RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Adequate bowel preparation is paramount for a high-quality screening colonoscopy. Despite the importance of adequate bowel preparation, there is a lack of large studies that associated the degree of bowel preparation with long-term colorectal cancer outcomes in screening patients. METHODS: In a large population-based screening program database in Austria, quality of bowel preparation was estimated according to the Aronchick Scale by the endoscopist (excellent, good, fair, poor, and inadequate bowel preparation). We used logistic regression to assess the influence of bowel preparation on the detection of different polyp types and the interphysician variation in bowel preparation scoring. Time-to-event analyses were performed to investigate the association of bowel preparation with postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer (PCCRC) death. RESULTS: A total of 335,466 colonoscopies between January 2012 and follow-up until December 2022 were eligible for the analyses. As compared with excellent bowel preparation, adenoma detection was not significantly lower for good bowel preparation (odds ratio 1.01, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.9971-1.0329, P = 0.1023); however, adenoma detection was significantly lower in fair bowel preparation (odds ratio 0.97, 95% CI 0.9408-0.9939, P = 0.0166). Individuals who had fair or lower bowel preparation at screening colonoscopy had significantly higher hazards for PCCRC death (hazard ratio for fair bowel preparation 2.56, 95% CI 1.67-3.94, P < 0.001). DISCUSSION: Fair bowel preparation on the Aronchick Scale was not only associated with a lower adenoma detection probability but also with increased risk of PCCRC death. Efforts should be made to increase bowel cleansing above fair scores.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Surveillance colonoscopy after polyps have been detected at screening aims to reduce the risk for subsequent colorectal cancer, so-called post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer (PCCRC). Inconsistencies exist as to whether the risk should be stratified by histologic subtype. We aimed to compare the risk for PCCRC mortality in screening participants with sessile serrated lesions (SSLs)/traditional serrated adenomas (TSAs), hyperplastic polyps (HPPs), or conventional adenomas. METHODS: Screening colonoscopy registry data were linked to death registry data between 2010 and 2022. We assessed the association of PCCRC death after a diagnosis of SSL/TSA, conventional adenoma, or HPP by Cox regression, and stratified by polyp size ≥10 and <10 mm. RESULTS: 383,801 participants were included in the analysis. There were 1490 HPPs ≥10 mm (2.6%), compared with 1853 SSL/TSAs (19.6%) and 10,960 conventional adenomas (12.9%). When adjusted for polyp location, the association of polyp size ≥10 mm with PCCRC death was of similar magnitude in participants with conventional adenomas (hazard ratio [HR] 3.68, 95%CI 2.49-5.44), SSL/TSAs (HR 2.55, 95%CI 1.13-5.72), and HPPs (HR 5.01, 95%CI 2.45-10.22). Participants with HPPs mostly died of tumors in the distal colon (54.1%; n = 20), while participants with SSL/TSAs more frequently died of proximal tumors (33.3%; n = 3). CONCLUSIONS: Across all histologic types, participants with polyps ≥10 mm had at least a two-fold increase in the likelihood of PCCRC death compared with those with polyps <10 mm. These data suggest that size, rather than histologic subtype, should be a determinant for risk stratification after screening colonoscopy.
