Literature DB >> 24891931

Withdrawal time in excellent or very poor bowel preparation qualities.

David Widjaja1, Manoj Bhandari1, Vivian Loveday-Laghi1, Mariela Glandt1, Bhavna Balar1.   

Abstract

AIM: To evaluate association(s) between withdrawal time and polyp detection in various bowel preparation qualities.
METHODS: Retrospective cohort analysis of screening colonoscopies performed between January 2005 and June 2011 for patients with average risk of colorectal cancer. Exclusion criteria included patients with a personal history of adenomatous polyps or colon cancer, prior colonic resection, significant family history of colorectal cancer, screening colonoscopy after other abnormal screening tests such as flexible sigmoidoscopy or barium enema, and screening colonoscopies during in-patient care. All procedures were performed or directly supervised by gastroenterologists. Main measurements were number of colonic segments with polyps and total number of colonic polyps.
RESULTS: Multivariate analysis of 8331 colonoscopies showed longer withdrawal time was associated with more colonic segments with polyps in good (adjusted OR = 1.16; 95%CI: 1.13-1.19), fair (OR = 1.13; 95%CI: 1.10-1.17), and poor (OR = 1.18; 95%CI: 1.11-1.26) bowel preparation qualities. A higher number of total polyps was associated with longer withdrawal time in good (OR = 1.15; 95%CI: 1.13-1.18), fair (OR = 1.13; 95%CI: 1.10-1.16), and poor (OR = 1.20; 95%CI: 1.13-1.29) bowel preparation qualities. Longer withdrawal time was not associated with more colonic segments with polyps or greater number of colonic polyps in bowel preparations with excellent (OR = 1.07, 95%CI: 0.99-1.26; OR = 1.11, 95%CI: 0.99-1.24, respectively) and very poor (OR = 1.02, 95%CI: 0.99-1.12; OR = 1.05, 95%CI: 0.99-1.10, respectively) qualities.
CONCLUSION: Longer withdrawal time is not associated with higher polyp number detected in colonoscopies with excellent or very poor bowel preparation quality.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bowel preparation quality; Polyp detection; Screening colonoscopy; Withdrawal time

Year:  2014        PMID: 24891931      PMCID: PMC4024491          DOI: 10.4253/wjge.v6.i5.186

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc


  28 in total

1.  Quality indicators for colonoscopy.

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

Review 2.  Quality indicators for colonoscopy.

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:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 9.427

3.  Withdrawal time as a quality indicator for colonoscopy - a nationwide analysis.

Authors:  V Moritz; M Bretthauer; H K Ruud; T Glomsaker; T de Lange; P Sandvei; G Huppertz-Hauss; Ø Kjellevold; G Hoff
Journal:  Endoscopy       Date:  2012-04-24       Impact factor: 10.093

4.  Bowel preparation for colonoscopy in very old patients: a randomized prospective trial comparing oral sodium phosphate and polyethylene glycol electrolyte lavage solution.

Authors:  L Seinelä; E Pehkonen; T Laasanen; J Ahvenainen
Journal:  Scand J Gastroenterol       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 2.423

5.  Predictors of inadequate bowel preparation for colonoscopy.

Authors:  R M Ness; R Manam; H Hoen; N Chalasani
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 10.864

6.  Factors associated with the technical performance of colonoscopy: An EPAGE Study.

Authors:  J K Harris; F Froehlich; V Wietlisbach; B Burnand; J-J Gonvers; J-P Vader
Journal:  Dig Liver Dis       Date:  2007-04-16       Impact factor: 4.088

7.  Accuracy of visual prediction of pathology of colorectal polyps: how accurate are we?

Authors:  Prashant Sharma; John Frye; Frank Frizelle
Journal:  ANZ J Surg       Date:  2013-08-26       Impact factor: 1.872

8.  Telephone-based re-education on the day before colonoscopy improves the quality of bowel preparation and the polyp detection rate: a prospective, colonoscopist-blinded, randomised, controlled study.

Authors:  Xiaodong Liu; Hui Luo; Lin Zhang; Felix W Leung; Zhiguo Liu; Xiangping Wang; Rui Huang; Na Hui; Kaichun Wu; Daiming Fan; Yanglin Pan; Xuegang Guo
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2013-03-16       Impact factor: 23.059

9.  Effect of institution-wide policy of colonoscopy withdrawal time > or = 7 minutes on polyp detection.

Authors:  Mandeep S Sawhney; Marcelo S Cury; Naama Neeman; Long H Ngo; Janet M Lewis; Ram Chuttani; Douglas K Pleskow; Mark D Aronson
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2008-08-27       Impact factor: 22.682

10.  A Comparison of 2 L of Polyethylene Glycol and 45 mL of Sodium Phosphate versus 4 L of Polyethylene Glycol for Bowel Cleansing: A Prospective Randomized Trial.

Authors:  Suh Eun Bae; Kyung-Jo Kim; Jun Bum Eum; Dong Hoon Yang; Byong Duk Ye; Jeong-Sik Byeon; Seung-Jae Myung; Suk-Kyun Yang; Jin-Ho Kim
Journal:  Gut Liver       Date:  2013-06-11       Impact factor: 4.519

View more
  3 in total

1.  Good is better than excellent: bowel preparation quality and adenoma detection rates.

Authors:  Audrey H Calderwood; Katherine D Thompson; Paul C Schroy; David A Lieberman; Brian C Jacobson
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 9.427

2.  Does the withdrawal time affect adenoma detection in non-screening colonoscopies?

Authors:  Ammar Al-Rifaie; Mohammed El-Feki; Ismaeel Al-Talib; Maysam Abdulwahid; Andrew Hopper; Mo Thoufeeq
Journal:  Frontline Gastroenterol       Date:  2019-03-16

3.  Weekend and evening planned colonoscopy activity: a safe and effective way to meet demands.

Authors:  Shimaa A Afify; Omnia M Abo-Elazm; Ishak I Bahbah; Mo H Thoufeeq
Journal:  Endosc Int Open       Date:  2021-06-17
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.