ABSTRACT
ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: The gold standard test for colorectal cancer screening the colonoscopy. Although this is the test of choice, colonoscopy misses a significant number of lesions, mainly in the proximal colon. With the purpose of reducing the number of lesions missed, new techniques have been studied, amongst them, retroflexed view in the right side of the colon and the second direct forward view. OBJECTIVE: Assessing the safety of the retroview in the proximal colon (cecum and ascending colon), its impact on the detection of lesions in the proximal colon and its advantage over the double right forward view using adenoma detection rate and adenoma miss rate. METHODS: Three hundred and ninety-three patients who came to Hospital Mater Dei to undergo colonoscopy from March to July 2017, prospectively. Out of these, 372 were included in the study based on the following exclusion criteria: being under 18 years of age, inadequate bowel preparations (Boston scale <7), history of colectomy, inflammatory bowel disease or polypoid diseases. First, an endoscopist inserted the colonoscope into the cecum and examine the cecum and the ascending colon with a forward view twice. In the third insertion into the cecum, retroflexed view was performed, cecal mucosa was examined until the hepatic flexure in search of polyps missed on forward view. All lesions found were resected and sent for histological analysis. RESULTS: In 334 (89.8%) patients, retroflexed view was performed successfully, 65.8% of failures were attributed to the loops of the device which prevented the maneuver. The direct view identified 175 polyps in the proximal colon in 102 people. Retroflexed view detected 26 polyps missed by the direct view in 24 (6.5%) people, with a missing rate of 12.9% in the test with only the forward view. Out of the 26 polyps found in retroview, 21 (80.76%) were adenomas, one of them with a high-grade dysplasia. Eleven patients had polyps seen only in retroflexed view. Retroview has increased the polyp detection rate from 27.41% to 31.72% and the adenoma detection rate from 21.77% to 25%. The adenoma miss rate by the double direct view was 12.8%. Without the retroview, one polyp in every 13.91 colonoscopies would be missed (number needed to treat - NNT=13.91). There was no adverse event. CONCLUSION: The retroflexed view technique in the proximal colon was shown to be safe, fast and feasible in most cases. It increased the adenoma detection rate and was shown to be advantageous in this study wit benefit beyond the double direct view.
RESUMO CONTEXTO: O exame padrão ouro para rastreamento de câncer colorretal é a colonoscopia. Apesar de ser o exame de escolha, a colonoscopia perde um número não desprezível de lesões, principalmente no cólon proximal. Com a intenção de reduzir a perda de lesões, novas técnicas são estudadas, dentre elas, a retroflexão em cólon direito e a segunda visão frontal direta. OBJETIVO: Avaliar a segurança da retrovisão no cólon proximal (ceco e cólon ascendente), o seu impacto na detecção de lesões em cólon proximal e sua superioridade sobre a dupla visão frontal direta usando taxa de detecção de adenoma e taxa de adenoma perdido. MÉTODOS: Foram avaliados 393 pacientes de forma prospectiva que procuraram o Hospital Mater Dei para realizar colonoscopia entre março e julho de 2017. Desses, 372 foram incluídos baseados nos critérios de exclusão: menores de 18 anos, preparos intestinais inadequados (escala de Boston <7), com antecedente de colectomia, doença inflamatória intestinal ou síndromes polipoides. Primeiramente um endoscopista realizou a inserção do colonoscópio até o ceco e examinou o ceco e o cólon ascendente em visão frontal por duas vezes. Na terceira reinserção até o ceco era realizada a retroflexão e inspeção da mucosa do ceco até a flexura hepática em busca de pólipos perdidos à visão frontal. Todas lesões encontradas foram ressecadas e enviadas para análise histológica. RESULTADOS: Em 334 (89,8%) pacientes a retroflexão foi realizada com sucesso, 65,8% dos insucessos foram atribuídos a alças no aparelho que impediram a manobra. A visão direta identificou 175 pólipos no cólon proximal em 102 pessoas. A retroflexão detectou 26 pólipos perdidos pela visão direta em 24 (6,5%) pessoas, com uma taxa de perda de 12,9% no exame apenas em visão frontal. Dos 26 pólipos encontrados em retrovisão, 21 (80,76%) eram adenomas, um deles com displasia de alto grau. Onze pacientes tinham pólipos vistos apenas em retroflexão. A realização da retrovisão aumentou a taxa de detecção de pólipo de 27,41% para 31,72% e a taxa de detecção e adenomas de 21,77% para 25%. A taxa de adenoma perdido pela dupla visão direta foi de 12,8%. Se a retrovisão não fosse realizada, um pólipo a cada 13,91 colonoscopias seria perdido (NNT=13,91). Não houve nenhum evento adverso. CONCLUSÃO: A técnica de retroflexão em cólon proximal mostrou-se segura, rápida e factível na maioria dos casos. Ela aumentou a taxa de detecção de adenomas e mostrou-se soberana neste estudo com benfeitorias além da dupla visão direta.
Subject(s)
Humans , Adolescent , Colonic Polyps/diagnostic imaging , Colonic Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Colonoscopy , Tertiary Care CentersABSTRACT
Objective:To explore whether the regular feedback system in opportunistic screening of colorectal cancer can improve the adenoma detection rate (ADR) of endoscopists.Methods:This study was an observational study, divided into three stages: the baseline stage before intervention (the pre-intervention period), the regular feedback stage (the intervention period) and the post-intervention stage (the post-intervention period). In the pre-intervention period, all patients who underwent opportunistic screening of colorectal cancer in Department of Gastroenterology in Beijing Shijitan Hospital Affiliated to Capital Medical University from June 2017 to May 2018 were reviewed, and the ADR of each endoscopist was calculated. In the intervention period from June 2018 to November 2018, colonoscopies were performed on patients for opportunistic screening of colorectal cancer by endoscopists who participated in the feedback. The ADR of each endoscopist during the previous month was calculated at the beginning of each month and feedback was provided in the form of a report. In the post-intervention period from December 2018 to January 2019, colonoscopies were performed on patients for opportunistic screening of colorectal cancer by endoscopists who participated in the feedback. The ADR of each endoscopist was calculated after the feedback stopped. ADR and polyp detection rate (PDR) of three stages were compared.Results:A total of 1 768, 1 308 and 344 patients were enrolled for opportunistic screening of colorectal cancer during the pre-intervention, the intervention and the post-intervention period respectively. Eight endoscopists participated in the whole process of this study. The total ADR increased from 23.70% (419/1 768) in the pre-intervention period to 33.72% (441/1 308) in the intervention period ( χ2=37.449, P<0.05). Two months after intervention, ADR decreased slightly to 33.14% (114/344), but was still higher compared with before ( χ2=13.602, P<0.05). The total PDR increased from 47.17% (834/1 768) in the pre-intervention period to 52.68% (689/1 308) in the intervention period ( χ2=9.111, P<0.05). Two months after the intervention, PDR increased slightly to 53.78% (185/344), and still higher compared with before ( χ2=5.035, P<0.05). Conclusion:Regular feedback to endoscopists can improve ADR in opportunistic screening of colorectal cancer.
ABSTRACT
Objective To explore the diagnostic value of the i-Scan for detection of polypoid lesions in right hemicolon during colonoscopy. Methods A total of 200 patients who underwent colonoscopy in Beijing Shijitan Hospital from January 2015 to December 2015 were enrolled. After completion of the first colonoscopy in right hemicolon, a second withdrawal was performed, using white light mode ( white light group, n=93) and i-Scan mode ( i-scan group, n=96) to detect polypoid lesions in the proximal colon. The detection rates of polyp and adenoma were compared between the two groups. Results During the twice withdrawal, compared with white light group, more polyps and adenomas were detected in i-Scan group (1. 469 VS 1. 011, P=0. 028; 0. 979 VS 0. 624,P=0. 039). The proportion of patients with more polyps and adenomas in the i-Scan group was significantly higher than that in the white light group [ 37. 5％( 36/96) VS 22. 6％ ( 21/93) , P=0. 025;24. 0％ ( 23/96) VS 11. 8％ ( 11/93) ,P=0. 030] . i-Scan mode detected more small polyps with diameter<5 mm [ 84. 0％ ( 42/50 ) VS 58. 3％ ( 14/24 ) , P=0. 016 ] . However, there were no differences between the two groups in the size, location, and morphology of the detected adenomas ( all P>0. 05) . The polyp detection rates of the i-Scan group and white light group were 61. 5％ (59/96) and 48. 4％ (45/93), respectively (P=0. 071), and the adenoma detection rates were 47. 9％ (46/96) and 35. 5％ (33/93), respectively (P=0. 083). Conclusion I-Scan mode can increase the detection rate of polyps and adenomas in right hemicolon, and improve detection of polypoid lesions and bsmall polyps in patients with multiple polyps and adenomas.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: The adenoma detection rate is commonly used as a measure of the quality of colonoscopy. This study assessed both the association between the adenoma detection rate and the quality of bowel preparation and the risk factors associated with the adenoma detection rate in screening colonoscopy. METHODS: This retrospective analysis involved 1,079 individuals who underwent screening colonoscopy at the National Cancer Center between December 2012 and April 2014. Bowel preparation was classified by using the Aronchick scale. Individuals with inadequate bowel preparations (n = 47, 4.4%) were excluded because additional bowel preparation was needed. The results of 1,032 colonoscopies were included in the analysis. RESULTS: The subjects' mean age was 53.1 years, and 657 subjects (63.7%) were men. The mean cecal intubation time was 6.7 minutes, and the mean withdrawal time was 8.7 minutes. The adenoma and polyp detection rates were 28.1% and 41.8%, respectively. The polyp, adenoma, and advanced adenoma detection rates did not correlate with the quality of bowel preparation. The multivariate analysis showed age ≥ 60 years (hazard ratio [HR], 1.42; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02–1.97; P = 0.040), body mass index ≥ 25 kg/m² (HR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.17–2.08; P = 0.002) and current smoking (HR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.01–2.06; P = 0.014) to be independent risk factors for adenoma detection. CONCLUSION: The adenoma detection rate was unrelated to the quality of bowel preparation for screening colonoscopy. Older age, obesity, and smoking were independent risk factors for adenoma detection.
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Adenoma , Body Mass Index , Colonoscopy , Intubation , Mass Screening , Multivariate Analysis , Obesity , Polyps , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , Smoke , SmokingABSTRACT
Objective To evaluate the performance of split-dosed polyethylene(PEG) for colonoscopy preparation.Methods Split-dose means that 1-3 L of PEG is taken in the afternoon or evening before examination and the remains in the next morning.And single-dose refers to all PEG is taken in the evening before ex-amination.A meta-analysis was conducted to compare bowel preparation quality,adenoma detection rate and patients' acceptance between groups.Results Ten randomized controlled trials were included into this study with 3 222 participants(1 481 in split-dose group and 1 741 in single-dose group).Split-dose group had higher rate of satisfactory bowel preparation(OR=3.37,95％CI:2.37-4.79),and so did the subgroup of 2～ 3 L PEG (OR =3.88,95％ CI:2.39-6.29).Split-dose group did not improve adenoma detection rate significantly (OR =0.94,95％ CI:0.71-1.24),but reported less adverse events such as nausea (OR =0.56,95％ CI:0.42-0.74)and vomiting(OR=0.51,95％CI:0.30-0.88).Conclusion Split-dosed PEG provides better colon cleansing with higher patient compliance,but does not improve detection rate of adenoma.
ABSTRACT
Endocuff (Arc Medical Design) is a U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved device that is attached like a cap to the distal tip of the colonoscope; it is used to improve adenoma detection rates during colonoscopy. The aim of this review was to summarize and evaluate the clinical and technical efficacy of Endocuff in improving adenoma detection rate. A comprehensive literature review was performed to identify studies describing this technique. In this review article, we have summarized case series and reports describing Endocuff use and results. The reported indications, results, limitations, and complications are discussed.
Subject(s)
Adenoma , Colonoscopes , Colonoscopy , Colorectal NeoplasmsABSTRACT
Objective To evaluate the effect of colonoscopy with a transparent hood on the adenoma detection rate.Methods A prospective randomized controlled trial was performed.A total of 376 patients,who underwent colonoscopy for screening colorectal polyps,were randomly allocated to 2 groups:transparent hood group (TH group,n =190) and conventional colonoscopy group (CC group,n =186).Only one endoscopist performed all the colonoscopy examinations,recorded the withdrawal time,bowel preparation status,the number,shape,location,size of adenoma when withdrawing the endoscope.All the adenoma were removed under the colonoscopy.The pathological results were recorded,and the data and relative factors were analysed.Results A total of 317 adenomas were detected in 175 patients:172 adenomas in 99 patients of TH group,145 adenomas in 76 patients of CC group.Total ADR was 46.54％.ADR of TH group was 52.11％ and ADR of CC group was 40.86％ (P =0.029).A total of 40 adenomas were found behind the fold,32 in TH group and 8 in CC group(P ＜ 0.01).In cecum and transverse colon,there were more adenomas in TH group than in CC group.In cecum,there were 23 adenomas found in TH group,6 adenomas in CC group(P ＜0.05).In transverse colon,there were 46 adenomas in TH group,25 adenomas in CC group (P ＜ 0.05).In descending colon and rectum,there were more adenomas in CC group than in TH group.In descending colon,there were 16 adenomas TH group,and 30 adenomas in CC group.In rectum,there were 14 adenomas in TH group,24 adenomas in CC group(P ＜0.05).There was no significant difference in size or shape of adenomas found between two groups.Conclusion Colonoscopy with transparent hood for screening can increase the adenoma detection rate,especially the adenoma behind the fold.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Colorectal cancer (CRC) develops from colonic adenomas. Type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) is associated with a higher risk of CRC and metformin decreases CRC risk. However, it is not certain if metformin affects the development of colorectal polyps and adenomas. This study aimed to elucidate if metforminaffects the incidence of colonic polyps and adenomas in patients with type 2 DM. METHODS: Of 12,186 patients with type 2 DM, 3,775 underwent colonoscopy between May 2001 and March 2013. This study enrolled 3,105 of these patients, and divided them in two groups: 912 patients with metformin use and 2,193 patients without metformin use. Patient clinical characteristics, polyp and adenoma detection rate in the two groups were analyzed retrospectively. RESULTS: The Colorectal polyp detection rate was lower in the metformin group than in the non-meformin group (39.4% vs. 62.4%, P<0.01). Colorectal adenoma detection rate was significantly lower in the metformin group than in the non-metformin group (15.2% vs. 20.5%, P<0.01). Fewer advanced adenomas were detected in the metformin group than in the non-metformin group (12.2% vs. 22%, P<0.01). Multivariate analysis identified age, sex, Body mass index and metformin use as factors associated with polyp incidence, whereas only metforminwas independently associated with decreased adenoma incidence (Odd ratio=0.738, 95% CI=0.554-0.983, P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with type 2 DM, metformin reduced the incidence of adenomas that may transform into CRC. Therefore, metformin may be useful for the prevention of CRC in patients with type 2 DM.
Subject(s)
Humans , Adenoma , Body Mass Index , Colon , Colonic Polyps , Colonoscopy , Colorectal Neoplasms , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Incidence , Metformin , Multivariate Analysis , Polyps , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a major cause of cancer mortality worldwide, and this has led to an increased use of screening colonoscopy. This screening has resulted in long-term risk reduction in asymptomatic individuals. However, endoscopists may fail to detect advanced adenomas or colon cancer during screening. The reasons that adenomas or cancers are missed are thought to be associated with the location of the lesions or the skills of the endoscopist. To address the limitations of white light endoscopy (WLE) for adenoma detection, advanced endoscopic images have recently been used. Image-enhanced endoscopies (IEEs), including the use of topical dyes, optical filtering, and ultramagnification, allow for gastrointestinal lesion analysis. Many studies have compared the adenoma detection rate (ADR) obtained by using WLE and IEE, but with different results. IEE can be used to help the endoscopist to improve their ADR in screening colonoscopy. This review examines the possible roles of image-enhanced colonoscopy in CRC screening.
Subject(s)
Adenoma , Colonic Neoplasms , Colonoscopy , Colorectal Neoplasms , Coloring Agents , Endoscopy , Image Enhancement , Mass Screening , Mortality , Risk Reduction BehaviorABSTRACT
BACKGROUND/AIMS: The aim of this study was to assess the effects of endoscopy nurse participation on polyp detection rate (PDR) and adenoma detection rate (ADR) of second-year fellows during screening colonoscopies. METHODS: This was a single-center, prospective, randomized study comparing a fellow alone and a fellow plus an endoscopy nurse as an additional observer during afternoon outpatient screening colonoscopies. The primary end points were PDR and ADR. RESULTS: One hundred ninety-one colonoscopies performed by a fellow alone and 192 colonoscopies performed by a fellow plus an endoscopy nurse were analyzed. The PDR was significantly higher when the nurse was involved (53.1% vs. 41.3%, p or =2 polyps, advanced adenomas, polyp size, polyp location, and polyp shapes between the two groups. There was no difference in the PDR according to the level of experience of the endoscopy nurse. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopy nurse participation as an additional observer during screening colonoscopy performed by second-year fellow increases the PDR; however, the level of experience of the nurse was not an important factor.
Subject(s)
Humans , Adenoma , Colonoscopy , Endoscopy , Mass Screening , Outpatients , Polyps , Prospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND/AIMS: The adenoma detection rate (ADR) has been proposed as a quality indicator of colonoscopy; however, ADR cannot be measured easily with commonly used endoscopy reporting systems because substantial time and effort is required to acquire data from histologic assessments. The purpose of this study was to determine if polyp detection rate (PDR) could be used as a valid proxy for ADR. METHODS: A total of 1,156 consecutive, asymptomatic, individuals of average risk between 50 and 75 years-of-age who underwent screening colonoscopies at four tertiary medical centers by 27 gastroenterologists were included in this study. Each individual endoscopist performed at least 10 colonoscopies during the study period. The ADR and PDR were calculated as the proportion of an endoscopist's cases with an adenoma or polyp divided by the total number of colonoscopies. Pearson's correlation coefficient and the intraclass correlation coefficient were used to determine the level of agreement between ADR and PDR. RESULTS: The mean PDR and ADR for endoscopists was 47.4% (range, 21.7-75.0) and 36.5% (range, 13.0-66.7), respectively. There was a strong correlation between PDR and ADR (Pearson's correlation coefficient 0.94, P<0.001) and there was also good agreement between performance quintiles defined by ADR and PDR (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.94, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: PDR is a valid proxy for ADR and may be useful for quality assurance at centers where ADR cannot be easily measured.
Subject(s)
Humans , Adenoma , Colonoscopy , Endoscopy , Mass Screening , Polyps , Proxy , Quality Indicators, Health CareABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Recently, the use of a transparent cap attached to the tip of the colonoscope has been revealed to be helpful in both detecting colorectal polyps and shortening the intubation time to the cecum. The aim of this study was to examine the usefulness of transparent cap-attached colonoscopy (CAC) as compared with conventional colonoscopy (CC) in terms of the technical ease and efficiency. METHODS: Colonoscopies from a total of 228 patients between May and October 2008 were prospectively collected. All colonoscopies were performed by single colorectal surgeon whose experience exceeded 3,000 colonoscopies. Patients were assigned to the CAC group (n=114) or to the CC group (n=114). The cecal intubation rate and time, the polyp detection rate, the adenoma detection rate, the withdrawal time, and the visual analogue scale (VAS) of the patient's pain were compared. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in the age, sex, body mass index, previous history of abdominal operation, diverticulosis, and the degree of bowel preparation between the two groups. The cecal intubation rate was 100% in both groups. The cecal intubation time was significantly shorter in the CAC group than in the CC group overall (5.3+/-4.0 min vs. 7.6+/-4.3 min, P<0.001), as well as for female (6.1+/-2.8 min vs. 9.1+/-4.7 min, P<0.001) patients. There were no statistically significant differences in the total colonoscopy time (13.1+/-6.3 min vs. 14.5+/-5.2 min, P=0.066), the polyp detection rate (38.6% vs. 33.3%, P=0.408), the adenoma detection rate (28.1% vs. 25.4%, P=0.654), and the VAS scale of pain (2.48 vs. 2.74, P=0.353) between the CAC and the CC groups. CONCLUSION: The transparent cap is effective in shortening the cecal intubation time, especially in female patients.