INTRODUCTION: The National Bowel Cancer Screening Programme guidelines advocate the use of endoscopic tattooing for suspected malignant lesions to assist identification and to facilitate laparoscopic resections. However, endoscopic tattooing practices are variable in endoscopic units, resulting in repeat endoscopy and delay in patient management. The aim of this study was to assess the adherence to tattoo protocol for significant colonic lesions at an endoscopy unit in a large district general hospital. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prospectively collected data were analysed for 252 patients with significant colonic lesions between January 2017 and December 2018. Data were collected through reviewing patient's notes, histopathology findings and endoscopy reports. Data on lesions, complications, number and site of tattoo placed, and any repeat endoscopy for a tattoo were collected. RESULTS: Of the 252 patients, 88% (n = 222) had malignant and 12% (n = 30) had benign lesions. Only 58.7% (n = 148) of those patients who had colonoscopy had tattoo placement reported. Of these 148 cases, the report stated the distance of tattoo in relation to the lesion in only 46% (n = 68) of patients. Unfortunately, 14.3% (n = 36) of patients required repeat endoscopy to tattoo the lesions prior to surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights the lack of uniformity of tattoo practice among endoscopists. Despite the National Bowel Cancer Screening Programme guidelines, a significant proportion of colorectal lesions are still not tattooed during their first endoscopy. Some patients had to have repeat endoscopy just for the purpose of tattooing. Active involvement and participation of all endoscopists in the colorectal and the complex polyp multidisciplinary teams may help to improve the tattoo service.
INTRODUCTION: The National Bowel Cancer Screening Programme guidelines advocate the use of endoscopic tattooing for suspected malignant lesions to assist identification and to facilitate laparoscopic resections. However, endoscopic tattooing practices are variable in endoscopic units, resulting in repeat endoscopy and delay in patient management. The aim of this study was to assess the adherence to tattoo protocol for significant colonic lesions at an endoscopy unit in a large district general hospital. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prospectively collected data were analysed for 252 patients with significant colonic lesions between January 2017 and December 2018. Data were collected through reviewing patient's notes, histopathology findings and endoscopy reports. Data on lesions, complications, number and site of tattoo placed, and any repeat endoscopy for a tattoo were collected. RESULTS: Of the 252 patients, 88% (n = 222) had malignant and 12% (n = 30) had benign lesions. Only 58.7% (n = 148) of those patients who had colonoscopy had tattoo placement reported. Of these 148 cases, the report stated the distance of tattoo in relation to the lesion in only 46% (n = 68) of patients. Unfortunately, 14.3% (n = 36) of patients required repeat endoscopy to tattoo the lesions prior to surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights the lack of uniformity of tattoo practice among endoscopists. Despite the National Bowel Cancer Screening Programme guidelines, a significant proportion of colorectal lesions are still not tattooed during their first endoscopy. Some patients had to have repeat endoscopy just for the purpose of tattooing. Active involvement and participation of all endoscopists in the colorectal and the complex polyp multidisciplinary teams may help to improve the tattoo service.
Entities:
Keywords:
Colorectal lesions; Endoscopic tattooing; India ink; Laparoscopic surgery
Authors: Sripathi R Kethu; Subhas Banerjee; David Desilets; David L Diehl; Francis A Farraye; Vivek Kaul; Richard S Kwon; Petar Mamula; Marcos C Pedrosa; Sarah A Rodriguez; Louis-Michel Wong Kee Song; William M Tierney Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2010-10 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: J W Park; D K Sohn; C W Hong; K S Han; D H Choi; H J Chang; S-B Lim; H S Choi; S-Y Jeong Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2007-08-17 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Sandra Alonso; Silvia Pérez; Núria Argudo; José Isaac Latorraca; Marta Pascual; Marco Antonio Álvarez; Agustín Seoane; Luis Eugenio Barranco; Luis Grande; Miguel Pera Journal: Rev Esp Enferm Dig Date: 2018-01 Impact factor: 2.086