OBJECTIVE: The quality of colonoscopy is key for ensuring protection against colorectal cancer (CRC). We therefore aimed to elucidate the aetiology of postcolonoscopy CRCs (PCCRCs), and especially to identify preventable factors. METHODS: We conducted a population-based study of all patients diagnosed with CRC in South-Limburg from 2001 to 2010 using colonoscopy and histopathology records and data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. PCCRCs were defined as cancers diagnosed within 5 years after an index colonoscopy. According to location, CRCs were categorised into proximal or distal from the splenic flexure and, according to macroscopic aspect, into flat or protruded. Aetiological factors for PCCRCs were subdivided into procedure-related (missed lesions, inadequate examination/surveillance, incomplete resection) and biology-related (new cancers). RESULTS: We included a total of 5107 patients with CRC, of whom 147 (2.9% of all patients, mean age 72.8 years, 55.1% men) had PCCRCs diagnosed on average 26 months after an index colonoscopy. Logistic regression analysis, adjusted for age and gender, showed that PCCRCs were significantly more often proximally located (OR 3.92, 95% CI 2.71 to 5.69), smaller in size (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.87) and more often flat (OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.18 to 2.43) than prevalent CRCs. Of the PCCRCs, 57.8% were attributed to missed lesions, 19.8% to inadequate examination/surveillance and 8.8% to incomplete resection, while 13.6% were newly developed cancers. CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, 86.4% of all PCCRCs could be explained by procedural factors, especially missed lesions. Quality improvements in performance of colonoscopy, with special attention to the detection and resection of proximally located flat precursors, have the potential to prevent PCCRCs.
OBJECTIVE: The quality of colonoscopy is key for ensuring protection against colorectal cancer (CRC). We therefore aimed to elucidate the aetiology of postcolonoscopy CRCs (PCCRCs), and especially to identify preventable factors. METHODS: We conducted a population-based study of all patients diagnosed with CRC in South-Limburg from 2001 to 2010 using colonoscopy and histopathology records and data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. PCCRCs were defined as cancers diagnosed within 5 years after an index colonoscopy. According to location, CRCs were categorised into proximal or distal from the splenic flexure and, according to macroscopic aspect, into flat or protruded. Aetiological factors for PCCRCs were subdivided into procedure-related (missed lesions, inadequate examination/surveillance, incomplete resection) and biology-related (new cancers). RESULTS: We included a total of 5107 patients with CRC, of whom 147 (2.9% of all patients, mean age 72.8 years, 55.1% men) had PCCRCs diagnosed on average 26 months after an index colonoscopy. Logistic regression analysis, adjusted for age and gender, showed that PCCRCs were significantly more often proximally located (OR 3.92, 95% CI 2.71 to 5.69), smaller in size (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.87) and more often flat (OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.18 to 2.43) than prevalent CRCs. Of the PCCRCs, 57.8% were attributed to missed lesions, 19.8% to inadequate examination/surveillance and 8.8% to incomplete resection, while 13.6% were newly developed cancers. CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, 86.4% of all PCCRCs could be explained by procedural factors, especially missed lesions. Quality improvements in performance of colonoscopy, with special attention to the detection and resection of proximally located flat precursors, have the potential to prevent PCCRCs.
Authors: Amandeep K Shergill; Erin E Conners; Kenneth R McQuaid; Sara Epstein; James C Ryan; Janak N Shah; John Inadomi; Ma Somsouk Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2015-05-01 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: A Tannapfel; D Aust; G B Baretton; H Bläker; I Esposito; C Langner; M Vieth; E Wardelmann; Th Kirchner; P Schirmacher Journal: Pathologe Date: 2015-03 Impact factor: 1.011
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: Michal F Kaminski; Siwan Thomas-Gibson; Marek Bugajski; Michael Bretthauer; Colin J Rees; Evelien Dekker; Geir Hoff; Rodrigo Jover; Stepan Suchanek; Monika Ferlitsch; John Anderson; Thomas Roesch; Rolf Hultcranz; Istvan Racz; Ernst J Kuipers; Kjetil Garborg; James E East; Maciej Rupinski; Birgitte Seip; Cathy Bennett; Carlo Senore; Silvia Minozzi; Raf Bisschops; Dirk Domagk; Roland Valori; Cristiano Spada; Cesare Hassan; Mario Dinis-Ribeiro; Matthew D Rutter Journal: United European Gastroenterol J Date: 2017-03-16 Impact factor: 4.623
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: Tim Dg Belderbos; Hendrikus Jm Pullens; Max Leenders; Marguerite Ei Schipper; Peter D Siersema; Martijn Gh van Oijen Journal: United European Gastroenterol J Date: 2016-08-05 Impact factor: 4.623
Authors: Elena M Stoffel; Rune Erichsen; Trine Frøslev; Lars Pedersen; Mogens Vyberg; Erika Koeppe; Seth D Crockett; Stanley R Hamilton; Henrik T Sørensen; John A Baron Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2016-07-19 Impact factor: 22.682