BACKGROUND: The role of surgeons as endoscopists has been extensively debated in the literature, with conflicting studies published regarding the safety and efficacy of surgeons performing colonoscopies. A multitude of medical federations and societies have set various standards for granting endoscopy privileges, many with a bias against general surgeons [1, 3]. We reviewed the colonoscopy experience at our institution to evaluate differences between gastroenterologists (GI) and general (GS) and colorectal surgeons (CRS) in procedure times and complication and cecal intubation rates. METHODS: Between January 2000 and July 2002, 5237 colonoscopies were performed at our institution. The data for procedure times, completion, and complication rates were collected in a prospective database. Complications were defined as perforation, bleeding, and postpolypectomy syndrome. Incomplete colonoscopies due to colitis, poor bowel preparation, or tumor obstruction were excluded. Chi-squared test was used to compare complication and cecal intubation rates between the three groups. Median procedure times were compared using the Kruskall-Wallis and Dunn's pairwise tests. A significant p-value was defined as <0.05. RESULTS: No differences in the complication rate was noted between the three groups: GI (0.12%), CRS (0.15%), and GS (0.11%) ( p = 0.99). There was a trend toward a lower incomplete colonoscopy rate in the GS group compared to CRS and GI: 0.32% vs 0.84% and 0.36%, respectively ( p = 0.07). The median colonoscopy times for GS (29 min), however, were shorter than for GI (34 min, p < 0.001) or CRS (31 min, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: General surgeons perform colonoscopies expeditiously, with as low a morbidity rate and as high a completion rate as their gastroenterology or colorectal surgery colleagues. As the results of this study confirm, general surgeons should not be excluded from endoscopy suites.
BACKGROUND: The role of surgeons as endoscopists has been extensively debated in the literature, with conflicting studies published regarding the safety and efficacy of surgeons performing colonoscopies. A multitude of medical federations and societies have set various standards for granting endoscopy privileges, many with a bias against general surgeons [1, 3]. We reviewed the colonoscopy experience at our institution to evaluate differences between gastroenterologists (GI) and general (GS) and colorectal surgeons (CRS) in procedure times and complication and cecal intubation rates. METHODS: Between January 2000 and July 2002, 5237 colonoscopies were performed at our institution. The data for procedure times, completion, and complication rates were collected in a prospective database. Complications were defined as perforation, bleeding, and postpolypectomy syndrome. Incomplete colonoscopies due to colitis, poor bowel preparation, or tumor obstruction were excluded. Chi-squared test was used to compare complication and cecal intubation rates between the three groups. Median procedure times were compared using the Kruskall-Wallis and Dunn's pairwise tests. A significant p-value was defined as <0.05. RESULTS: No differences in the complication rate was noted between the three groups: GI (0.12%), CRS (0.15%), and GS (0.11%) ( p = 0.99). There was a trend toward a lower incomplete colonoscopy rate in the GS group compared to CRS and GI: 0.32% vs 0.84% and 0.36%, respectively ( p = 0.07). The median colonoscopy times for GS (29 min), however, were shorter than for GI (34 min, p < 0.001) or CRS (31 min, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: General surgeons perform colonoscopies expeditiously, with as low a morbidity rate and as high a completion rate as their gastroenterology or colorectal surgery colleagues. As the results of this study confirm, general surgeons should not be excluded from endoscopy suites.
Authors: D N Reed; J D Collins; W J Wyatt; J E Hull; M L Patton; S O Dahm; H H Dabideen; J C Hudson; D B Allen Journal: Am J Surg Date: 1992-02 Impact factor: 2.565
Authors: A A Nimeri; S A Hussein; E Panzeter; J McNeill; J Gusz; P M Chen; J N Yuh; J M Marks Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2005-03-11 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Mario P Morales; Gregory J Mancini; Brent W Miedema; Nitin J Rangnekar; Debra G Koivunen; Bruce J Ramshaw; W Stephen Eubanks; Hugh E Stephenson Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2008-02-23 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Jeffrey W Hazey; Jeffrey M Marks; John D Mellinger; Thadeus L Trus; Bipan Chand; Conor P Delaney; Brian J Dunkin; Robert D Fanelli; Gerald M Fried; Jose M Martinez; Jonathan P Pearl; Benjamin K Poulose; Lelan F Sillin; Melina C Vassiliou; W Scott Melvin Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2013-12-07 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Jan M Eberth; Michele J Josey; Lee R Mobley; Davidson O Nicholas; Donna B Jeffe; Cassie Odahowski; Janice C Probst; Mario Schootman Journal: J Rural Health Date: 2017-11-16 Impact factor: 4.333
Authors: Joshua Tierney; Rebeccah B Baucom; Michael D Holzman; Benjamin K Poulose; Richard A Pierce Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2016-08-17 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Jonathan Pearl; Erika Fellinger; Brian Dunkin; Eric Pauli; Thadeus Trus; Jeffrey Marks; Robert Fanelli; Michael Meara; Dimitrios Stefanidis; William Richardson Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2016-06-28 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Aimee K Gardner; Daniel J Scott; Ross E Willis; Kent Van Sickle; Michael S Truitt; John Uecker; Kimberly M Brown; Jeffrey M Marks; Brian J Dunkin Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2016-06-10 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Sonja N Buzink; Richard H M Goossens; Erik J Schoon; Huib de Ridder; Jack J Jakimowicz Journal: World J Surg Date: 2010-05 Impact factor: 3.352