David A Lieberman1, Jennifer L Holub2, Cynthia D Morris3, Judith Logan3, J Lucas Williams2, Patricia Carney4. 1. Division of Gastroenterology, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon. Electronic address: lieberma@ohsu.edu. 2. Division of Gastroenterology, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon. 3. Department of Medical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon. 4. Department of Family Medicine, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon.
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Guidelines recommend a 10-year interval between screening colonoscopies with negative results for average-risk individuals. However, many patients are examined at shorter intervals. We investigated outcomes of individuals with no polyps who had repeat colonoscopy in <10 years. METHODS: Data were collected using the National Endoscopic Database, from 69 gastroenterology centers, on 264,184 asymptomatic subjects who underwent screening colonoscopies from 2000 through 2006, were found to have no polyps, and received another colonoscopy examination within <10 years. RESULTS: No polyps were found in 147,375 patients during a baseline colonoscopy; 17,525 patients (11.9%) had a follow-up colonoscopy within <10 years, including 1806 (10.3%) who received the follow-up colonoscopy within <1 year. The most common reason for repeating the examination within 1 year was that the first was compromised by inadequate bowel preparation or incomplete examination. Of these patients, 6.5% (95% confidence interval: 5.3-7.6) had large polyp(s) >9 mm-a proportion similar to the prevalence in the average-risk screening population. Reasons that examinations were repeated within 1-5 years included average-risk screening (15.7%), family history of colon polyps or cancer (30.1%), bleeding (31.2%), gastrointestinal symptoms (11.8%), or a positive result from a fecal blood test (5.5%). If the baseline examination was adequate, the incidence of large polyps within 1-5 years after baseline colonoscopy was 3.1% (95% confidence interval: 2.7-3.5) and within years 5-10 years was 3.7% (95% confidence interval: 3.3-4.1). CONCLUSIONS: Repeat colonoscopies within 10 years are of little benefit to patients who had adequate examinations and were found to have no polyps. Repeat colonoscopies are beneficial to patients when the baseline examination was compromised.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Guidelines recommend a 10-year interval between screening colonoscopies with negative results for average-risk individuals. However, many patients are examined at shorter intervals. We investigated outcomes of individuals with no polyps who had repeat colonoscopy in <10 years. METHODS: Data were collected using the National Endoscopic Database, from 69 gastroenterology centers, on 264,184 asymptomatic subjects who underwent screening colonoscopies from 2000 through 2006, were found to have no polyps, and received another colonoscopy examination within <10 years. RESULTS: No polyps were found in 147,375 patients during a baseline colonoscopy; 17,525 patients (11.9%) had a follow-up colonoscopy within <10 years, including 1806 (10.3%) who received the follow-up colonoscopy within <1 year. The most common reason for repeating the examination within 1 year was that the first was compromised by inadequate bowel preparation or incomplete examination. Of these patients, 6.5% (95% confidence interval: 5.3-7.6) had large polyp(s) >9 mm-a proportion similar to the prevalence in the average-risk screening population. Reasons that examinations were repeated within 1-5 years included average-risk screening (15.7%), family history of colon polyps or cancer (30.1%), bleeding (31.2%), gastrointestinal symptoms (11.8%), or a positive result from a fecal blood test (5.5%). If the baseline examination was adequate, the incidence of large polyps within 1-5 years after baseline colonoscopy was 3.1% (95% confidence interval: 2.7-3.5) and within years 5-10 years was 3.7% (95% confidence interval: 3.3-4.1). CONCLUSIONS: Repeat colonoscopies within 10 years are of little benefit to patients who had adequate examinations and were found to have no polyps. Repeat colonoscopies are beneficial to patients when the baseline examination was compromised.
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
Authors: Su Jin Chung; Young Sun Kim; Sun Young Yang; Ji Hyun Song; Donghee Kim; Min Jung Park; Sang Gyun Kim; In Sung Song; Joo Sung Kim Journal: Gut Date: 2011-03-22 Impact factor: 23.059
Authors: Douglas K Rex; John L Petrini; Todd H Baron; Amitabh Chak; Jonathan Cohen; Stephen E Deal; Brenda Hoffman; Brian C Jacobson; Klaus Mergener; Bret T Petersen; Michael A Safdi; Douglas O Faigel; Irving M Pike Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2006-04 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Robert E Schoen; Paul F Pinsky; Joel L Weissfeld; Lance A Yokochi; Timothy Church; Adeyinka O Laiyemo; Robert Bresalier; Gerald L Andriole; Saundra S Buys; E David Crawford; Mona N Fouad; Claudine Isaacs; Christine C Johnson; Douglas J Reding; Barbara O'Brien; Danielle M Carrick; Patrick Wright; Thomas L Riley; Mark P Purdue; Grant Izmirlian; Barnett S Kramer; Anthony B Miller; John K Gohagan; Philip C Prorok; Christine D Berg Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2012-05-21 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Thomas F Imperiale; Elizabeth A Glowinski; Ching Lin-Cooper; Gregory N Larkin; James D Rogge; David F Ransohoff Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-09-18 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Reiko Nishihara; Kana Wu; Paul Lochhead; Teppei Morikawa; Xiaoyun Liao; Zhi Rong Qian; Kentaro Inamura; Sun A Kim; Aya Kuchiba; Mai Yamauchi; Yu Imamura; Walter C Willett; Bernard A Rosner; Charles S Fuchs; Edward Giovannucci; Shuji Ogino; Andrew T Chan Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2013-09-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Kristin Wallace; Heather M Brandt; James D Bearden; Bridgette F Blankenship; Renay Caldwell; James Dunn; Patricia Hegedus; Brenda J Hoffman; Courtney H Marsh; William H Marsh; Cathy L Melvin; March E Seabrook; Ronald E Sterba; Mary Lou Stinson; Annie Thibault; Franklin G Berger; Anthony J Alberg Journal: Dig Dis Sci Date: 2015-09-19 Impact factor: 3.199
Authors: Robert E Schoen; Anthony Razzak; Kelly J Yu; Sonja I Berndt; Kevin Firl; Thomas L Riley; Paul F Pinsky Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2015-08-05 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Ernst J Kuipers; William M Grady; David Lieberman; Thomas Seufferlein; Joseph J Sung; Petra G Boelens; Cornelis J H van de Velde; Toshiaki Watanabe Journal: Nat Rev Dis Primers Date: 2015-11-05 Impact factor: 52.329