Considering the issues of shortage of medical resources and the invasiveness and infection risk involved in the collection of nasopharyngeal swab specimens, there is a need for an effective alternative test specimen for SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection. Here, we investigated suitability of saliva as a non-invasively obtained specimen for molecular detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in Japanese patients with COVID-19. In total, 28 paired clinical specimens of saliva and nasopharyngeal swabs were collected from 12 patients at various time points after symptom onset. Each specimen was assayed using reverse transcription real-time polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) on the BD MAX open system using primers and probes targeting the N-gene. The saliva and nasopharyngeal swab specimens showed 19 and 15 positive results, respectively. No invalid (PCR inhibition) result was observed for any specimen. The qualitative results of each specimen obtained in the period immediately after symptom onset were similar. Three convalescent patients presented saliva-positive results, whereas their nasopharyngeal swabs were negative at four different time points, suggesting that saliva may be superior to nasopharyngeal swabs in terms of obtaining stable assay result of SARS-CoV-2. In conclusion, our results suggest that saliva can potentially serve as an alternative to nasopharyngeal swabs as a specimen for SARS-CoV-2 rRT-PCR. As saliva can be collected by patients themselves, it may be an effective way to overcome the shortage of personal protective equipment and specimen sampling tools.

INTRODUCTION: The bleeding source of hematochezia is unknown without performing colonoscopy. We sought to identify whether colonoscopy is a risk-stratifying tool to identify etiology and predict outcomes and whether presenting symptoms can differentiate the etiologies in patients with hematochezia. METHODS: This multicenter retrospective cohort study conducted at 49 hospitals across Japan analyzed 10,342 patients admitted for outpatient-onset acute hematochezia. RESULTS: Patients were mostly elderly population, and 29.5% had hemodynamic instability. Computed tomography was performed in 69.1% and colonoscopy in 87.7%. Diagnostic yield of colonoscopy reached 94.9%, most frequently diverticular bleeding. Thirty-day rebleeding rates were significantly higher with diverticulosis and small bowel bleeding than with other etiologies. In-hospital mortality was significantly higher with angioectasia, malignancy, rectal ulcer, and upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Colonoscopic treatment rates were significantly higher with diverticulosis, radiation colitis, angioectasia, rectal ulcer, and postendoscopy bleeding. More interventional radiology procedures were needed for diverticulosis and small bowel bleeding. Etiologies with favorable outcomes and low procedure rates were ischemic colitis and infectious colitis. Higher rates of painless hematochezia at presentation were significantly associated with multiple diseases, such as rectal ulcer, hemorrhoids, angioectasia, radiation colitis, and diverticulosis. The same was true in cases of hematochezia with diarrhea, fever, and hemodynamic instability. DISCUSSION: This nationwide data set of acute hematochezia highlights the importance of colonoscopy in accurately detecting bleeding etiologies that stratify patients at high or low risk of adverse outcomes and those who will likely require more procedures. Predicting different bleeding etiologies based on initial presentation would be challenging.

Background and study aims The efficacy of endoclips for colonic diverticular hemorrhage remains unclear. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of endoclips versus endoscopic band ligation (EBL) for the treatment of colonic diverticular hemorrhage. Patients and methods At Nara City Hospital, 93 patients with colonic diverticular hemorrhage with stigmata of recent hemorrhage (SRH) were treated using endoclips or EBL between January 2013 and December 2018. We classified the patients treated by endoclips into the direct clipping group and indirect clipping group. Endoclips were placed directly onto the vessel if technically feasible (direct clipping). When direct placement of endoclips onto the vessel was not possible, the diverticulum was closed in a zipper fashion (indirect clipping). Patient demographics, rate of early rebleeding within 30 days after initial treatment, and complications were retrospectively evaluated. Results Of the 93 patients, 34, 28, and 31 were in the direct clipping group, indirect clipping group, and EBL group, respectively. Rates of early rebleeding in the direct clipping, indirect clipping, and EBL groups were 5.9 % (2/34), 35.7 % (10/28), and 6.5 % (2/31), respectively (P = 0.006: direct clipping vs indirect clipping, P = 1: direct clipping vs EBL). No complications occurred in any groups. All patients who had early rebleeding in the direct clipping group underwent EBL, and no further bleeding occurred after repeat therapy. Conclusions Direct clip placement is acceptable as the first treatment choice for colonic diverticular hemorrhage. When direct placement of endoclips is not possible, EBL should be performed instead of indirect clipping.

BackgroundThe value of endoscopy for acute lower GI bleeding (ALGIB) remains unclear, given few large cohort studies. We aim to provide detailed clinical data for ALGIB management and to identify patients at risk for adverse outcomes based on endoscopic diagnosis.MethodsWe conducted a multicenter, retrospective cohort study, named CODE BLUE J-Study, in 49 hospitals throughout Japan and studied 10,342 cases admitted for outpatient-onset of acute hematochezia.ResultsCases were mostly elderly, with 29.5% hemodynamic instability and 60.1% comorbidity. 69.1% and 87.7 % of cases underwent CT and colonoscopy, respectively. Diagnostic yield of colonoscopy reached 94.9%, revealing 48 etiologies, most frequently diverticular bleeding. During hospitalization, the endoscopic therapy rate was 32.7%, mostly using clipping and band ligation. IVR and surgery were infrequently performed, for 2.1% and 1.4%. In-hospital rebleeding and death occurred in 15.2% and 0.9%. Diverticular bleeding cases had higher rates of hemodynamic instability, rebleeding, endoscopic therapy, IVR, and transfusion, but lower rates of death and surgery than other etiologies. Small bowel bleeding cases had significantly higher rates of surgery, IVR, and transfusion than other etiologies. Malignancy or upper GIB cases had significantly higher rates of thromboembolism and death than other etiologies. Etiologies that have favorable outcomes were ischemic colitis, infectious colitis, and post-endoscopy bleeding.ConclusionsLarge-scale data of patients with acute hematochezia revealed high proportions of colonoscopy and CT, resulting in high endoscopic therapy rates. We highlight the importance of colonoscopy in detecting accurate bleeding etiologies that stratify patients at high or low risk of adverse outcomes.

Background and study aims: Prior studies have shown the effectiveness of endoscopic band ligation (EBL) and clipping for colonic diverticular hemorrhage (CDH) but have been small and conducted at single centers. Thus, we investigated which was the more effective and safe treatment in a multicenter long-term cohort study. Patients and methods: We reviewed data for 1,679 patients with CDH who were treated with EBL (n=638) or clipping (n=1,041) between January 2010 and December 2019 at 49 hospitals across Japan (CODE BLUE-J Study). Logistic regression analysis was used to compare outcomes between the two treatments. Results: In multivariate analysis, EBL compared with clipping was independently associated with reduced risk of early rebleeding (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.46; p<0.001) and late rebleeding (AOR 0.62; p<0.001). These significantly lower rebleeding rates with EBL were evident regardless of active bleeding or early colonoscopy. No significant difference was found between the treatments in the rate of initial hemostasis or mortality. EBL compared with clipping independently reduced the risk of need for interventional radiology (IVR) (AOR 0.37; p=0.006) and prolonged length of hospital stay (LOS) (AOR 0.35; p<0.001), but not need for surgery. Diverticulitis developed in 1 patient (0.16%) following EBL and 2 patients (0.19%) following clipping. Perforation occurred in 2 patients (0.31%) following EBL and none following clipping. Conclusions: Analysis of our large endoscopy dataset suggests that EBL is an effective and safe endoscopic therapy for CDH offering the advantages of lower early and late rebleeding rates, reduced need for IVR, and shorter LOS.