PURPOSE: The main purpose of this study was to achieve a broad perspective of the clinical problem with regard to its overall presentation and relation to anticoagulant and antiplatelet therapy, and to describe common management strategies and clinical outcomes. METHODS: We initially screened 262 patients who were admitted from the Emergency Department between June, 1996 and June, 2013, with International Classification of Diseases code of K66.1 (hemoperitoneum), R58 (retroperitoneal hemorrhage) and D68.3 (hemorrhagic disorder due to anticoagulants). We excluded patients with retroperitoneal hemorrhage (RH) associated with trauma, vascular lesions, tumors, liver cirrhosis, renal failure, and surgical complications. A total of 24 adult patients were found to have retroperitoneal hematoma due to spontaneous lumbar artery rupture and were included in the study for further analysis. RESULTS: Male to female ratio was 14:10 and the mean age was 75.3+/-10.4 years old. Overall, 19 patients (79.1%) were taking warfarin, 20 patients (83.3%) were taking aspirin and/or clopidogrel, and 15 patients (62.5%) were taking both anticoagulant and antiplatelet medications. The most common presenting symptom was acute back pain. CT scan showed extravasation of contrast in 20 patients. The mean hematoma size was 12.5+/-6.4 cm. Eleven patients (55%) underwent arterial embolization and 22 patients (91.6%) received blood transfusion. No surgical intervention was performed. CONCLUSION: Retroperitoneal hematomas caused by spontaneous rupture of the lumbar artery showed a strong association with use of anticoagulant and/or antiplatelet therapy. For patients, particularly elderly patients, who present with acute back pain or hemodynamic instability and who are on anticoagulant and/or antiplatelet therapy, ER physicians should consider retroperitoneal hematoma as a differential diagnosis and to rule it out vigilantly.
Adult ; Aged ; Anticoagulants ; Arteries* ; Aspirin ; Back Pain ; Blood Transfusion ; Diagnosis, Differential ; Emergency Service, Hospital ; Female ; Hematoma* ; Hemodynamics ; Hemorrhage ; Humans ; International Classification of Diseases ; Liver Cirrhosis ; Male ; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors ; Renal Insufficiency ; Retroperitoneal Space ; Retrospective Studies* ; Rupture ; Rupture, Spontaneous* ; Tomography, X-Ray Computed ; Warfarin

We report the case of a 56-year-old man with a prostatic mass that extended into the rectal mucosa. He experienced constipation and anal bleeding for 6 months. He underwent surgical ablation for an approximately 5-cm, benign, subepithelial cystic mass in the rectum, which was adjacent to a 5-cm solid mass located on the prostatic gland seen on computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the pelvis. One year after the surgery, the patient had recurrent anal bleeding with difficulty defecating. The pelvic MRI scan showed a solid mass with heterogeneous enhancement that was compressing the rectum. The sigmoidoscopic exam showed a 4-cm mass protruding through the anterior rectal mucosa 7-cm above the anal verge. Ultra-low anterior resection with ileostomy and prostatectomy was performed for curative resection of the mass with extension into the rectum. However, the pathologic report showed massive benign prostatic hyperplasia involving the rectum, but not penetrating into the rectal mucosa. The patient did not complain of any symptoms including constipation and anal bleeding, until 18 months after the surgical resection. This is the first reported case of benign prostatic hyperplasia mimicking a rectal submucosal tumor in a patient presenting with anal bleeding and constipation.
Constipation ; Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage ; Hemorrhage ; Humans ; Ileostomy ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging ; Middle Aged ; Mucous Membrane ; Pelvis ; Prostatectomy ; Prostatic Hyperplasia* ; Rectal Neoplasms ; Rectum

Background: Endobronchial ultrasound‒guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) is a standard diagnostic method for mediastinal and hilar lymphadenopathy. Although rare, fatal infectious complications can occur following EBUS-TBNA. However, to date, there is a lack of effective preventive strategies to reduce these complications. We started a trial to investigate the effect of chlorhexidine mouthrinse on the prevention of microbial contamination during EBUS-TBNA. Methods: This study is a single-center, parallel-group, assessor-blinded randomized controlled trial (RCT). We will enroll 112 adult participants undergoing EBUS-TBNA using a convex probe, and randomly assign them to two groups at a 1:1 ratio. The intervention group will gargle for 1 minute with 100 mL of 0.12% chlorhexidine gluconate before EBUS-TBNA, while the control group will have no mouthrinse before the procedure. Immediately after completion of EBUS-TBNA on all targeted lesions with an aspiration needle, a needle wash sample will be taken by instilling 5 mL of sterile saline into the used needle. The primary outcome is colony forming unit (CFU) counts in aerobic cultures of the needle wash samples. Secondary outcomes are CFU counts in anaerobic cultures, fever within 24 hours after EBUS-TBNA, and infectious complications within 4 weeks after EBUS-TBNA. Conclusion This trial was designed as the first RCT to investigate the effect of chlorhexidine mouthrinse on the prevention of microbial contamination during EBUS-TBNA. Results from this trial can provide clinical evidence for a simple, safe, and cost-effective strategy to prevent infectious complications following EBUS-TBNA (ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT04718922, registered on 22 January 2021).

Background: Endobronchial ultrasound‒guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) is a standard diagnostic method for mediastinal and hilar lymphadenopathy. Although rare, fatal infectious complications can occur following EBUS-TBNA. However, to date, there is a lack of effective preventive strategies to reduce these complications. We started a trial to investigate the effect of chlorhexidine mouthrinse on the prevention of microbial contamination during EBUS-TBNA. Methods: This study is a single-center, parallel-group, assessor-blinded randomized controlled trial (RCT). We will enroll 112 adult participants undergoing EBUS-TBNA using a convex probe, and randomly assign them to two groups at a 1:1 ratio. The intervention group will gargle for 1 minute with 100 mL of 0.12% chlorhexidine gluconate before EBUS-TBNA, while the control group will have no mouthrinse before the procedure. Immediately after completion of EBUS-TBNA on all targeted lesions with an aspiration needle, a needle wash sample will be taken by instilling 5 mL of sterile saline into the used needle. The primary outcome is colony forming unit (CFU) counts in aerobic cultures of the needle wash samples. Secondary outcomes are CFU counts in anaerobic cultures, fever within 24 hours after EBUS-TBNA, and infectious complications within 4 weeks after EBUS-TBNA. Conclusion This trial was designed as the first RCT to investigate the effect of chlorhexidine mouthrinse on the prevention of microbial contamination during EBUS-TBNA. Results from this trial can provide clinical evidence for a simple, safe, and cost-effective strategy to prevent infectious complications following EBUS-TBNA (ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT04718922, registered on 22 January 2021).

Background: Oral sulfate tablets (OSTs) are bowel preparation agents that combine oral sulfate solution and simethicone. This study compared the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of OST compared to 2 L-polyethylene glycol plus ascorbic acid (2 L-PEG/ASC). Methods: This prospective, randomized, controlled, single-blinded, multicenter, noninferiority trial enrolled 211 healthy adults who underwent colonoscopy between May 2020 and September 2022 at 13 university hospitals. The bowel cleansing rate was assessed using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) and Harefield Cleansing Scale (HCS), and the preparation agents were administered in split regimens. Results: The total BBPS score (8.2 ± 1.5 vs. 7.8 ± 1.4, p = 0.040) and the high-quality bowel cleansing rates in the right colon (73.2% vs. 50.5), transverse colon (80.6% vs. 68.0%), and left colon (81.5% vs. 67.0%) on the BBPS were significantly higher in the OST group than in the 2 L-PEG/ASC group. However, the rates of successful cleansing according to BBPS (90.7% vs. 91.2%) and HCS (96.3% vs. 94.2%) did not significantly differ between the two groups.The taste, ease, and amount of consumption of the preparation agent; and willingness to repeat colonoscopy with the same agent (89.8% vs. 78.6%, P = 0.026) were significantly better in the OST group compared to the 2 L-PEG/ASC group. Adverse events and clinically significant laboratory changes were not significantly different between the two groups. Conclusion The OST was not inferior to 2 L-PEG/ASC in terms of bowel cleansing efficacy and showed better tolerability when used for bowel preparation for colonoscopy.

Background: Oral sulfate tablets (OSTs) are bowel preparation agents that combine oral sulfate solution and simethicone. This study compared the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of OST compared to 2 L-polyethylene glycol plus ascorbic acid (2 L-PEG/ASC). Methods: This prospective, randomized, controlled, single-blinded, multicenter, noninferiority trial enrolled 211 healthy adults who underwent colonoscopy between May 2020 and September 2022 at 13 university hospitals. The bowel cleansing rate was assessed using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) and Harefield Cleansing Scale (HCS), and the preparation agents were administered in split regimens. Results: The total BBPS score (8.2 ± 1.5 vs. 7.8 ± 1.4, p = 0.040) and the high-quality bowel cleansing rates in the right colon (73.2% vs. 50.5), transverse colon (80.6% vs. 68.0%), and left colon (81.5% vs. 67.0%) on the BBPS were significantly higher in the OST group than in the 2 L-PEG/ASC group. However, the rates of successful cleansing according to BBPS (90.7% vs. 91.2%) and HCS (96.3% vs. 94.2%) did not significantly differ between the two groups.The taste, ease, and amount of consumption of the preparation agent; and willingness to repeat colonoscopy with the same agent (89.8% vs. 78.6%, P = 0.026) were significantly better in the OST group compared to the 2 L-PEG/ASC group. Adverse events and clinically significant laboratory changes were not significantly different between the two groups. Conclusion The OST was not inferior to 2 L-PEG/ASC in terms of bowel cleansing efficacy and showed better tolerability when used for bowel preparation for colonoscopy.

Background: Oral sulfate tablets (OSTs) are bowel preparation agents that combine oral sulfate solution and simethicone. This study compared the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of OST compared to 2 L-polyethylene glycol plus ascorbic acid (2 L-PEG/ASC). Methods: This prospective, randomized, controlled, single-blinded, multicenter, noninferiority trial enrolled 211 healthy adults who underwent colonoscopy between May 2020 and September 2022 at 13 university hospitals. The bowel cleansing rate was assessed using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) and Harefield Cleansing Scale (HCS), and the preparation agents were administered in split regimens. Results: The total BBPS score (8.2 ± 1.5 vs. 7.8 ± 1.4, p = 0.040) and the high-quality bowel cleansing rates in the right colon (73.2% vs. 50.5), transverse colon (80.6% vs. 68.0%), and left colon (81.5% vs. 67.0%) on the BBPS were significantly higher in the OST group than in the 2 L-PEG/ASC group. However, the rates of successful cleansing according to BBPS (90.7% vs. 91.2%) and HCS (96.3% vs. 94.2%) did not significantly differ between the two groups.The taste, ease, and amount of consumption of the preparation agent; and willingness to repeat colonoscopy with the same agent (89.8% vs. 78.6%, P = 0.026) were significantly better in the OST group compared to the 2 L-PEG/ASC group. Adverse events and clinically significant laboratory changes were not significantly different between the two groups. Conclusion The OST was not inferior to 2 L-PEG/ASC in terms of bowel cleansing efficacy and showed better tolerability when used for bowel preparation for colonoscopy.

Background: Oral sulfate tablets (OSTs) are bowel preparation agents that combine oral sulfate solution and simethicone. This study compared the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of OST compared to 2 L-polyethylene glycol plus ascorbic acid (2 L-PEG/ASC). Methods: This prospective, randomized, controlled, single-blinded, multicenter, noninferiority trial enrolled 211 healthy adults who underwent colonoscopy between May 2020 and September 2022 at 13 university hospitals. The bowel cleansing rate was assessed using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) and Harefield Cleansing Scale (HCS), and the preparation agents were administered in split regimens. Results: The total BBPS score (8.2 ± 1.5 vs. 7.8 ± 1.4, p = 0.040) and the high-quality bowel cleansing rates in the right colon (73.2% vs. 50.5), transverse colon (80.6% vs. 68.0%), and left colon (81.5% vs. 67.0%) on the BBPS were significantly higher in the OST group than in the 2 L-PEG/ASC group. However, the rates of successful cleansing according to BBPS (90.7% vs. 91.2%) and HCS (96.3% vs. 94.2%) did not significantly differ between the two groups.The taste, ease, and amount of consumption of the preparation agent; and willingness to repeat colonoscopy with the same agent (89.8% vs. 78.6%, P = 0.026) were significantly better in the OST group compared to the 2 L-PEG/ASC group. Adverse events and clinically significant laboratory changes were not significantly different between the two groups. Conclusion The OST was not inferior to 2 L-PEG/ASC in terms of bowel cleansing efficacy and showed better tolerability when used for bowel preparation for colonoscopy.

Background/Aims: We investigated the clinical practice patterns of post-polypectomy colonoscopic surveillance among Korean endoscopists. Methods: In a web-based survey conducted between September and November 2021, participants were asked about their preferred surveillance intervals and the patient age at which surveillance was discontinued. Adherence to the recent guidelines of the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer (USMSTF) was also analyzed. Results: In total, 196 endoscopists completed the survey. The most preferred first surveillance intervals were: a 5-year interval after the removal of 1–2 tubular adenomas < 10 mm; a 3-year interval after the removal of 3–10 tubular adenomas < 10 mm, adenomas ≥ 10 mm, tubulovillous or villous adenomas, ≤ 20 hyperplastic polyps < 10 mm, 1–4 sessile serrated lesions (SSLs) < 10 mm, hyperplastic polyps or SSLs ≥ 10 mm, and traditional serrated adenomas; and a 1-year interval after the removal of adenomas with highgrade dysplasia, >10 adenomas, 5–10 SSLs, and SSLs with dysplasia. In piecemeal resections of large polyps ( > 20 mm), surveillance colonoscopy was mostly preferred after 1 year for adenomas and 6 months for SSLs. The mean USMSTF guideline adherence rate was 30.7%. The largest proportion of respondents (40.8%–55.1%) discontinued the surveillance at the patient age of 80–84 years. Conclusions A significant discrepancy was observed between the preferred post-polypectomy surveillance intervals and recent international guidelines. Individualized measures are required to increase adherence to the guidelines.

Colonoscopic polypectomy is effective in decreasing the incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer (CRC). Premalignant polyps discovered during colonoscopy are associated with the risk of metachronous advanced neoplasia. Postpolypectomy surveillance is the most important method for managing advanced metachronous neoplasia. A more efficient and evidence-based guideline for postpolypectomy surveillance is required because of the limited medical resources and concerns regarding colonoscopy complications. In these consensus guidelines, an analytic approach was used to address all reliable evidence to interpret the predictors of CRC or advanced neoplasia during surveillance colonoscopy. The key recommendations state that the high-risk findings for metachronous CRC following polypectomy are as follows: adenoma ≥10 mm in size; 3 to 5 (or more) adenomas; tubulovillous or villous adenoma; adenoma containing high-grade dysplasia; traditional serrated adenoma; sessile serrated lesion containing any grade of dysplasia; serrated polyp of at least 10 mm in size; and 3 to 5 (or more) sessile serrated lesions. More studies are needed to fully comprehend the patients who are most likely to benefit from surveillance colonoscopy and the ideal surveillance interval to prevent metachronous CRC.