Literature DB >> 19251007

Colonoscopy and its complications across a Canadian regional health authority.

Harminder Singh1, Robert B Penfold, Carolyn DeCoster, Lisa Kaita, Cindy Proulx, Gerry Taylor, Charles N Bernstein, Michael Moffatt.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Defining the complication rate of endoscopy performed across an entire city will capture usual as opposed to referral center data.
OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to evaluate the current practice of colonoscopy and complications associated with lower GI endoscopy in usual clinical practice.
DESIGN: All admissions within 30 days of an outpatient lower GI endoscopy at any of the 6 adult-care Winnipeg hospitals were identified. This includes endoscopy for both complex and routine patients. A chart audit of all cases with potential complications was performed.
RESULTS: A total of 24,509 outpatient lower GI endoscopies for adults were performed at the 6 hospitals over the 2 study years (April 1, 2004, to March 31, 2006). There were 303 admissions with potential complications. The colonoscopy completion rate was 65% (72% for gastroenterologists vs 59% for general surgeons, P < .005). Quality of bowel preparation and nature of polyps were often not documented. The overall rate of complications was 2.9/1000 procedures; the perforation rate after polypectomy was 1.8/1000; and the postpolypectomy bleeding rate was 6.4/1000. Most (67%) complications were recognized after discharge for the index procedure. The complication rate was highest for the endoscopists performing fewer than 200 procedures per year (5.4/1000 vs 2.7/1000 for the rest, P = .02, relative risk 2 [95% CI, 1.1-3.7]). LIMITATIONS: Chart audit was limited to cases requiring admission within 30 days of the index procedure.
CONCLUSIONS: The overall complication rate after lower GI endoscopy in usual clinical practice in Winnipeg is comparable to that previously reported. A higher complication rate after endoscopy by low-volume endoscopists needs to be further evaluated. The reporting of endoscopy must be standardized to enhance outcomes interpretation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19251007     DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2008.09.046

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc        ISSN: 0016-5107            Impact factor:   9.427


  27 in total

1.  Colonoscopic polypectomy and associated techniques.

Authors:  Christopher-J Fyock; Peter-V Draganov
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2010-08-07       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 2.  Adverse events in older patients undergoing colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Lukejohn W Day; Annette Kwon; John M Inadomi; Louise C Walter; Ma Somsouk
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 9.427

3.  Indicators of safety compromise in gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Authors:  Mark Ram Borgaonkar; Lawrence Hookey; Roger Hollingworth; Ernst J Kuipers; Alan Forster; David Armstrong; Alan Barkun; Ron Bridges; Rose Carter; Chris de Gara; Catherine Dube; Robert Enns; Donald Macintosh; Sylviane Forget; Grigorios Leontiadis; Jonathan Meddings; Peter Cotton; Roland Valori
Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 3.522

4.  Management of colonoscopic perforation: a systematic review and treatment algorithm.

Authors:  Khalid N Alsowaina; Mooyad A Ahmed; Nawar A Alkhamesi; Ahmad I Elnahas; Jeffrey D Hawel; Nitin V Khanna; Christopher M Schlachta
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2019-08-26       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  The Efficacy of a Novel Tissue Grasper-Clips Technique for Large Perforations of the Sigmoid Colon in an Experimental Animal Model (Video).

Authors:  Jun Young Eun; Yunho Jung; Tae Hoon Lee; Young Sin Cho; Ho Sung Rhee; Young Kyu Jung; Joung-Ho Han; Duk Su Kim; Il Kwun Chung; Sang-Heum Park; Sun Joo Kim
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2017-02-08       Impact factor: 3.199

6.  Who Performs Colonoscopy? Workforce Trends Over Space and Time.

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

Review 7.  Post-Colonoscopy Complications: A Systematic Review, Time Trends, and Meta-Analysis of Population-Based Studies.

Authors:  Ankie Reumkens; Eveline J A Rondagh; C Minke Bakker; Bjorn Winkens; Ad A M Masclee; Silvia Sanduleanu
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-06-14       Impact factor: 10.864

8.  Adverse events after screening and follow-up colonoscopy.

Authors:  Carolyn M Rutter; Eric Johnson; Diana L Miglioretti; Margaret T Mandelson; John Inadomi; Diana S M Buist
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2011-11-22       Impact factor: 2.506

9.  British Society of Gastroenterology/Association of Coloproctologists of Great Britain and Ireland guidelines for the management of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps.

Authors:  Matthew D Rutter; Amit Chattree; Jamie A Barbour; Siwan Thomas-Gibson; Pradeep Bhandari; Brian P Saunders; Andrew M Veitch; John Anderson; Bjorn J Rembacken; Maurice B Loughrey; Rupert Pullan; William V Garrett; Gethin Lewis; Sunil Dolwani
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2015-06-23       Impact factor: 23.059

10.  Magnetic imaging-assisted colonoscopy vs conventional colonoscopy: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Christopher W Teshima; Sergio Zepeda-Gómez; Suliman H AlShankiti; Gurpal S Sandha
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-09-28       Impact factor: 5.742

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.