22 research outputs found
AGA Institute Quality Measure Development for the Diagnosis and Management of COVID-19
This document presents the official recommendations of the American
Gastroenterological Association (AGA) regarding quality measures related to the
diagnosis and management of the novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2. The current report
outlines the process by which the Quality Committee (QC) evaluates guidance
statements published by the AGA’s Clinical Guidelines Committee (CGC) to inform
measure development. The recommendations discussed in this report relate to what
remains an unprecedented event in contemporary history with unique challenges for
CGC guidance-related measure development. The following recommendations were
developed by the QC in consultation with the CGC. Their development was fully funded
by the AGA Institute, with no additional outside funding.The AGA Institute provided funding for creation of this document
External Validation of a Model Determining Risk of Neoplastic Progression of Barrett\u27s Esophagus in a Cohort of Us Veterans
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) in those with Barrett\u27s esophagus (BE) is 11-fold greater than the general population. It remains unclear which BE patients are at highest risk of progression to EAC. We aimed to validate a predictive model risk-stratifying BE patients.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study at the Houston Veteran Affairs Medical Center of consecutive patients with a new diagnosis of BE from November 1990 to January 2019. Study follow-up was through February 2020. Patients were excluded if they had no follow-up EGD with esophageal biopsy sampling after the initial BE-diagnosing EGD or evidence of high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or EAC on initial EGD. We performed an external validation study of a risk model containing sex, smoking, BE length, and low-grade dysplasia (LGD) status and assessed discriminatory ability using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC).
RESULTS: Among 608 BE patients, 24 progressed to HGD/EAC. The points-based model discriminated well with an AUROC of .72 (95% confidence interval [CI], .63-.82). When categorized into low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups according to published cutoffs, the AUROC was poor at .57. Restructured into low-risk versus high-risk groups, the AUROC was .72 (95% CI, .64-.80). Excluding baseline LGD did not reduce discriminatory ability (AUROC, .73; 95% CI, .64-.82).
CONCLUSIONS: This external validation provides further evidence that the model including sex, LGD status, smoking status, and BE length may help to risk stratify BE patients. A simplified version excluding LGD status and/or reducing the number of risk groups has increased utility in clinical practice without loss of discriminatory ability
AGA Institute Quality Measure Development for the Diagnosis and Management of COVID-19
This document presents the official recommendations of the American
Gastroenterological Association (AGA) regarding quality measures related to the
diagnosis and management of the novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2. The current report
outlines the process by which the Quality Committee (QC) evaluates guidance
statements published by the AGA’s Clinical Guidelines Committee (CGC) to inform
measure development. The recommendations discussed in this report relate to what
remains an unprecedented event in contemporary history with unique challenges for
CGC guidance-related measure development. The following recommendations were
developed by the QC in consultation with the CGC. Their development was fully funded
by the AGA Institute, with no additional outside funding.The AGA Institute provided funding for creation of this document
Recommended from our members
Accuracy of a novel noninvasive secretin-enhanced MRCP severity index scoring system for diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis: correlation with EUS-based Rosemont criteria
To evaluate the accuracy of a secretin-enhanced MRCP Chronic Pancreatitis Severity Index (CPSI) in the diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis (CP) based on endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) Rosemont criteria.
In this retrospective study, 31 patients (20 women; median age 48Â years, range 18-77) with known/suspected CP evaluated with both EUS and secretin-enhanced MRCP were included. CP severity was graded using a ten-point-scale secretin-enhanced MRCP-based CPSI scoring system which considered ductal, parenchymal and secretin-based dynamic abnormalities. Cases were categorized as normal, mild, moderate or severe CP. Correlation between CPSI and the EUS Rosemont criteria was performed using Cohen's kappa coefficient. Comparative evaluation of test performance was obtained using ROC analysis.
Using EUS Rosemont criteria, eight patients had features consistent/suggestive of CP, 20 patients were normal and three were indeterminate. On CPSI, five patients were normal, 12 had mild and 14 had moderate/severe CP. There was only fair agreement (k = 0.272) between CPSI and Rosemont criteria categories. CPSI showed 87.5% sensitivity, 69.6% specificity and 74.2% accuracy (cutoff value = 3.5 points; area under the curve = 0.804; p = 0.0026) for CP diagnosis based on EUS Rosemont criteria.
CPSI showed relatively high diagnostic accuracy for diagnosis of CP based on Rosemont criteria. The CPSI scoring system can be proposed as a noninvasive alternative to the EUS Rosemont criteria for CP diagnosis
Risk Profiles for Barrett's Esophagus Differ between New and Prevalent, and Long- and Short-Segment Cases.
Previous studies on Barrett's esophagus (BE) risk factors have had differing case definitions and control groups. The purpose of this study was to examine differences in risk factors between newly diagnosed vs. prevalent BE, long- vs. short-segment BE, and endoscopy-only BE without specialized intestinal metaplasia (SIM).We conducted a cross-sectional study among eligible patients scheduled for elective esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and patients eligible for screening colonoscopy, recruited from primary care clinics at a Veterans Affairs center. All participants completed a survey on demographics, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptoms and medication use prior to undergoing study EGD. We compared BE cases separately to two control groups: 503 primary care controls and 1353 endoscopy controls. Associations between risk factors and differing BE case definitions were evaluated with multivariate logistic regression models.For comparisons with primary care controls, early onset frequent GERD symptoms were more strongly associated with risk of long-segment BE (OR 19.9; 95% CI 7.96-49.7) than short-segment BE (OR 8.54; 95% CI 3.85-18.9). Likewise, the inverse association with H. pylori infection was stronger for long-segment BE (OR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.26-0.79) than short-segment BE (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.48-1.05). GERD symptoms and H. pylori infection was also more strongly associated with prevalent BE than newly diagnosed BE. Few differences were observed between BE cases and endoscopy controls. Endoscopy-only BE was associated with GERD symptoms (OR 2.25, 95% CI 1.32-3.85) and PPI/H2RA use (OR 4.44; 95% CI 2.61-7.54) but to a smaller degree than BE with SIM.We found differences in the strength and profiles of risk factors for BE. The findings support that epidemiological studies of BE should make a distinction between long and short, new and prevalent, endoscopy-only and BE with SIM as well as type of controls