Tonya Kaltenbach1, Sarah K McGill, Venkat Kalidindi, Shai Friedland, Roy Soetikno. 1. Gastroenterology Section, Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Healthcare System, Division of Gastroenterology, Stanford University School of Medicine, 3801 Miranda Ave, GI-111, Palo Alto, CA 94304, USA. endoresection@me.com
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Current efforts to prevent colorectal cancer focus on the detection and removal of neoplasms. Nonpolypoid colorectal neoplasms (NP-CRN) have a subtle appearance that can be difficult to recognize during colonoscopy. Endoscopists must first be familiar with the patterns of NP-CRN in order to detect and diagnose them. We studied the adenoma detection rates of endoscopists who had trained to detect NP-CRN, versus endoscopists who had not. DESIGN: Retrospective Nested Case Control Study. SETTING: Outpatient Screening Colonoscopy. PARTICIPANTS: Adult Veterans. INTERVENTION: Proficiency in the features and diagnosis of NP-CRN. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASUREMENTS: Adenoma detection. RESULTS: In total, 462 patients had screening colonoscopies-267 by colonoscopists who had trained in the features and diagnosis of NP-CRN. Patient characteristics were similar between groups-the majority were men with a mean age of 62 ± 6 years. Neoplasia was more prevalent (45.7 vs. 34.9%; p = 0.02) in patients evaluated by the trained compared to the conventionally trained group. Trained colonoscopists had a higher adenoma detection rate (0.76 vs. 0.54 adenomas per patient, p < 0.001); removed a higher proportion of neoplasia (77 vs. 35%, p < 0.001); and more frequently diagnosed NP-CRN lesions (OR 2.98, 95% CI: 1.46-6.08) compared to colonoscopists without supplemental training. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopists who are proficient in the detection of NP-CRN had significantly higher adenoma detection rates-of both polypoid and flat adenomas-compared to endoscopists without training, and were more specific in resection of adenomatous over hyperplastic lesions.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Current efforts to prevent colorectal cancer focus on the detection and removal of neoplasms. Nonpolypoid colorectal neoplasms (NP-CRN) have a subtle appearance that can be difficult to recognize during colonoscopy. Endoscopists must first be familiar with the patterns of NP-CRN in order to detect and diagnose them. We studied the adenoma detection rates of endoscopists who had trained to detect NP-CRN, versus endoscopists who had not. DESIGN: Retrospective Nested Case Control Study. SETTING:Outpatient Screening Colonoscopy. PARTICIPANTS: Adult Veterans. INTERVENTION: Proficiency in the features and diagnosis of NP-CRN. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASUREMENTS: Adenoma detection. RESULTS: In total, 462 patients had screening colonoscopies-267 by colonoscopists who had trained in the features and diagnosis of NP-CRN. Patient characteristics were similar between groups-the majority were men with a mean age of 62 ± 6 years. Neoplasia was more prevalent (45.7 vs. 34.9%; p = 0.02) in patients evaluated by the trained compared to the conventionally trained group. Trained colonoscopists had a higher adenoma detection rate (0.76 vs. 0.54 adenomas per patient, p < 0.001); removed a higher proportion of neoplasia (77 vs. 35%, p < 0.001); and more frequently diagnosed NP-CRN lesions (OR 2.98, 95% CI: 1.46-6.08) compared to colonoscopists without supplemental training. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopists who are proficient in the detection of NP-CRN had significantly higher adenoma detection rates-of both polypoid and flat adenomas-compared to endoscopists without training, and were more specific in resection of adenomatous over hyperplastic lesions.
Authors: Douglas K Rex; John L Petrini; Todd H Baron; Amitabh Chak; Jonathan Cohen; Stephen E Deal; Brenda Hoffman; Brian C Jacobson; Klaus Mergener; Bret T Petersen; Michael A Safdi; Douglas O Faigel; Irving M Pike Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2006-04 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Michal F Kaminski; Jaroslaw Regula; Ewa Kraszewska; Marcin Polkowski; Urszula Wojciechowska; Joanna Didkowska; Maria Zwierko; Maciej Rupinski; Marek P Nowacki; Eugeniusz Butruk Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-05-13 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: K-I Fu; Y Sano; S Kato; T Fujii; F Nagashima; T Yoshino; T Okuno; S Yoshida; T Fujimori Journal: Endoscopy Date: 2004-12 Impact factor: 10.093
Authors: Rob McCarney; James Warner; Steve Iliffe; Robbert van Haselen; Mark Griffin; Peter Fisher Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2007-07-03 Impact factor: 4.615
Authors: Sascha C van Doorn; Y Hazewinkel; James E East; Monique E van Leerdam; Amit Rastogi; Maria Pellisé; Silvia Sanduleanu-Dascalescu; Barbara A J Bastiaansen; Paul Fockens; Evelien Dekker Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2014-10-21 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Johannes L Klein; Murat Okcu; Karl H Preisegger; Heinz F Hammer Journal: United European Gastroenterol J Date: 2015-10-13 Impact factor: 4.623
Authors: William A Ross; Selvi Thirumurthi; Patrick M Lynch; Asif Rashid; Mala Pande; Mehnaz A Shafi; Jeffrey H Lee; Gottumukkala S Raju Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2015-01-10 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Gottumukkala S Raju; Vikram Vadyala; Rebecca Slack; Somashekar G Krishna; William A Ross; Patrick M Lynch; Robert S Bresalier; Ernest Hawk; John R Stroehlein Journal: Cancer Med Date: 2013-04-20 Impact factor: 4.452