BACKGROUND: In everyday practice, the use of colonoscopy for the prevention of colorectal cancer (CRC) is less effective in the proximal than the distal colon. A potential explanation for this is that proximal neoplasms have a more subtle endoscopic appearance, making them more likely to be overlooked. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the differences in endoscopic appearance, ie, diminutive size and nonpolypoid shape, of proximal compared with distal colorectal neoplasms. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, single-center study. SETTING: Endoscopists at the Maastricht University Medical Center in the Netherlands who were previously trained in the detection and classification of nonpolypoid colorectal lesions. PATIENTS: Consecutive patients undergoing elective colonoscopy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Endoscopic appearance, ie, diminutive size (<6 mm) or nonpolypoid shape (height less than half of the diameter) of colorectal adenomas and serrated polyps (SPs), with a focus on adenomas with advanced histology, ie, high-grade dysplasia or early CRC and SPs with dysplasia or large size. RESULTS: We included 3720 consecutive patients with 2106 adenomas and 941 SPs. We found that in both men and women, proximal adenomas with high-grade dysplasia/early CRC (n = 181) were more likely to be diminutive or nonpolypoid than distal ones (76.3% vs 26.2%; odds ratio [OR] 9.24; 95% CI, 4.45-19.2; P < .001). Of the proximal adenomas, 84.4% were diminutive or nonpolypoid compared with 68.0% of the distal ones (OR 2.66; 95% CI, 2.14-3.29; P < .001). Likewise, large/dysplastic SPs in the proximal colon were more often nonpolypoid than distal ones (66.2% vs 27.8%; OR 5.51; 95% CI, 2.79-10.9; P < .001). LIMITATIONS: Inclusion of both symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. CONCLUSIONS: Proximal colorectal neoplasms with advanced histology frequently are small or have a nonpolypoid appearance. These findings support careful inspection of the proximal colon, if quality of cancer prevention with the use of colonoscopy is to be optimized.
BACKGROUND: In everyday practice, the use of colonoscopy for the prevention of colorectal cancer (CRC) is less effective in the proximal than the distal colon. A potential explanation for this is that proximal neoplasms have a more subtle endoscopic appearance, making them more likely to be overlooked. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the differences in endoscopic appearance, ie, diminutive size and nonpolypoid shape, of proximal compared with distal colorectal neoplasms. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, single-center study. SETTING: Endoscopists at the Maastricht University Medical Center in the Netherlands who were previously trained in the detection and classification of nonpolypoid colorectal lesions. PATIENTS: Consecutive patients undergoing elective colonoscopy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Endoscopic appearance, ie, diminutive size (<6 mm) or nonpolypoid shape (height less than half of the diameter) of colorectal adenomas and serrated polyps (SPs), with a focus on adenomas with advanced histology, ie, high-grade dysplasia or early CRC and SPs with dysplasia or large size. RESULTS: We included 3720 consecutive patients with 2106 adenomas and 941 SPs. We found that in both men and women, proximal adenomas with high-grade dysplasia/early CRC (n = 181) were more likely to be diminutive or nonpolypoid than distal ones (76.3% vs 26.2%; odds ratio [OR] 9.24; 95% CI, 4.45-19.2; P < .001). Of the proximal adenomas, 84.4% were diminutive or nonpolypoid compared with 68.0% of the distal ones (OR 2.66; 95% CI, 2.14-3.29; P < .001). Likewise, large/dysplasticSPs in the proximal colon were more often nonpolypoid than distal ones (66.2% vs 27.8%; OR 5.51; 95% CI, 2.79-10.9; P < .001). LIMITATIONS: Inclusion of both symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. CONCLUSIONS: Proximal colorectal neoplasms with advanced histology frequently are small or have a nonpolypoid appearance. These findings support careful inspection of the proximal colon, if quality of cancer prevention with the use of colonoscopy is to be optimized.
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: Sahana Arumugam; Chantal M C le Clercq; Robert G Riedl; Ad A M Masclee; Silvia Sanduleanu Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2015-01 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Sander de Kort; Mariëlle We Bouwens; Matty P Weijenberg; Maryska Lg Janssen-Heijnen; Adriaan P de Bruïne; Robert Riedl; Ad Am Masclee; Silvia Sanduleanu Journal: United European Gastroenterol J Date: 2016-08-09 Impact factor: 4.623
Authors: Mariëlle W E Bouwens; Rogier de Ridder; Ad A M Masclee; Ann Driessen; Robert G Riedl; Bjorn Winkens; Silvia Sanduleanu Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2013-07-21 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Seth D Crockett; Rebecca A Gourevitch; Michele Morris; David S Carrell; Sherri Rose; Zhuo Shi; Julia B Greer; Robert E Schoen; Ateev Mehrotra Journal: Endoscopy Date: 2018-04-24 Impact factor: 10.093
Authors: Bishnu P Joshi; Asha Pant; Xiyu Duan; Anoop Prabhu; Erik J Wamsteker; Richard S Kwon; Grace H Elta; Scott R Owens; Henry D Appelman; Thomas D Wang; D Kim Turgeon Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2016-03-05 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Samir Gupta; Bijal A Balasubramanian; Tommy Fu; Robert M Genta; Don C Rockey; Richard Lash Journal: Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2012-07-24 Impact factor: 11.382