatening embolic events. To this date, there is no systematic guideline for the selection and management of patients with haematological disorders with LAA occlusion therapy, especially in those with platelet disorders such as immune thrombocytopenia (ITP). Patients with platelet disorders are at a higher risk for bleeding; however, that does not prevent such patients from thromboembolic events secondary to AF. We present a case of ITP with permanent AF, where an LAA device was complicated by thrombus formation due to challenges faced with anticoagulation therapy.

Introduction: Bowel preparation quality in colonoscopy is one of the most essential components of quality assessment. According to the latest guidelines, inadequate bowel preparation warrants repeat colonoscopy in less than a year. Our aim was to investigate the role of bowel preparation in adenoma detection rate (ADR), its relationship with patients' demographics, and compliance with subsequent surveillance recommendations with guidelines.Methods: This is a retrospective chart review study. Bowel preparation quality was divided into three categories: high, intermediate, and low. ADR and polyp detection rates (PDR) were calculated as the number of patients with adenoma or polyp divided by the total number of patients.Results: Among 1,062 patients (934 African American and 128 non-African American) 81%, 11%, and 8% had high, intermediate, and low-quality bowel preparations, respectively. Race, gender, age, type of endoscopist, and body mass index did not play any role in bowel preparation quality. ADR and PDR were significantly higher in African Americans as compared to non-African Americans. ADR was significantly lower in the lowquality as compared to the high-and intermediate-quality bowel preparations (OR=2.13; p=0.0032). Bowel preparation quality was not correlated with subsequent follow-up recommendations. Academic gastroenterologists and surgeons had the highest and lowest compliance with surveillance guidelines, respectively.Conclusions: Racial and gender disparity appears to have no meaningful effect on the quality of bowel preparation. Only two categories (adequate [high/intermediate] or inadequate [low-quality]) may be used for follow-up recommendations. Non-compliance with surveillance guidelines is concerning and may inadvertently increase the interval risk of colorectal cancer.