OBJECTIVES: Withdrawal time (WT) has been proposed as a quality indicator for colonoscopy based on evidence that it is directly related to the rate of adenoma detection. Our objective was to test the hypothesis that baseline WT is inversely associated with the risk of finding neoplasia at interval colonoscopy. METHODS: In all, 3,121 subjects, aged 50-75 years, had screening colonoscopy between 1994 and 1997 at 13 Veteran Affairs Medical Centers. In all, 1,193 subjects returned by protocol for surveillance within 5.5 years. In the 304 patients without polyps at baseline, we evaluated the contribution of baseline WT to their risk of interval neoplasia using bivariate and logistic regression analysis. We also examined the correlation between mean WT, baseline adenoma detection rate, and interval neoplasia rate at the medical-center level. RESULTS: The average WT at the baseline exam in subjects with neoplasia on follow-up was 15.3 min as compared with 13.2 min in subjects without neoplasia (P=0.18). In a logistic regression model, WT was not associated with the risk of interval neoplasia (P=0.07). At the medical-center level, mean WT was not correlated with the probability of finding interval neoplasia (P=0.61) but was positively correlated with adenoma detection rate at baseline (P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: In this study with a mean baseline WT &12 min, there was no detectable association between WT and risk of future neoplasia. The medical center-level WT was positively correlated with adenoma detection. Therefore, above a certain threshold, WT may no longer be an adequate quality measure for screening colonoscopy.
OBJECTIVES: Withdrawal time (WT) has been proposed as a quality indicator for colonoscopy based on evidence that it is directly related to the rate of adenoma detection. Our objective was to test the hypothesis that baseline WT is inversely associated with the risk of finding neoplasia at interval colonoscopy. METHODS: In all, 3,121 subjects, aged 50-75 years, had screening colonoscopy between 1994 and 1997 at 13 Veteran Affairs Medical Centers. In all, 1,193 subjects returned by protocol for surveillance within 5.5 years. In the 304 patients without polyps at baseline, we evaluated the contribution of baseline WT to their risk of interval neoplasia using bivariate and logistic regression analysis. We also examined the correlation between mean WT, baseline adenoma detection rate, and interval neoplasia rate at the medical-center level. RESULTS: The average WT at the baseline exam in subjects with neoplasia on follow-up was 15.3 min as compared with 13.2 min in subjects without neoplasia (P=0.18). In a logistic regression model, WT was not associated with the risk of interval neoplasia (P=0.07). At the medical-center level, mean WT was not correlated with the probability of finding interval neoplasia (P=0.61) but was positively correlated with adenoma detection rate at baseline (P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: In this study with a mean baseline WT &12 min, there was no detectable association between WT and risk of future neoplasia. The medical center-level WT was positively correlated with adenoma detection. Therefore, above a certain threshold, WT may no longer be an adequate quality measure for screening colonoscopy.
Authors: Perry J Pickhardt; J Richard Choi; Inku Hwang; James A Butler; Michael L Puckett; Hans A Hildebrandt; Roy K Wong; Pamela A Nugent; Pauline A Mysliwiec; William R Schindler Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2003-12-01 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Douglas K Rex; John H Bond; Sidney Winawer; Theodore R Levin; Randall W Burt; David A Johnson; Lynne M Kirk; Scott Litlin; David A Lieberman; Jerome D Waye; James Church; John B Marshall; Robert H Riddell Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2002-06 Impact factor: 10.864
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
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
Authors: Jill Tinmouth; Erin B Kennedy; David Baron; Mae Burke; Stanley Feinberg; Michael Gould; Nancy Baxter; Nancy Lewis Journal: Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2014-05
Authors: Lynn Butterly; Christina M Robinson; Joseph C Anderson; Julia E Weiss; Martha Goodrich; Tracy L Onega; Christopher I Amos; Michael L Beach Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2014-01-07 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Sharareh Siamakpour-Reihani; Peter M Scarbrough; Frances Wang; Ivan Spasojevic; Karel Base; Rebecca Sedjo; Ralph B D'Agostino; Dora Il'yasova Journal: Ann Epidemiol Date: 2012-06-12 Impact factor: 3.797