Literature DB >> 23642491

The impact of fair colonoscopy preparation on colonoscopy use and adenoma miss rates in patients undergoing outpatient colonoscopy.

Stacy B Menees1, H Myra Kim, Eric E Elliott, Jennifer L Mickevicius, Brittany B Graustein, Philip S Schoenfeld.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The impact of fair bowel preparation on endoscopists' recommendations and adenoma miss rates in average-risk patients undergoing colonoscopy is unknown.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of fair bowel preparation on endoscopists' interval colonoscopy recommendations and miss rates in colonoscopies performed within 3 years of the index colonoscopy in average-risk patients undergoing colorectal cancer screening.
DESIGN: Retrospective chart review.
SETTING: Tertiary-care center. PATIENTS: Average-risk patients undergoing index colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening between 2004 and 2006. INTERVENTION: Colonoscopy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Endoscopists' interval recommendations, adenoma miss rates.
RESULTS: A total of 16,251 colonoscopy records were reviewed over a 2-year period. Of these cases, 1943 colonoscopies were performed for the sole indication of average risk or screening. Of these, fair bowel preparation was reported in 619 patients (31.9%). A repeat colonoscopy within 5 years was recommended in 70.4% of patients. The follow-up colonoscopy compliance rate within 3 years was 55.9%. Adenoma detection rates at index and follow-up colonoscopy were 20.5% and 28.2%, respectively. Of the 39 patients with follow-up colonoscopy within 3 years, the overall adenoma miss rate was 28%. Of the patients with an adenoma identified on follow-up colonoscopy, 13.6% had normal colonoscopy results on index examination. LIMITATIONS: Retrospective design.
CONCLUSION: Fair bowel preparation led to a deviation from national guidelines with early repeat colonoscopy follow-up recommendations in nearly 60% of average-risk patients with normal colonoscopy results. In patients who returned for repeat colonoscopy within 3 years, the overall adenoma miss rate was 28%. Further guidelines on timing for repeat colonoscopy for fair bowel preparation are needed. Published by Mosby, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  CRC; colorectal cancer

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23642491      PMCID: PMC3840536          DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2013.03.1334

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


  25 in total

Review 1.  Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after screening and polypectomy: a consensus update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer.

Authors:  David A Lieberman; Douglas K Rex; Sidney J Winawer; Francis M Giardiello; David A Johnson; Theodore R Levin
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2012-07-03       Impact factor: 22.682

2.  How many endoscopies are performed for colorectal cancer screening? Results from CDC's survey of endoscopic capacity.

Authors:  Laura C Seeff; Thomas B Richards; Jean A Shapiro; Marion R Nadel; Diane L Manninen; Leslie S Given; Fred B Dong; Linda D Winges; Matthew T McKenna
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 22.682

3.  Surveillance patterns and polyp recurrence following diagnosis and excision of colorectal polyps in a medicare population.

Authors:  Mayur M Amonkar; Timothy L Hunt; Zhiyuan Zhou; Xiaodong Jin
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 4.254

4.  Colon polyp recurrence in a managed care population.

Authors:  Marianne Ulcickas Yood; Susan Oliveria; J Gregory Boyer; Karen Wells; Paul Stang; Christine Cole Johnson
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2003-02-24

5.  Impact of colonoscopy preparation quality on detection of suspected colonic neoplasia.

Authors:  Gavin C Harewood; Virender K Sharma; Pat de Garmo
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 9.427

6.  High compliance rates observed for follow up colonoscopy post polypectomy are achievable outside of clinical trials: efficacy of polypectomy is not reduced by low compliance for follow up.

Authors:  P Colquhoun; H-C Chen; Jong Ik Kim; J Efron; E G Weiss; J J Nogueras; A M Vernava; S D Wexner
Journal:  Colorectal Dis       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 3.788

7.  Are physicians doing too much colonoscopy? A national survey of colorectal surveillance after polypectomy.

Authors:  Pauline A Mysliwiec; Martin L Brown; Carrie N Klabunde; David F Ransohoff
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2004-08-17       Impact factor: 25.391

8.  Colorectal cancer screening and surveillance: clinical guidelines and rationale-Update based on new evidence.

Authors:  Sidney Winawer; Robert Fletcher; Douglas Rex; John Bond; Randall Burt; Joseph Ferrucci; Theodore Ganiats; Theodore Levin; Steven Woolf; David Johnson; Lynne Kirk; Scott Litin; Clifford Simmang
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 22.682

9.  Randomized comparison of surveillance intervals after colonoscopic removal of newly diagnosed adenomatous polyps. The National Polyp Study Workgroup.

Authors:  S J Winawer; A G Zauber; M J O'Brien; M N Ho; L Gottlieb; S S Sternberg; J D Waye; J Bond; M Schapiro; E T Stewart
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1993-04-01       Impact factor: 91.245

10.  Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. The National Polyp Study Workgroup.

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

View more
  30 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.  Impact of Bowel Preparation Quality on Adenoma Identification During Colonoscopy and Optimal Timing of Surveillance.

Authors:  Ju Seok Kim; Sun Hyung Kang; Hee Seok Moon; Eaum Seok Lee; Seok Hyun Kim; Jae Kyu Sung; Byung Seok Lee; Hyun Yong Jeong; Woo Suk Chung
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2015-06-06       Impact factor: 3.199

4.  Nationwide variability of colonoscopy preparation instructions.

Authors:  Loc Ton; Helen Lee; Pushpak Taunk; Audrey H Calderwood; Brian C Jacobson
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2014-07-02       Impact factor: 3.199

5.  Patient compliance and suboptimal bowel preparation with split-dose bowel regimen in average-risk screening colonoscopy.

Authors:  Stacy B Menees; H Myra Kim; Patricia Wren; Brian J Zikmund-Fisher; Grace H Elta; Stephanie Foster; Sheryl Korsnes; Brittany Graustein; Philip Schoenfeld
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2014-03-13       Impact factor: 9.427

6.  Factors Associated With Shorter Colonoscopy Surveillance Intervals for Patients With Low-Risk Colorectal Adenomas and Effects on Outcome.

Authors:  Joseph C Anderson; John A Baron; Dennis J Ahnen; Elizabeth L Barry; Roberd M Bostick; Carol A Burke; Robert S Bresalier; Timothy R Church; Bernard F Cole; Marcia Cruz-Correa; Adam S Kim; Leila A Mott; Robert S Sandler; Douglas J Robertson
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2017-02-20       Impact factor: 22.682

7.  Impact of a Clinical Decision Support System on Guideline Adherence of Surveillance Recommendations for Colonoscopy After Polypectomy.

Authors:  Melissa Magrath; Edward Yang; Chul Ahn; Christian A Mayorga; Purva Gopal; Caitlin C Murphy; Samir Gupta; Deepak Agrawal; Ethan A Halm; Eric K Borton; Celette Sugg Skinner; Amit G Singal
Journal:  J Natl Compr Canc Netw       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 11.908

8.  Timed screening colonoscopy: a randomized trial of two colonoscopic withdrawal techniques.

Authors:  Eduardo Coghlan; Luis Laferrere; Elisa Zenon; Juan Manuel Marini; German Rainero; Alberto San Roman; Maria Lourdes Posadas Martinez; Angel Nadales
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2019-05-29       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  Use of automated irrigation pumps improves quality of bowel preparation for colonoscopy.

Authors:  Sujan Ravi; Rana Sabbagh; Fadi Antaki
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2016-03-25

10.  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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.