Endoscopists with Longer Cecal Intubation Time than Withdrawal Time Have Lower Adenoma Detection Rate

2013 ◽  
Vol 108 ◽  
pp. S186
Author(s):  
Shailendra Singh ◽  
Elie Aoun ◽  
Vishal Goyal ◽  
Mayuri Gupta ◽  
Trupti Shinde ◽  
...  
10.20883/183 ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 85 (4) ◽  
pp. 298 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elżbieta Poniewierka ◽  
Robert Dudkowiak ◽  
Witold Marczyński

Introduction. Colonoscopy is the gold standard for prevention and early diagnosis of colorectal cancer. Procedure quality is an important issue. Current quality indicators, such as cecal intubation rate, adenoma detection rate, and withdrawal time, are important, but cecum intubation time influences all of them. Factors that determine cecal intubation time (CIT) include body mass index (BMI), age, sex, history of abdominal surgery, quality of bowel preparation, and visceral adipose tissue. Among those who perform colonoscopy, it is believed that the procedure is easier to perform in obese people. Aim. To determine whether cecal intubation time depends on body mass index and sex of patients undergoing colonoscopy.Material and Methods. An analysis of the technical aspects of colonoscopy, such as the time required to intubate the cecum, with respect to BMI and sex in 100 patients.Results. The average time taken to reach the cecum or ileum was slightly longer in obese people than in people with normal weight. Average CIT was almost one minute longer in men than women. Average CIT in obese men was slightly longer than in normal weight men. There was no difference in average CIT in obese and normal weight women. The differences were not statistically significant.Conclusions. This study demonstrates that the claim that endoscopic examination of the lower gastrointestinal tract is easier to perform in obese people cannot be objectively confirmed.


2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Jaison John ◽  
Abdul Al-Douri ◽  
Bretta Candelaria ◽  
Saurin Gandhi ◽  
Paul Guzik ◽  
...  

Background. Delivery of high-quality colonoscopy and adherence to evidence-based surveillance guidelines is essential to a high-quality screening program, especially in safety net systems with limited resources. We sought to assess colonoscopy quality and ensure appropriate surveillance in a network of safety net practices. Methods. We identified age-eligible patients ages 50-75 within a Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) clinic system with evidence of colonoscopy in preceding 10 years. We performed chart reviews to assess key aspects of colonoscopy quality: bowel preparation quality, evidence of cecal intubation, cecal withdrawal time, and the adenoma detection rate. We then utilized established guidelines to assess and revise surveillance colonoscopy intervals, determine whether appropriate surveillance had taken place, and schedule overdue patients as appropriate. Results. Of 26,394 age-eligible patients, a total of 3,970 patients had evidence of prior colonoscopy and 1,709 charts were selected and reviewed. Mean age was 57, 54% identified as women and 51% identified as Hispanic. Of 1709 colonoscopies reviewed, 77% had data on bowel preparation, and of those, 85% had adequate preparation quality. Cecal intubation was documented in 89% of procedures. Adequate cecal withdrawal time was documented in 59% of those with documented cecal intubation. Overall adenoma detection rate was 42%. Initial surveillance interval was clearly stated in 72% ( n = 1238 ) of procedures. Of these, initial recommended intervals were too short in 24.5% ( n = 304 ) and too long in 3.6% ( n = 45 ). A total of 132 patients (10.7%) were overdue for appropriate surveillance and were referred for follow-up colonoscopy. Conclusions. Overall, the quality of screening colonoscopy was high, but reporting was incomplete. We found fair adherence to evidence-based surveillance guidelines, with significant opportunities to extend surveillance intervals and improve adherence to best practices.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Zhen-wen Wu ◽  
Sheng-gang Zhan ◽  
Mei-feng Yang ◽  
Yi-teng Meng ◽  
Feng Xiong ◽  
...  

Background and Aims. Simethicone (SIM), as an antifoaming agent, has been shown to improve bowel preparation during colonoscopy. However, the optimal timing of SIM addition remained undetermined. We aimed to investigate the optimal timing of SIM addition to polyethylene glycol (PEG) to improve bowel preparation. Methods. Eligible patients were randomly assigned to two groups: the SIM evening group (SIM addition to PEG in the evening of the day prior to colonoscopy) and the SIM morning group (SIM addition to PEG in the morning of colonoscopy). The primary outcome was Bubble Scale (BS). The secondary outcomes were Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) and adenoma detection rate (ADR). Results. A total of 419 patients were enrolled in this study. The baseline characteristics of the patients were similar in both groups. No significant differences were observed in terms of BS (8.76 ± 0.90 vs. 8.65 ± 1.16, P  = 0.81), ADR (34.1% vs. 30.8%, P  = 0.47), Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) (8.59 ± 0.94 vs. 8.45 ± 1.00, P  = 0.15), and withdrawal time (8.22 ± 2.04 vs. 8.01 ± 2.51, P  = 0.094) between the two groups. Moreover, safety and compliance were similar in both groups. However, the SIM evening group was associated with shorter cecal intubation time (3.80 ± 1.81 vs. 4.42 ± 2.03, P  < 0.001), higher BS (2.95 ± 0.26 vs. 2.88 ± 0.38, P  = 0.04) in the right colon, and diminutive ADR (62.5% vs. 38.6%, P  = 0.022) in the right colon, when compared to the SIM evening group. Conclusions. The SIM addition to PEG in the evening of the day prior to colonoscopy can shorten cecal intubation time and improve BS scores and diminutive ADR of the right colon compared with the SIM addition to PEG in the morning of colonoscopy in bowel preparation.


2016 ◽  
Vol 85 (4) ◽  
pp. 298-301
Author(s):  
Elżbieta Poniewierka ◽  
Robert Dudkowiak ◽  
Witold Marczyński

Introduction. Colonoscopy is the gold standard for prevention and early diagnosis of colorectal cancer. Procedure quality is an important issue. Current quality indicators, such as cecal intubation rate, adenoma detection rate, and withdrawal time, are important, but cecum intubation time influences all of them. Factors that determine cecal intubation time (CIT) include body mass index (BMI), age, sex, history of abdominal surgery, quality of bowel preparation, and visceral adipose tissue. Among those who perform colonoscopy, it is believed that the procedure is easier to perform in obese people. Aim. To determine whether cecal intubation time depends on body mass index and sex of patients undergoing colonoscopy.Material and Methods. An analysis of the technical aspects of colonoscopy, such as the time required to intubate the cecum, with respect to BMI and sex in 100 patients.Results. The average time taken to reach the cecum or ileum was slightly longer in obese people than in people with normal weight. Average CIT was almost one minute longer in men than women. Average CIT in obese men was slightly longer than in normal weight men. There was no difference in average CIT in obese and normal weight women. The differences were not statistically significant.Conclusions. This study demonstrates that the claim that endoscopic examination of the lower gastrointestinal tract is easier to perform in obese people cannot be objectively confirmed.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Subin G Chirayath ◽  
Janak Bahirwani ◽  
Parampreet Kaur ◽  
Noel Martins ◽  
Ronak Modi

Background and Aims: Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has affected many facets of the practice of medicine including screening colonoscopies. Our study looks to observe if there has been an effect on the quality of colonoscopies, as indicated by quality measures such as cecal intubation rate (CIR), cecal intubation time (CIT), scope withdrawal time (SWT) and adenoma detection rate (ADR) with the adoption of standard COVID-19 precautions. Methods: We conducted a retrospective chart review to analyze the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on screening colonoscopies. The study utilized data on CIR, CIT, SWT and ADR from outpatient, non-emergent procedures conducted at 3 endoscopy suites of St Lukes University Health Network. All inpatient and emergent procedures were excluded. Data was obtained by performing chart review on EPIC electronic health record. Results: Our study demonstrated that the total number of screening colonoscopies was decreased between 2019 to 2020 (318 in 2019 vs 157 in 2020, p= 0.005). CIT (320+/-105 seconds in 2019 vs 392+/-107 seconds in 2020, p=0.001) and SWT (706+/-232 seconds in 2019 vs 830+/-241 seconds in 2020, p=0.001) were increased while CIR (98.2% in 2019 vs 96.6% in 2020, p=0.04) was decreased between 2019 and 2020 likely due to PPE introduction. ADR was similar between the two groups (38.23 (12.50-66.66) in 2019 vs 38.18(16.66-66.00) in 2020, p=0.8). Conclusion: Our study showed that quality indices for screening colonoscopies like cecal intubation rate, cecal intubation time and scope withdrawal time were negatively impacted during the initial COVID time period compared to pre-COVID time. The study also displayed that though there was a significant decline in both screening and diagnostic colonoscopies during pandemic, adenoma detection rates were comparable. Thus, the efficiency of the procedures was affected by the use of PPE but it did not affect the colonoscopies clinical benefits.


2020 ◽  
Vol 08 (12) ◽  
pp. E1842-E1849
Author(s):  
Venkat Nutalapati ◽  
Madhav Desai ◽  
Vivek Sandeep Thoguluva-Chandrasekar ◽  
Mojtaba Olyaee ◽  
Amit Rastogi

Abstract Background and study aims The adenoma detection rate (ADR) is an important quality metric of colonoscopy. Higher ADR correlates with lower incidence of interval colorectal cancer. ADR is variable between endoscopists and depends upon the withdrawal technique amongst other factors. Dynamic position change (lateral rotation of patients with a view to keep the portion of the colon being inspected at a higher level) helps with luminal distension during the withdrawal phase. However, impact of this on ADR is not known in a pooled sample. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to study the impact of dynamic position changes during withdrawal phase of colonoscopy on ADR Methods A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Database was conducted from each database’s inception to search for studies comparing dynamic position changes during colonoscope withdrawal with static left lateral position (control). The primary outcome of interest was ADR. Other studied outcomes were polyp detection rate (PDR) and withdrawal time. Outcomes were reported as pooled odds ratio (OR) with 95 % confidence intervals (CI) with statistical significance (P < 0.05). RevMan 5.3 software was used for statistical analysis. Results Six studies were included in our analysis with 2860 patients. Of these, dynamic position change was implemented in 1177 patients while 1183 patients served as the controls. ADR was significantly higher in the dynamic position change group with pooled OR 1.36 (95 % CI, 1.15–1.61; P < 0.01). There was low heterogeneity in inclusion studies (I2 = 0 %). PDR was numerically higher in position change group (53.4 % vs 49.6 %) but not statistically significant (P = 0.16). Mean withdrawal time did not significantly change with dynamic position change (12.43 min vs 11.46 min, P = 0.27). Conclusion Position change during the withdrawal phase of colonoscopy can increase the ADR compared to static left lateral position. This is an easy and practical technique that can be implemented to improve ADR.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document