Ratuapli, Shiva K.

Background. Appropriate recommendations for a followup exam after an index colonoscopy are an important quality indicator. Lack of knowledge of polyp pathology at the time of colonoscopy may be one reason that followup recommendations are not made. Aim. To describe and compare the accuracy of followup recommendations made at colonoscopy based on the size and number of polyps with recommendations made at a later date based on actual polyp pathology. Methods. All patients who underwent screening and surveillance colonoscopy from March, 2012, to August, 2012, were included. Surveillance recommendations from the endoscopy reports were graded as “accurate” or “not accurate” based on the postpolypectomy surveillance guidelines established by US Multisociety Task Force on Colon Cancer. Polyp pathology was then used to regrade the surveillance recommendations. Results. Followup recommendations were accurate in 759/884 (86%) of the study colonoscopies, based upon size and number of polyps with the assumption that all polyps were adenomatous. After incorporating actual polyp pathology, 717/884 (81%) colonoscopies had accurate recommendations. Conclusion. In our practice, the knowledge of actual polyp pathology does not change the surveillance recommendations made at the time of colonoscopy in the majority of patients.

Abstract Background Defecatory disorders can be diagnosed by rectal balloon expulsion ( BE ) and anorectal manometry, which are traditionally evaluated in the seated and left lateral ( LL ) positions, respectively. The aims of this study were to compare BE in the LL and seated positions and to compare anorectal manometric parameters to BE performed in the seated and LL positions. Methods 220 women [healthy (62), chronic constipation (158)] had anorectal high‐resolution manometry and BE , summarized by time required (seated position, normal ≤60 s) or external traction to facilitate expulsion ( LL position, normal ≤100 g). Key Results Balloon expulsion results in both positions were either concordant [normal (141) or abnormal (32)] or discordant [only LL abnormal (30), only seated abnormal (17)]. There was modest agreement [κ = 0.44 (95% CI 0.30–0.57)] between seated and LL BE . Compared with subjects with normal BE in both positions, anal pressure during simulated evacuation ( SE ) was higher, and the rectoanal gradient (rectal‐anal pressure) during SE was more negative in the other 3 categories (i.e., abnormal LL only, abnormal seated only, and both abnormal). High anal pressure during SE ( OR = 1.02, 95% CI 1.00–1.04) and high rectal sensory threshold for desire to defecate ( OR = 1.01, 95% CI 1.00–1.02) were associated with increased risk of abnormal BE in both positions, whereas high rectal pressure during SE ( OR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.93–0.98) was associated with lower risk. Conclusions & Inferences There is modest agreement between rectal BE in LL and seated positions. In addition to abnormal seated BE , which is considered indicative of pelvic floor dysfunction, high resolution manometry findings suggest that even some patients with abnormal BE in the LL position have pelvic floor dysfunction.