Literature DB >> 19239580

Appropriateness of colonoscopy in a digestive endoscopy unit: a prospective study using ASGE guidelines.

Renzo Suriani1, Mario Rizzetto, Dario Mazzucco, Silvia Grosso, Paola Gastaldi, Maria Marino, Sabina Sanseverinati, Ivo Venturini, Athos Borghi, Maria Luisa Zeneroli.   

Abstract

RATIONALE, AIMS AND
OBJECTIVES: Appropriate indications for colonoscopy (C) are essential for a rational use of resources. The aim of this study is to evaluate the appropriateness of indication for C according to the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) guidelines and to evaluate whether appropriate use was correlated with the diagnostic yield of C.
METHODS: We analysed 677 consecutive C performed over an 11-month period in a digestive endoscopy unit with an open access system.
RESULTS: The rate of 'generally indicated' C was 77% and 'generally not indicated' C was 18%. The rate of indication not listed in the ASGE guidelines was 5%. The percentage of generally not indicated C requested by gastroenterologists for outpatients was lower than that requested by primary care surgeons or doctors (9.5%, 29%, 25.3%, respectively). In 38 (7.3%) and in 111 (21.3%) of 520 patients with appropriate C, cancer and polyps larger than 5 mm were found, respectively. Twenty polyps greater than 5 mm were detected in 15 cases (12%) of 122 inappropriate C, with only one case of intramucosal carcinoma; four (12%) polyps measuring over 5 mm were found in C not listed in ASGE guidelines. No advanced stage cancer was detected in the inappropriate group and in C not listed in ASGE guidelines.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results showed the high rate of inappropriate procedures, according to ASGE guidelines, requested by surgeons, internists and primary care doctors for both outpatients and inpatients. The proportion of not indicated endoscopic procedures requested by gastroenterologists must be reduced through more carefully application of ASGE guidelines. Endoscopic findings were more stringent in appropriate C.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19239580     DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2008.00950.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Eval Clin Pract        ISSN: 1356-1294            Impact factor:   2.431


  5 in total

Review 1.  Colonoscopy appropriateness: Really needed or a waste of time?

Authors:  Antonio Z Gimeno-García; Enrique Quintero
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2015-02-16

2.  The Drivers of Discretionary Utilization: Clinical History Versus Physician Supply.

Authors:  Gregory W Ruhnke; Willard G Manning; David T Rubin; David O Meltzer
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2017-05       Impact factor: 6.893

3.  Clinical validation of the European Panel on the Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (EPAGE) II criteria in an open-access unit: a prospective study.

Authors:  A Z Gimeno García; Y González; E Quintero; D Nicolás-Pérez; Z Adrián; R Romero; O Alarcón Fernández; M Hernández; M Carrillo; V Felipe; J Díaz; L Ramos; M Moreno; A Jiménez-Sosa
Journal:  Endoscopy       Date:  2011-11-22       Impact factor: 10.093

4.  Most Premature Surveillance Colonoscopy Is Not Attributable to Bowel Preparation or New Clinical Indications.

Authors:  Vishal Desai; Daniel A Sussman; Michael Greenspan; Sandeep Dayanand; Kevin Ollington; Sheena Patel; Hong Li; Joshua Melson
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2016-05-03       Impact factor: 3.199

5.  A cross-sectional study of the appropriateness of colonoscopy requests in the Spanish region of Catalonia.

Authors:  Diana Puente; Francesc Xavier Cantero; Maria Llagostera; Pilar Piñeiro; Raquel Nieto; Rosa Saladich; Juanjo Mascort; Mercè Marzo; Jesús Almeda; Manel Segarra
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2012-11-30       Impact factor: 2.692

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.