Article Text

Download PDFPDF
COVID-19 transmission following outpatient endoscopy during pandemic acceleration phase involving SARS-CoV-2 VOC 202012/01 variant in UK
  1. Bu'Hussain Hayee1,
  2. The SCOTS II Project group,
  3. Pradeep Bhandari2,
  4. Colin J Rees3,
  5. Ian Penman4
    1. 1 Gastroenterology, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
    2. 2 Gastroenterology, Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth, Portsmouth, UK
    3. 3 Gastroenterology, South Tyneside NHS Foundation Trust, South Shields, South Tyneside, UK
    4. 4 Centre for Liver & Digestive Disorders, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
    1. Correspondence to Dr Bu'Hussain Hayee, Gastroenterology, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, London, UK; b.hayee{at}

    Statistics from

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.


    Infection prevention and control (IPC) measures put in place during the first phases of the COVID-19 pandemic were effective in reducing endoscopy-related transmission while allowing recovery of activity.

    In late 2020 a novel, more infectious, SARS-CoV-2 variant (VOC 202012/01) was associated with a second ’surge' or acceleration phase in the UK. We sought to measure whether pre-existing IPC guidance would be sufficient to prevent transmission in this scenario. Prospective data were collected from eight UK centres for n=2440 procedures. Pre-endoscopy, nine (0.37%) asymptomatic patients were positive for SARS-CoV-2 by nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) testing and their procedures deferred. Post endoscopy, 30 (1.27%) developed symptoms suspicious for COVID-19, with 15 (0.65%) testing positive on NPS. Three (0.12%) cases were attributed to potential transmission from endoscopy attendance. All 15 patients recovered fully requiring only community treatment.

    Although we report cases potentially transmitted by endoscopy attendance in this latest study, the risk of COVID-19 transmission following outpatient endoscopy remains very low. Thus, IPC measures developed in earlier pandemic phases appear robust, but our data emphasise the need for vigilance and strict adherence to these measures in order to optimally protect both patients and staff.

    In more detail

    The effects of the COVID-19 pandemic continue to extend beyond direct care of affected patients,1 particularly impacting outpatient diagnostics including GI endoscopy. Considerable concerns remain around the potential impact on detection of, and survival from, significant disease such as cancer.2 3 In mid-2020, a pandemic deceleration phase4 in the UK led to a period of intense ‘restart and recovery’ activity in endoscopy to mitigate the effects of delayed or cancelled procedures. This was supported by professional society guidance on the development of ‘COVID-minimised’ or ‘green’ pathways with NPS testing of patients before their attendance for the procedure.5–7 Activity was limited by the impact on endoscopy staff …

    View Full Text


    • Twitter @IBDdoc, @GastronauIan

    • Collaborators The SCOTS II Project group comprises: Vivienne Sayer, Mayur Kumar, Kath Lynch Princess Royal University Hospital, Orpington, Kent; Ben Warner, Olaolu Olabintan Darenth Valley Hospital, Dartford, Kent; Imogen Sutherland, Gabor Sipos Medway Maritime Hospital, Gillingham, Kent; Zacharias Tsiamoulos Queen Elizabeth QM Hospital, Margate, Kent; Shraddha Gulati, Mehul Patel King’s College Hospital, London; Ed Seward, Rawen Kader University College London Hospital, London; Sergio Coda, Sas Banerjee Barking and Havering NHS Trust, London; Adam Humphries, Sarah Marshall, Angad Dhillon, Romanov Nable St Mark’s Hospital, London.

    • Contributors All named authors contributed to the initiation, analysis and writing of this article.

    • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Patient and public involvement Patients and/or the public were not involved in the design, or conduct, or reporting, or dissemination plans of this research.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.