Literature DB >> 22381531

Prevalence of missed adenomas in patients with inadequate bowel preparation on screening colonoscopy.

Reena V Chokshi1, Christine E Hovis, Thomas Hollander, Dayna S Early, Jean S Wang.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of missed polyps in patients with inadequate bowel preparation on screening colonoscopy is unknown.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of missed adenomas in average-risk patients presenting for screening colonoscopy who are found to have inadequate bowel preparation.
DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. Endoscopy and pathology reports were examined to determine the characteristics of polyps. Data from repeat colonoscopies were collected through 2010.
SETTING: Outpatient endoscopy center at an academic medical center. PATIENTS: This study involved patients who underwent outpatient average-risk screening colonoscopy between 2004 and 2009 documented to have inadequate bowel preparation and who had colonoscopy to the cecum. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Initial adenoma detection rate and adenoma detection rate on follow-up examination.
RESULTS: Inadequate bowel preparation was reported on 373 patients, with an initial adenoma detection rate of 25.7%. Of 133 patients who underwent repeat colonoscopy, 33.8% had at least 1 adenoma detected, and 18.0% had high-risk states detected (≥ 3 adenomas, 1 adenoma ≥ 1 cm, or any adenoma with villous features or high-grade dysplasia). Per-adenoma miss rate was 47.9%. Among patients with at least 1 adenoma on repeat colonoscopy, 31.1% had no polyps on initial colonoscopy; mean time between colonoscopies was 340 days. Among patients with high-risk states, 25.0% had no polyps seen on initial colonoscopy; mean time between colonoscopies was 271 days. LIMITATIONS: Retrospective design.
CONCLUSION: Adenomas and high-risk lesions were frequently detected on repeat colonoscopy in patients with inadequate bowel preparation on initial screening colonoscopy, suggesting that these lesions were likely missed on initial colonoscopy.
Copyright © 2012 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22381531     DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2012.01.005

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


  115 in total

Review 1.  Quality in Colonoscopy.

Authors:  Katherine T Brunner; Audrey H Calderwood
Journal:  Curr Gastroenterol Rep       Date:  2015-10

2.  Improving Endoscopic Adherence to Quality Metrics in Colonoscopy.

Authors:  Jonathan J Lu; Christopher H Decker; Sean E Connolly
Journal:  Ochsner J       Date:  2015

3.  Bisacodyl plus split 2-L polyethylene glycol-citrate-simethicone improves quality of bowel preparation before screening colonoscopy.

Authors:  Flavio Valiante; Angelo Bellumat; Manuela De Bona; Michele De Boni
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2013-09-07       Impact factor: 5.742

4.  Multiple, zonal and multi-zone adenoma detection rates according to quality of cleansing during colonoscopy.

Authors:  Stefano Pontone; Cesare Hassan; Roberta Maselli; Paolo Pontone; Rita Angelini; Manuela Brighi; Gregorio Patrizi; Daniele Pironi; Fabio Massimo Magliocca; Angelo Filippini
Journal:  United European Gastroenterol J       Date:  2016-07-07       Impact factor: 4.623

Review 5.  Colon cleansing for colonoscopy 2013: current status.

Authors:  Stephen W Landreneau; Jack A Di Palma
Journal:  Curr Gastroenterol Rep       Date:  2013-08

6.  Benchmarking and quality-screening colonoscopy.

Authors:  Felix W Leung
Journal:  J Interv Gastroenterol       Date:  2012-07-01

Review 7.  Update on Bowel Preparation for Colonoscopy.

Authors:  Cristina C Rutherford; Audrey H Calderwood
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol       Date:  2018-03

8.  Impact of fair bowel preparation quality on adenoma and serrated polyp detection: data from the New Hampshire colonoscopy registry by using a standardized preparation-quality rating.

Authors:  Joseph C Anderson; Lynn F Butterly; Christina M Robinson; Martha Goodrich; Julia E Weiss
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2014-05-10       Impact factor: 9.427

9.  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

10.  Outcomes of Next-Day Versus Non-next-Day Colonoscopy After an Initial Inadequate Bowel Preparation.

Authors:  Christopher John Murphy; N Jewel Samadder; Kristen Cox; Ronak Iqbal; Brian So; Daniel Croxford; John C Fang
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2015-08-20       Impact factor: 3.199

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.