Literature DB >> 35545844

Endoscopy volumes and outcomes at a tertiary Melbourne centre during the 2020 COVID-19 lockdowns.

Daniel Schneider1, Michael Swan1, Simon Hew1.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Keywords:  COVID-19; Cancer; Digestive system neoplasms; Endoscopy

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35545844      PMCID: PMC9347955          DOI: 10.5694/mja2.51539

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med J Aust        ISSN: 0025-729X            Impact factor:   12.776


× No keyword cloud information.
During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic, elective medical procedures and population cancer screening programs, including colonoscopy, were suspended because of lockdowns and other public health measures. , , , Marked declines in endoscopic procedure volumes were reported overseas. In Melbourne, two lockdowns restricted non‐urgent endoscopy during 2020. All patients scheduled for elective endoscopy at Monash Health were re‐triaged for priority in accordance with the Gastroenterological Society of Australia COVID‐19 guidelines. In this article, we report our assessment of the impact of lockdowns on endoscopic volumes and outcomes at our centre. We undertook a retrospective analysis of endoscopic procedures at Monash Health during the 2020 lockdowns (24 March – 1 May, 2 August – 28 September 2020) and the corresponding periods in 2019. All patients underwent pre‐procedure COVID‐19 screening (health questionnaire, polymerase chain reaction testing). We collected information on patient demographic characteristics, procedure type, COVID‐19 status, and endoscopic outcomes (cancer and polyp detection). We assessed differences in procedure volumes and rates during the 2019 and 2020 periods in χ2 tests; P < 0.05 was deemed statistically significant. The overall missing cancer number was estimated as the difference between the expected number of cancers (based on procedure volume and detection rate for 2019) and the number of cancers identified during the 2020 lockdowns. Our study was approved by the Monash Health Human Research Ethics Committee (QA/68490/MonH‐2020‐232763). A total of 1147 endoscopic procedures were performed during the two lockdowns; none of the patients were diagnosed with COVID‐19. This number was 42% lower than during the corresponding periods of 2019 (1972 procedures), but the overall cancer detection rate was higher (2020: 77, 6.7% of procedures; 2019: 89, 4.5%; P = 0.008). Colonoscopy detection indicators — the adenoma (2020: 138 of 426 colonoscopies, 32.4%; 2019: 256 of 906; 28.3%; P = 0.12) and sessile serrated polyp detection rates (2020: 17 of 426, 4.0%; 2019: 40 of 906, 4.4%; P = 0.72) — were similar for the two periods (Box). Despite the higher cancer detection rate and the similar quality indicator values, 55 fewer cases of cancer were detected than expected had the number of procedures been the same in 2020 as in 2019. IQR = interquartile range. The data from our Melbourne centre may not be representative of data for other centres with different endoscopy strategies during the pandemic. The 2019 periods corresponding to the 2020 lockdown periods may not reflect baseline endoscopic volume and outcomes, but endoscopic activity during 2019 was regarded as typical for our centre. Despite a large reduction in case volume because of pandemic lockdowns, the overall cancer detection rate was higher and colonoscopy detection indicators were maintained at pre‐pandemic levels. However, fewer cancers were detected. By enhancing patient selection using guideline‐based re‐triage, we increased our overall cancer detection rate during a period of limited access and resources. Although our missing cancer rate was not as high as reported elsewhere, prompt restoration of endoscopy volume should be a focus of pandemic recovery.

Competing interests

No relevant disclosures.
Characteristic20192020 P
Patients
Total number of patients1606946
Outpatients1253 (78%)646 (68.3%)
Inpatients353 (22%)300 (31.7%)
Sex (men)792 (49%)506 (53.5%)
Age (years), median (IQR)61 (48–72)64 (51–73)
Endoscopic procedures
Total number of procedures19721147
Cancers detected (overall detection rate)89 (4.5%)77 (6.7%)0.008
Gastroscopy765 (38.8%)461 (40.2%)
Cancers detected24 (3.1%)16 (3.5%)0.75
Colonoscopy906 (45.9%)426 (37.1%)
Cancers detected24 (2.6%)18 (4.2%)0.13
National Bowel Cancer Screening Program84 (9.3%)71 (17%)< 0.001
Adenoma detection rate256 (28.3%)138 (32.4%)0.12
Sessile serrated polyp detection rate40 (4.4%)17 (4.0%)0.72
Flexible sigmoidoscopy94 (4.8%)27 (2.4%)
Cancers detected7 (7%)2 (7%)0.99
Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography103 (5.2%)114 (9.9%)
Cancers detected9 (9%)10 (9%)0.99
Endoscopic ultrasound93 (4.7%)116 (10%)
Cancers detected24 (26%)31 (27%)0.88
Enteroscopy9 (0.4%)2 (0.2%)
Cancers detected1 (11%)0
Per‐oral endoscopic myotomy2 (0.1%)1 (0.1%)

IQR = interquartile range.

  4 in total

1.  Efficacy of endoscopic triage during the Covid-19 outbreak and infective risk.

Authors:  Luca Elli; Gian Eugenio Tontini; Elisabetta Filippi; Lucia Scaramella; Paolo Cantù; Maurizio Vecchi; Roberto Bertè; Annarita Baldassarri; Roberto Penagini
Journal:  Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2020-10       Impact factor: 2.566

2.  COVID-19 and endoscopy: implications for healthcare and digestive cancer screening.

Authors:  Ian M Gralnek; Cesare Hassan; Mario Dinis-Ribeiro
Journal:  Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2020-08       Impact factor: 46.802

3.  Real-world clinical data of endoscopy-based cancer detection during the emergency declaration for COVID-19 in Japan.

Authors:  Shuntaro Yoshida; Toshihiro Nishizawa; Osamu Toyoshima
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2020-10-16

4.  Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on UK endoscopic activity and cancer detection: a National Endoscopy Database Analysis.

Authors:  Matthew D Rutter; Matthew Brookes; Thomas J Lee; Peter Rogers; Linda Sharp
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2020-07-20       Impact factor: 23.059

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.