BACKGROUND: Colonoscopy is currently considered to be the gold standard method for detecting and removing adenomatous polyps. However, tandem colonoscopy studies reveal a pooled polyp miss rate of 22%. OBJECTIVE: A prospective randomized trial was conducted to assess whether alteration of patient position during colonoscopy withdrawal increases the adenoma detection rate (ADR). METHOD: The study group included 120 patients who presented for elective colonoscopic examination. After reaching the cecum, patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to examination in either the left lateral position or other positions (left lateral position for the cecum, ascending colon and hepatic flexure; supine for transverse colon; and supine and right lateral position for splenic flexure, descending and sigmoid colon) first. Examination of the colon was performed segment by segment. The size, morphology and location of all polyps were recorded. Polyps were removed immediately after examination of a colon segment when all positions were completed. ADR and polyp detection rates (PDR) were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 102 patients completed the study. Examination in the left lateral position revealed 66 polyps in 31 patients (PDR 30.3%) and 42 adenomas in 24 patients (ADR 23.5%). PDR increased to 43.1% (81 polyps in 44 patients) and the ADR to 33.3% (53 adenomas in 34 patients) after the colon was examined in the additional positions (P<0.001 and P=0.002, respectively). The increase in the number of adenomas detected was statistically significant in the transverse and sigmoid colon. The addition of position changes led to a 9.8% increase in the ADR in the transverse colon, splenic flexure, and descending and sigmoid colon. The frequency of surveillance interval was shortened in nine (8.8%) patients after examination of the colon in dynamic positions. CONCLUSION: Alteration of patient position during colonoscopy withdrawal is a simple and effective method to improve ADR.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Colonoscopy is currently considered to be the gold standard method for detecting and removing adenomatous polyps. However, tandem colonoscopy studies reveal a pooled polyp miss rate of 22%. OBJECTIVE: A prospective randomized trial was conducted to assess whether alteration of patient position during colonoscopy withdrawal increases the adenoma detection rate (ADR). METHOD: The study group included 120 patients who presented for elective colonoscopic examination. After reaching the cecum, patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to examination in either the left lateral position or other positions (left lateral position for the cecum, ascending colon and hepatic flexure; supine for transverse colon; and supine and right lateral position for splenic flexure, descending and sigmoid colon) first. Examination of the colon was performed segment by segment. The size, morphology and location of all polyps were recorded. Polyps were removed immediately after examination of a colon segment when all positions were completed. ADR and polyp detection rates (PDR) were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 102 patients completed the study. Examination in the left lateral position revealed 66 polyps in 31 patients (PDR 30.3%) and 42 adenomas in 24 patients (ADR 23.5%). PDR increased to 43.1% (81 polyps in 44 patients) and the ADR to 33.3% (53 adenomas in 34 patients) after the colon was examined in the additional positions (P<0.001 and P=0.002, respectively). The increase in the number of adenomas detected was statistically significant in the transverse and sigmoid colon. The addition of position changes led to a 9.8% increase in the ADR in the transverse colon, splenic flexure, and descending and sigmoid colon. The frequency of surveillance interval was shortened in nine (8.8%) patients after examination of the colon in dynamic positions. CONCLUSION: Alteration of patient position during colonoscopy withdrawal is a simple and effective method to improve ADR.
Authors: Louis Michel Wong Kee Song; Douglas G Adler; Jason D Conway; David L Diehl; Francis A Farraye; Sergey V Kantsevoy; Richard Kwon; Petar Mamula; Betsy Rodriguez; Raj J Shah; William M Tierney Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2008-04 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Petar Mamula; William M Tierney; Subhas Banerjee; David Desilets; David L Diehl; Francis A Farraye; Vivek Kaul; Sripathi R Kethu; Richard S Kwon; Marcos C Pedrosa; Sarah A Rodriguez; Louis-Michel Wong Kee Song Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2011-06 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Suryakanth R Gurudu; Francisco C Ramirez; M Edwyn Harrison; Jonathan A Leighton; Michael D Crowell Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2012-06-23 Impact factor: 9.427
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: Edwin J Lai; Audrey H Calderwood; Gheorghe Doros; Oren K Fix; Brian C Jacobson Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2009-01-10 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Tae Sun Kim; Dong Il Park; Do Young Lee; Jang Hyuk Yoon; Jung Ho Park; Hong Joo Kim; Yong Kyun Cho; Chong Il Sohn; Woo Kyu Jeon; Byung Ik Kim; Jae Wan Lim Journal: Gut Liver Date: 2012-07-12 Impact factor: 4.519
Authors: Colin J Rees; Roisin Bevan; Katharina Zimmermann-Fraedrich; Matthew D Rutter; Douglas Rex; Evelien Dekker; Thierry Ponchon; Michael Bretthauer; Jaroslaw Regula; Brian Saunders; Cesare Hassan; Michael J Bourke; Thomas Rösch Journal: Gut Date: 2016-10-08 Impact factor: 23.059