Literature DB >> 19156519

Variation in colonoscopic technique and adenoma detection rates at an academic gastroenterology unit.

Mark E Benson1, Mark Reichelderfer, Adnan Said, Eric A Gaumnitz, Patrick R Pfau.   

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to evaluate the quality of colonoscopy at an academic institution with a focus on factors influencing withdrawal times and adenoma detection rates. Procedural data and pathologic results of 550 consecutive screening colonoscopies in average risks patients (mean [+/-SD] age, 57 +/- 7.6, 44% male) completed by ten academic gastroenterologists were reviewed. Per individual gastroenterologist, the adenoma detection rates ranged widely from 0.09 to 0.82 adenomas per patient with a mean of 0.46 for the group. The mean withdrawal time was 7.0 min for the group and ranged from 3.4 to 9.6 min. There was a significant positive relationship between the number of adenomas detected and the withdrawal time (P = 0.006). Endoscopists with cecal intubation time to withdrawal time ratios of less than 1 detected significantly more adenomas compared to endoscopists with ratios greater than 1 (P = 0.001). (1) Significant variation in academic gastroenterologists' abilities to detect adenomas during screening colonoscopies exists. (2) Colonoscopic withdrawal time and the cecal intubation to withdrawal time ratio are important factors associated with increased adenoma detection rates.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19156519     DOI: 10.1007/s10620-008-0703-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dig Dis Sci        ISSN: 0163-2116            Impact factor:   3.199


  16 in total

1.  Colonoscopy practice patterns since introduction of medicare coverage for average-risk screening.

Authors:  Gavin C Harewood; David A Lieberman
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 11.382

2.  Evaluation of polyp detection in relation to procedure time of screening or surveillance colonoscopy.

Authors:  William Sanchez; Gavin C Harewood; Bret T Petersen
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 10.864

3.  Impact of endoscopist withdrawal speed on polyp yield: implications for optimal colonoscopy withdrawal time.

Authors:  D T Simmons; G C Harewood; T H Baron; B T Petersen; K K Wang; F Boyd-Enders; B J Ott
Journal:  Aliment Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2006-09-15       Impact factor: 8.171

4.  Afternoon colonoscopies have higher failure rates than morning colonoscopies.

Authors:  Madhusudhan R Sanaka; Nirav Shah; Kevin D Mullen; D R Ferguson; Charles Thomas; Arthur J McCullough
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 10.864

5.  Is in vivo measurement of size of polyps during colonoscopy accurate?

Authors:  N Gopalswamy; V N Shenoy; U Choudhry; R J Markert; N Peace; M S Bhutani; C J Barde
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  1997-12       Impact factor: 9.427

6.  The pathologic measurement of polyp size is preferable to the endoscopic estimate.

Authors:  R E Schoen; L D Gerber; C Margulies
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  1997-12       Impact factor: 9.427

7.  Patient tolerance of colonoscopy without sedation during screening examination for colorectal polyps.

Authors:  E Thiis-Evensen; G S Hoff; J Sauar; M H Vatn
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 9.427

8.  Colonoscopic miss rates determined by direct comparison of colonoscopy with colon resection specimens.

Authors:  Georges Postic; David Lewin; Charles Bickerstaff; Michael B Wallace
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 10.864

9.  Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. The National Polyp Study Workgroup.

Authors:  S J Winawer; A G Zauber; M N Ho; M J O'Brien; L S Gottlieb; S S Sternberg; J D Waye; M Schapiro; J H Bond; J F Panish
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1993-12-30       Impact factor: 91.245

10.  Wide variation in adenoma detection rates at screening flexible sigmoidoscopy.

Authors:  Wendy Atkin; Pauline Rogers; Christopher Cardwell; Claire Cook; Jack Cuzick; Jane Wardle; Rob Edwards
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 22.682

View more
  22 in total

1.  Diagnostic yield of small bowel capsule endoscopy depends on the small bowel transit time.

Authors:  Jessie Westerhof; Jan J Koornstra; Reinier A Hoedemaker; Wim J Sluiter; Jan H Kleibeuker; Rinse K Weersma
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2012-04-07       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 2.  Endoscopy and polyps-diagnostic and therapeutic advances in management.

Authors:  Scott R Steele; Eric K Johnson; Bradley Champagne; Brad Davis; Sang Lee; David Rivadeneira; Howard Ross; Dana A Hayden; Justin A Maykel
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2013-07-21       Impact factor: 5.742

3.  Improved bowel preparation increases polyp detection and unmasks significant polyp miss rate.

Authors:  Ioannis S Papanikolaou; Athanasios D Sioulas; Nektarios Magdalinos; Iosif Beintaris; Lazaros-Dimitrios Lazaridis; Dimitrios Polymeros; Chrysoula Malli; George D Dimitriadis; Konstantinos Triantafyllou
Journal:  World J Clin Cases       Date:  2015-10-16       Impact factor: 1.337

4.  Current status of chromoendoscopy and narrow band imaging in colonoscopy.

Authors:  Jonathan P Nass; Sean E Connolly
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2010-02

5.  Effects of the no interruption zone on distraction levels, withdrawal times, and adenoma detection rates of colonoscopy.

Authors:  Nancy S Behazin; Michelle Thompson; Mena Milad; Jeffrey Hart; Juhee Song; Mark Jeffries; Dawn M Sears
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2014-10-18       Impact factor: 3.199

6.  Cecal Insertion Time and the ADR: Patience Is Good for Patients.

Authors:  Yu-Hsi Hsieh; Malcolm Koo
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 3.199

7.  Prolonged Cecal Insertion Time Is Not Associated with Decreased Adenoma Detection When a Longer Withdrawal Time Is Achieved.

Authors:  Cassandra D L Fritz; Zachary L Smith; Jeffrey Elsner; Thomas Hollander; Dayna Early; Vladimir Kushnir
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2018-05-03       Impact factor: 3.199

8.  Quality colonoscopy: a matter of time, technique or technology?

Authors:  Robert H Lee
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2013-03-14       Impact factor: 5.742

9.  Relationship between detection of adenomas by flexible sigmoidoscopy and interval distal colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Shari S Rogal; Paul F Pinsky; Robert E Schoen
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2012-08-16       Impact factor: 11.382

10.  Should Assessment of Quality Indicator of Colonoscopy Be Varied Depending on the Colonoscopic Technique Level?

Authors:  Bum Su Choung; Seong Hun Kim; Kyung Bo Yoo; Seung Young Seo; In Hee Kim; Seung Ok Lee; Soo Teik Lee; Sang Wook Kim
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2015-11-17       Impact factor: 3.199

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.