scholarly journals Comparison of colonoscopy after colonic diverticulitis and positive fecal immunochemical tests for the detection of colorectal neoplasia

2021 ◽  
Vol 09 (03) ◽  
pp. E331-E337
Author(s):  
Dai Nakamatsu ◽  
Tsutomu Nishida ◽  
Shinji Kuriki ◽  
Li-sa Chang ◽  
Kazuki Aochi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Detection Rate ◽  
Colorectal Neoplasia ◽  
Acute Diverticulitis ◽  
Colonic Diverticulitis ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Positive Group ◽  
Asymptomatic Patients ◽  
Polyp Detection Rate ◽  
Adenoma Detection ◽  
Acute Colonic Diverticulitis

Abstract Background and study aims The relationship between acute colonic diverticulitis and colorectal cancer (CRC) is unclear, but colonoscopy is recommended to exclude malignancy. We compared the detection rates for colorectal neoplasia in patients with colonic diverticulitis and asymptomatic patients who had positive fecal immunochemical tests (FITs). Patients and methods In total, 282 patients with acute colonic diverticulitis were hospitalized in our hospital from February 2011 to December 2019. Of them, 143 patients with diverticulitis and 1819 with positive FITs patients during the same period underwent colonoscopy without a prior colonoscopy within 5 years. We retrospectively compared these patients in terms of the invasive CRC rate, advanced neoplasia detection rate (ANDR), adenoma detection rate (ADR), and polyp detection rate (PDR). Results Compared to the diverticulitis group, the FIT-positive group had a significantly higher CRC rate (0 vs 2.7 %, P = 0.0061), ANDR (5.6 vs. 14.0 %, P = 0.0017), ADR (19.6 vs. 53.2 %, P < .0001), and PDR (44.1 vs. 91.0 %, P < .0001). Using 1:1 propensity score matching based on age and sex, we obtained 276 matched patients in both groups. After matching, no difference was found in the CRC rate (0 vs 0.7 %) or ANDR (5.8 vs 7.3 %) between groups, but the ADR and PDR were significantly higher in the FIT-positive group (20.3 vs 43.5 %, P < .0001; 45.7 % vs 86.2 %, P < .0001). Conclusion Patients with acute diverticulitis had lower ADRs and PDRs than patients with positive FITs.

scholarly journals A120 NO EVIDENCE OF A FRIDAY EFFECT ON COLONOSCOPY QUALITY OUTCOMES

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 101-102
Author(s):  
Z Hindi ◽  
L Guizzetti ◽  
S cocco ◽  
M Brahmania ◽  
A Wilson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Detection Rate ◽  
Hospital Setting ◽  
Polyp Detection ◽  
Cecal Intubation ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Adjusted Risk ◽  
Polyp Detection Rate ◽  
Adenoma Detection ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Colonoscopy Quality

Abstract Background Colonoscopy quality may be influenced by operator fatigue. Prior studies have shown lower adenoma detection rates for procedures performed at the end of the day. However, it is unknown if colonoscopy quality is impaired at the end of the work week. Aims We investigated whether colonoscopy quality-related metrics differ at the end of the work week using the South West Ontario Colonoscopy Cohort. Methods Between April 2017 to February 2018, 45,510 consecutive colonoscopies from 20 academic and community hospitals in our health region were captured to form the cohort. In Canada, outpatient endoscopies are generally performed between Monday to Friday, taking Friday, or the last business day, as the last day of the work week compared to the rest of the work week. When a statutory holiday occurred on a Friday, Thursday was designated the last day of the work week. The primary outcome was adenoma detection rate (ADR), and secondary outcomes were sessile serrated polyp detection rate (ssPDR), polyp detection rate (PDR), and failed cecal intubation. Outcomes were presented as unadjusted and adjusted risk ratios derived from modified Poisson regression and adjusting for physician-level clustering, and characteristics of the patient (age, sex, severity), procedure (hospital setting, trainee presence, indication, sedation, bowel preparation quality) and physician (experience and specialty). Results During the observation period, 9,132 colonoscopies were performed on the last day of the work week compared to 36,378 procedures during the rest of the work week. No significant difference was observed for ADR (26.4% vs. 26.6%, p=0.75), ssPDR (4.5% vs. 5.0%, p=0.12), PDR (44.1% vs. 43.1%, p=0.081), or failed cecal intubation (2.8% vs. 2.9%, p=0.51) for colonoscopies performed on the last day of the work week compared to the rest of the week, respectively. After adjusting for potential confounders, there were no significant differences in the ADR (RR 1.01, 95% CI [0.88, 1.15], p=0.94), ssPDR (RR 0.90, 95% CI [0.70, 1.14], p=0.38), PDR (RR 1.00, 95% CI [0.92, 1.09], p=0.94), or failed cecal intubation (RR 0.92, 95% CI [0.72, 1.18], p=0.51) for colonoscopies performed on the last day of the work week compared to the rest of week, respectively. Conclusions Colonoscopy quality metrics, including ADR, ssPDR, PDR, and failed cecal intubation are not significantly different at the end of the week. Funding Agencies None

Are adenoma and serrated polyp detection rates correlated with endoscopists’ sensitivity of optical diagnosis?

Endoscopy ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 52 (09) ◽  
pp. 763-772 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maxime E. S. Bronzwaer ◽  
Jasper L. A. Vleugels ◽  
Sascha C. van Doorn ◽  
Marcel G. W. Dijkgraaf ◽  
Paul Fockens ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Detection Rate ◽  
Lesion Detection ◽  
Optical Diagnosis ◽  
Polyp Detection ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Serrated Polyps ◽  
Serrated Polyp ◽  
Polyp Detection Rate ◽  
Adenoma Detection ◽  
Post Hoc

Abstract Introduction Endoscopists with a high adenoma detection rate (ADR) and proximal serrated polyp detection rate (PSPDR) detect these polyps more frequently, which may be attributable to better recognition of their endoscopic features. Little is known about the association between endoscopic lesion detection and differentiation skills. Therefore, we evaluated the correlation between the ADR, PSPDR, and the sensitivity of optical diagnosis for adenomas and serrated polyps. Methods We performed an exploratory post-hoc analysis of the DISCOUNT-2 study, including complete colonoscopies after a positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT) performed by endoscopists who performed ≥ 50 colonoscopies. The correlations between the ADR, PSPDR, and the sensitivity of optical diagnosis were calculated using Pearson’s rho correlation coefficient. Results 24 endoscopists performed ≥ 50 colonoscopies, resulting in a total of 2889 colonoscopies. The overall ADR was 84.5 % (range 71.4 % – 95.3 %) and overall PSPDR was 13.7 % (4.3 % – 29.0 %). The sensitivity of optical diagnosis for adenomas and serrated polyps were 94.5 % (83.3 % – 100 %) and 74.0 % (37.5 % – 94.1 %), respectively. No correlation could be demonstrated between the ADR and the sensitivity of optical diagnosis for adenomas (−0.20; P = 0.35) or between the PSPDR and the sensitivity of optical diagnosis for serrated polyps (−0.12; P = 0.57). Conclusions In a homogeneous FIT-positive population, no correlation between the ADR, PSPDR, and the sensitivity of optical diagnosis for adenomas and serrated polyps could be demonstrated. These exploratory results suggest that lesion detection and differentiation require different endoscopic skills. Further prospective studies are needed; until then, monitoring of both performance indicators is important to secure optimal efficacy of FIT-based colorectal cancer screening.

BowelScope: Accuracy of Detection Using Endocuff Optimisation of Mucosal Abnormalities (the B-ADENOMA Study): a multicentre, randomised controlled flexible sigmoidoscopy trial

Gut ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 69 (11) ◽  
pp. 1959-1965
Author(s):  
Colin J Rees ◽  
Andrew Brand ◽  
Wee Sing Ngu ◽  
Clive Stokes ◽  
Zoe Hoare ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Detection Rate ◽  
Flexible Sigmoidoscopy ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Polyp Detection ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Link Type ◽  
Polyp Detection Rate ◽  
Adenoma Detection ◽  
Participant Experience ◽  
Randomised Controlled

ObjectivesAdenoma detection rate (ADR) is an important quality marker at lower GI endoscopy. Higher ADRs are associated with lower postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer rates. The English flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) screening programme (BowelScope), offers a one-off FS to individuals aged 55 years. However, variation in ADR exists. Large studies have demonstrated improved ADR using Endocuff Vision (EV) within colonoscopy screening, but there are no studies within FS. We sought to test the effect of EV on ADR in a national FS screening population.DesignBowelScope: Accuracy of Detection Using ENdocuff Optimisation of Mucosal Abnormalities was a multicentre, randomised controlled trial involving 16 English BowelScope screening centres. Individuals were randomised to Endocuff Vision-assisted BowelScope (EAB) or Standard BowelScope (SB). ADR, polyp detection rate (PDR), mean adenomas per procedure (MAP), polyp characteristics and location, participant experience, procedural time and adverse events were measured. Comparison of ADR within the trial with national BowelScope ADR was also undertaken.Results3222 participants were randomised (53% male) to receive EAB (n=1610) or SB (n=1612). Baseline demographics were comparable between arms. ADR in the EAB arm was 13.3% and that in the SB arm was 12.2% (p=0.353). No statistically significant differences were found in PDR, MAP, polyp characteristics or location, participant experience, complications or procedural characteristics. ADR in the SB control arm was 3.1% higher than the national ADR.ConclusionEV did not improve BowelScope ADR when compared with SB. ADR in both arms was higher than the national ADR. Where detection rates are already high, EV is unable to improve detection further.Trial registration numbersNCT03072472, ISRCTN30005319 and CPMS ID 33224.

scholarly journals Simple feedback of colonoscopy performance improved the number of adenomas per colonoscopy and serrated polyp detection rate

2021 ◽  
Vol 09 (07) ◽  
pp. E1032-E1038
Author(s):  
Osamu Toyoshima ◽  
Shuntaro Yoshida ◽  
Toshihiro Nishizawa ◽  
Tadahiro Yamakawa ◽  
Toru Arano ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Propensity Score ◽  
Propensity Score Matching ◽  
Quality Indicators ◽  
Detection Rate ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Serrated Polyp ◽  
Polyp Detection Rate ◽  
Adenoma Detection ◽  
Clinically Significant ◽  
Simple Feedback

Abstract Background and study aims High-quality endoscopy requires improvement of not only the adenoma detection rate (ADR) but also the serrated polyp (SP) detection rate and the mean number of adenomas per positive procedure (MAP +). We evaluated whether a simple feedback of colonoscopy performance improves those quality indicators using propensity-score matching. Patients and methods Eleven endoscopists were evaluated regarding colonoscopy performance including ADRs, SP detection rates, mean numbers of adenomas per procedure (MAPs), and MAPs + with their ranking in the clinic. Endoscopic performance was compared before and after the feedback. Results Colonoscopies were performed for 874 patients before the feedback and 1,272 patients after the feedback. Using propensity-score matching, 803 patients before the feedback and 803 patients after the feedback were matched. ADR after the feedback was significantly higher than that before the feedback (50.8 % and 40.8 %, respectively). MAP after feedback was significantly larger than that before the feedback (0.92 and 0.69, respectively), as well as MAP + (1.96 and 1.69, respectively). Clinically significant SP detection rate was also improved from 10.0 % to 14.9 %. Conclusions Feedback including ADR, MAP, MAP +, and clinically significant SR detection rate could improve on those quality indicators. Further studies are needed to effectively prevent colorectal cancer in colonoscopy practice.

scholarly journals Efficacy and Patient Tolerability Profiles of Probiotic Solution with Bisacodyl Versus Conventional Cleansing Solution for Bowel Preparation: A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (10) ◽  
pp. 3286
Author(s):  
Youn I Choi ◽  
Jong-Joon Lee ◽  
Jun-Won Chung ◽  
Kyoung Oh Kim ◽  
Yoon Jae Kim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bowel Preparation ◽  
Detection Rate ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Screening Colonoscopy ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Case Group ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Polyp Detection Rate ◽  
Adenoma Detection ◽  
Bowel Cleansing

Although adequate bowel preparation is essential in screening colonoscopy, patient intolerability to bowel cleansing agents is problematic. Recently, a probiotic mixture solution with bisacodyl emerged to improve patient tolerability. We investigated the efficacy, safety, and patient tolerability profiles of probiotics with bisacodyl versus conventional polyethylene glycol (PEG) solution for bowel preparation for screening colonoscopies in healthy patients in this prospective, randomized, case-control study. In total, 385 volunteers were randomly assigned to receive 2 L of water + 200 mL of probiotic solution (case group, n = 195) or 4 L of PEG solution (control group, n = 190). The efficacy of the bowel cleansing was evaluated using the Ottawa scale system, polyp detection rate, and adenoma detection rate, and the patient tolerability profiles were assessed using a questionnaire. The demographics were not significantly different between groups. When the Ottawa score for each bowel segment was stratified into an adequate vs. inadequate level (Ottawa score ≤ 3 vs. >3), there were no statistical differences between groups in each segment of the colon. There were no significant differences in the polyp and adenoma detection rates between groups (38.42% vs. 32.42, p = 0.30; 25.79% vs. 18.97%, p = 0.11). The case group showed significantly fewer events than the control group, especially nausea, vomiting, and abdominal bloating events. Regarding the overall satisfaction grade, the case group reported significantly more “average” scores (95% vs. 44%, p < 0.001) and were more willing to use the same agents again (90.26% vs. 61.85%, p < 0.001). As patient compliance with bowel preparation agents is associated with an adequate level of bowel cleansing, a probiotic solution with bisacodyl might be a new bowel preparation candidate, especially in patients who show a poor compliance with conventional bowel preparation agents.

scholarly journals Melanosis Coli: A Helpful Contrast Effect or a Harmful Pigmentation?

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 117955221881732 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fadi Abu Baker ◽  
Amir Mari ◽  
Dan Feldman ◽  
Muhammad Suki ◽  
Oren Gal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Detection Rate ◽  
Control Group ◽  
P Value ◽  
Polyp Detection ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Benign Condition ◽  
Melanosis Coli ◽  
Polyp Detection Rate ◽  
Adenoma Detection

Background: Melanosis coli, a brown discoloration of colonic mucosa, is considered as a benign condition mainly observed in patients under chronic anthranoid laxatives. Recent data link this condition with an increased adenoma detection rate. Moreover, its tumorigenic potential and possible association with the development of colorectal cancer remains uncertain. We conducted this study to compare the polyp detection rate and colorectal cancer diagnosis in patients with melanosis against matched control group without melanosis. Patients and methods: A retrospective single-center study. Patients diagnosed with melanosis coli on colonoscopy over a 15-year period were included. Each melanosis coli patient was matched with three controls by age, gender, setting (inpatient/outpatient), and procedure’s indication. Polyp detection rate and diagnosis of colorectal cancer were recorded and compared between the groups before and after adjustment for bowel preparation. Results: A cohort of 718 patients with melanosis and 2154 controls were included. The polyp detection rates were 33.4% and 21.8% of melanosis and control groups, respectively ( P < .001). Melanosis coli, however, was associated with less diagnosis of colorectal cancer than controls (0.3% vs 3.9%; P < .001). In multivariate analysis, melanosis diagnosis on endoscopy was significantly associated with higher polyp detection rate (odds ratio [OR] = 1.986, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.626-2.425; P value < .01). Conclusions: Melanosis coli is not associated with increased diagnosis of colorectal cancer. It is associated, however, with enhanced polyp detection likely due to chromo-endoscopy-like effect.

scholarly journals Polyp detection rate: does length matter?

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 107-112 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan P Segal ◽  
Cynthia Kanagasundaram ◽  
Philip Mills ◽  
Paul Bassett ◽  
Simon M Greenfield
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Detection Rate ◽  
Surrogate Marker ◽  
Bowel Cancer ◽  
Polyp Detection ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Polyp Detection Rate ◽  
Adenoma Detection ◽  
Bowel Cancer Screening ◽  
The Difference

IntroductionPolyp detection rate is a surrogate marker for adenoma detection rate and therefore a surrogate marker of quality colonoscopy. To our knowledge, this is the first study that compares distance from the monitor to the endoscopist on polyp detection rate.MethodsThis was a retrospective study comparing polyp detection rate across two different endoscopy room set-ups. All colonoscopies performed between December 2013 and November 2014 were retrieved. The difference in the room set-up was the distance from the endoscopist to the endoscopy monitor. Room A had a distance of 219 cm and Room B had 147 cm. We used two identical rooms, C and D, as a control arm with a distance of 190 cm between the endoscopist and the monitor.ResultsThere were significant differences in polyp detection rates between Room A and Room B in the bowel cancer screening lists. For these lists, the room with the closest distance from the endoscopist to the monitor (147 cm) had a statistically significant higher polyp detection rate than the room that had a further monitor to endoscopist distance of 219 cm (p<0.0006) and a trend towards a higher polyp detection rate compared with the room where the distance between the monitor and the endoscopist was 190 cm (p=0.08). This effect was not noticed across the service lists.ConclusionsThis study has suggested that the distance from the endoscopist to the monitor can affect polyp detection rate. It appears that for bowel cancer screening lists, the further the endoscopist from the monitor the lower their polyp detection rate.

scholarly journals The Impact of Face Shields on the Quality of Colonoscopy During the COVID-19 Pandemic

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jong Yoon Lee ◽  
Yeo Wool Kang ◽  
Jong Hoon Lee
Keyword(s):  
Quality Indicators ◽  
Detection Rate ◽  
Lesion Detection ◽  
University Hospital ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Polyp Detection Rate ◽  
Adenoma Detection ◽  
Colonoscopy Quality ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a global pandemic. Healthcare workers are at a higher risk for exposure to COVID-19 infection than the general population. During the COVID-19 pandemic, endoscopists are recommended to wear personal protective equipment (PPE), including face shields, to prevent COVID-19 transmission. However, to the best of our knowledge, there are no reports on the impact of face shields on the quality of colonoscopy. This study aimed to determine whether the use of PPE, including face shields, affects the quality of colonoscopy during the COVID-19 pandemic.Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients who underwent screening or surveillance colonoscopy performed at Dong-A University Hospital between June 2020 and March 2021 during the COVID-19 pandemic. Endoscopists wore isolation gowns, disposable gloves, and KF94 masks from June 2020 to October 2020. From November 2020, endoscopists additionally wore face shields. Therefore, we compared the colonoscopy quality indicators during the 5 months without the use of face shields and the 5 months with the use of face shields. We calculated the overall adenoma detection rates (ADRs) of the group using face shields and the group not using face shields. Further, the polyp detection rate (PDR), sessile serrated lesion detection rate (SSLDR), advanced neoplasia detection rate (ANDR), polyp per colonoscopy, and adenoma per colonoscopy were calculated for each group.Results: In total, 1,359 patients were included in the study; the face shield and non-face shield groups comprised 679 and 680 patients, respectively. We found no statistically significant differences in the PDR (49.04 vs. 52.50%, p=0.202), ADR (38.59 vs. 38.97%, p=0.884) SSPDR (1.91 vs. 1.32%, p=0.388), and ANDR (3.98 vs. 3.97%, p=0.991) between the groups. In both the experienced endoscopist group and trainee endoscopist group, there was no difference in the colonoscopy quality indicators between the groups of patients examined by endoscopists with and without face shields.Conclusions: The quality indicators of colonoscopy were not affected by face shields during the COVID-19 pandemic.

scholarly journals Performance report cards increase adenoma detection rate

2017 ◽  
Vol 05 (07) ◽  
pp. E675-E682 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Sey ◽  
Andy Liu ◽  
Samuel Asfaha ◽  
Victoria Siebring ◽  
Vipul Jairath ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Detection Rate ◽  
Temporal Trends ◽  
Adenoma Detection Rate ◽  
Report Cards ◽  
Polyp Detection ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Polyp Detection Rate ◽  
Adenoma Detection ◽  
Performance Report ◽  
Colonoscopy Quality

Abstract Background and study aims Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is an important measure of colonoscopy quality, as are polyp, advanced ADR, and adenocarcinoma detection rates. We investigated whether performance report cards improved these outcome measures. Patients and methods Endoscopists were given report cards comparing their detection rates to the institutional mean on an annual basis. Detection rates were evaluated at baseline, 1 year after report cards (Year 1), and 2 years after report cards (Year 2). Endoscopists were unaware of the study and received no other interventions. The primary outcome was ADR and secondary outcomes were polyp detection rate (PDR), advanced ADR, and adenocarcinoma detection rate. Multivariate regression was performed to adjust for temporal trends in patient, endoscopists, and procedural factors. Results Seventeen physicians performed 3,118 screening colonoscopies in patients with positive FOBT or family history of colon cancer. The ADR increased from 34.5 % (baseline) to 39.4 % (Year 1) and 41.2 % (Year 2) (P = 0.0037). The PDR increased from 45 % (baseline) to 48.8 % (Year 1) and 51.8 % (Year 2) (P = 0.011). There was no significant improvement in advanced ADR or adenocarcinoma detection rates. On multivariate analysis, the ADR increased by 22 % in Year 1 (P = 0.03) and 30 % in Year 2 (P = 0.008). Among physicians with a baseline ADR < 25 %, improvement in ADR was even greater, increasing 2.2 times by the end of the study (P = 0.004). Improvements in ADR were not correlated with specialty although gastroenterologists were 52 % more likely to find an adenoma than general surgeons. Conclusions Annual performance report cards increased adenoma detection rates, especially among physicians with low ADR < 25 %.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document