BACKGROUND: An endoscopists adenoma detection rate (ADR) of less than 20 % correlates with high risk for occurrence of interval cancer. The impact of high-definition (HD) imaging on the ADR is discussed controversially. We aimed to investigate whether detection rates of individual endoscopists increase within 1 year before and 1 year after the switch from standard to HD endoscopy. METHODS: This cohort study analyzed 6,330 screening colonoscopies (2,968 with standard and 3,362 with HD) performed by 42 endoscopists between November 2007 and March 2013 within a nationwide quality assurance program for screening colonoscopy. RESULTS: The ADR of endoscopists with a low ADR (<20 %) increased significantly higher (from 11.8 to 18.1 %, p = 0.003) than of those with a high ADR (≥ 20 %) (from 28.6 to 30.7 %, p = 0.439) after switch from standard to HD colonoscopes (p = 0.0076). The proportion of endoscopists with an ADR < 20 % decreased from 45 to 42.9 % (p = 0.593). There was no significant increase in age- and sex-adjusted detection rates of adenomas (20.2 vs 23.7 %; p = 0.089), advanced adenomas (4.7 vs 5.5 %; p = 0.479), flat adenomas (2.7 vs 3.1 %; p = 0.515), polyps (38.8 vs 41.5 %; p = 0.305), proximal polyps (18.5 vs 20 %; p = 0.469) and hyperplastic polyps (15 vs 17.2 %; p = 0.243) of endoscopists after switch to HD colonoscopes. There was no difference in detection rates of flat polyps (5.5 vs 5.5 %; p = 0.987). CONCLUSIONS: The use of HD scopes is associated with marginal improvement in adenoma detection rates limited to those endoscopists with low adenoma detection rates prior to its introduction.
BACKGROUND: An endoscopists adenoma detection rate (ADR) of less than 20 % correlates with high risk for occurrence of interval cancer. The impact of high-definition (HD) imaging on the ADR is discussed controversially. We aimed to investigate whether detection rates of individual endoscopists increase within 1 year before and 1 year after the switch from standard to HD endoscopy. METHODS: This cohort study analyzed 6,330 screening colonoscopies (2,968 with standard and 3,362 with HD) performed by 42 endoscopists between November 2007 and March 2013 within a nationwide quality assurance program for screening colonoscopy. RESULTS: The ADR of endoscopists with a low ADR (<20 %) increased significantly higher (from 11.8 to 18.1 %, p = 0.003) than of those with a high ADR (≥ 20 %) (from 28.6 to 30.7 %, p = 0.439) after switch from standard to HD colonoscopes (p = 0.0076). The proportion of endoscopists with an ADR < 20 % decreased from 45 to 42.9 % (p = 0.593). There was no significant increase in age- and sex-adjusted detection rates of adenomas (20.2 vs 23.7 %; p = 0.089), advanced adenomas (4.7 vs 5.5 %; p = 0.479), flat adenomas (2.7 vs 3.1 %; p = 0.515), polyps (38.8 vs 41.5 %; p = 0.305), proximal polyps (18.5 vs 20 %; p = 0.469) and hyperplastic polyps (15 vs 17.2 %; p = 0.243) of endoscopists after switch to HD colonoscopes. There was no difference in detection rates of flat polyps (5.5 vs 5.5 %; p = 0.987). CONCLUSIONS: The use of HD scopes is associated with marginal improvement in adenoma detection rates limited to those endoscopists with low adenoma detection rates prior to its introduction.
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: Kazutomo Togashi; David G Hewett; Graham L Radford-Smith; Leo Francis; Barbara A Leggett; Mark N Appleyard Journal: J Gastroenterol Date: 2009-05-16 Impact factor: 7.527
Authors: G Tribonias; A Theodoropoulou; K Konstantinidis; E Vardas; K Karmiris; N Chroniaris; G Chlouverakis; G A Paspatis Journal: Colorectal Dis Date: 2010-10 Impact factor: 3.788
Authors: J E East; M Stavrindis; S Thomas-Gibson; T Guenther; P P Tekkis; B P Saunders Journal: Aliment Pharmacol Ther Date: 2008-09-15 Impact factor: 8.171
Authors: Maria Pellisé; Glòria Fernández-Esparrach; Andrés Cárdenas; Oriol Sendino; Elena Ricart; Eva Vaquero; Antonio Z Gimeno-García; Cristina Rodríguez de Miguel; Michel Zabalza; Angels Ginès; Josep M Piqué; Josep Llach; Antoni Castells Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2008-07-09 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: E Waldmann; D Penz; B Majcher; J Zagata; H Šinkovec; G Heinze; A Dokladanska; A Szymanska; M Trauner; A Ferlitsch; M Ferlitsch Journal: United European Gastroenterol J Date: 2018-11-04 Impact factor: 4.623
Authors: Elisabeth Waldmann; Georg Heinze; Arnulf Ferlitsch; Irina GessI; Daniela Sallinger; Philip Jeschek; Martha Britto-Arias; Petra Salzl; Elisabeth Fasching; Bernd Jilma; Michael Kundi; Michael Trauner; Monika Ferlitsch Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2016-10-20 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Ilsoo Kim; Han Hee Lee; Young Jae Ko; Ho Eun Chang; Dae Young Cheung; Bo-In Lee; Young-Seok Cho; Jin Il Kim; Myung-Gyu Choi Journal: Korean J Intern Med Date: 2022-07-25 Impact factor: 3.165
Authors: Cristiano Spada; Anastasios Koulaouzidis; Cesare Hassan; Pedro Amaro; Anurag Agrawal; Lene Brink; Wolfgang Fischbach; Matthias Hünger; Rodrigo Jover; Urpo Kinnunen; Akiko Ono; Árpád Patai; Silvia Pecere; Lucio Petruzziello; Jürgen Ferdinand Riemann; Harry Staines; Ann L Stringer; Ervin Toth; Giulio Antonelli; Lorenzo Fuccio Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-03-13 Impact factor: 3.390