Literature DB >> 25278696

Improving quality measures in colonoscopy and its therapeutic intervention.

Akira Horiuchi1, Naoki Tanaka1.   

Abstract

Colonoscopy with polypectomy has been shown to reduce the risk of colon cancer. The critical element in the quality of colonoscopy in terms of polyp detection and removal continues to be the performance of the endoscopist, independent of patient-related factors. Improved results in terms of polyp detection and complete removal have implications regarding the development of screening and surveillance intervals and the reduction of interval cancers after negative colonoscopy. Advances in colonoscopy techniques such as high-definition colonoscopy, hood-assisted colonoscopy and dye-based chromoendoscopy have improved the detection of small and flat-type colorectal polyps. Virtual chromoendoscopy has not proven to improve polyp detection but may be useful to predict polyp pathology. The majority of polyps can be removed endoscopically. Available polypectomy techniques include cold forceps polypectomy, cold snare polypectomy, conventional polypectomy, endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection. The preferred choice depends on the polyp size and characteristics. Other useful techniques include colonoscopic hemostasis for acute colonic diverticular bleeding, endoscopic decompression using colonoscopic stenting, and transanal tube placement for colorectal obstruction. Here we review the current knowledge concerning the improvement of quality measures in colonoscopy and colonoscopy-related therapeutic interventions.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Colonic diverticular bleeding; Colonoscopy; Colorectal obstruction; Colorectal polyp; Endoscopic decompression; Gastrointestinal endoscopy; Hemostasis; Polypectomy

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25278696      PMCID: PMC4177481          DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i36.13027

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Gastroenterol        ISSN: 1007-9327            Impact factor:   5.742


  56 in total

Review 1.  Transparent cap-assisted colonoscopy versus standard adult colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  David A Westwood; Nicholas Alexakis; Saxon J Connor
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 4.585

2.  Large adenoma recurrence after polypectomy.

Authors:  David S Weinberg
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 9.427

3.  High definition colonoscopy vs. standard video endoscopy for the detection of colonic polyps: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  V Subramanian; J Mannath; C J Hawkey; K Ragunath
Journal:  Endoscopy       Date:  2011-02-28       Impact factor: 10.093

4.  Randomized, controlled trial of standard, large-capacity versus jumbo biopsy forceps for polypectomy of small, sessile, colorectal polyps.

Authors:  Peter V Draganov; Myron N Chang; Ahmad Alkhasawneh; Lisa R Dixon; John Lieb; Baharak Moshiree; Steven Polyak; Shahnaz Sultan; Dennis Collins; Amitabh Suman; John F Valentine; Mihir S Wagh; Samir L Habashi; Chris E Forsmark
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 9.427

5.  Pancolonic chromoendoscopy with indigo carmine versus standard colonoscopy for detection of neoplastic lesions: a randomised two-centre trial.

Authors:  Jürgen Pohl; Arved Schneider; Hartmut Vogell; Gerhard Mayer; Gernot Kaiser; Christian Ell
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2010-12-15       Impact factor: 23.059

6.  Some diminutive colorectal polyps can be removed and discarded without pathological examination.

Authors:  B Denis; J Bottlaender; A M Weiss; A Peter; G Breysacher; P Chiappa; P Perrin
Journal:  Endoscopy       Date:  2010-11-24       Impact factor: 10.093

7.  Relative sensitivity of colonoscopy and barium enema for detection of colorectal cancer in clinical practice.

Authors:  D K Rex; E Y Rahmani; J H Haseman; G T Lemmel; S Kaster; J S Buckley
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 22.682

8.  Improved colorectal adenoma detection with a transparent retractable extension device.

Authors:  Akira Horiuchi; Yoshiko Nakayama
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2007-12-11       Impact factor: 10.864

9.  Status evaluation: hot biopsy forceps. American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Technology Assessment Committee.

Authors:  D A Gilbert; A J DiMarino; D M Jensen; R Katon; M B Kimmey; L A Laine; B V MacFadyen; P A Michaletz-Onody; G Zuckerman
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  1992 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 9.427

10.  Follow-up of hot biopsy forceps treatment of diminutive colonic polyps.

Authors:  F Peluso; F Goldner
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  1991 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 9.427

View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  Non-polypoid colorectal neoplasms: Classification, therapy and follow-up.

Authors:  Antonio Facciorusso; Matteo Antonino; Marianna Di Maso; Michele Barone; Nicola Muscatiello
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-05-07       Impact factor: 5.742

2.  What is the most accurate method for the treatment of diminutive colonic polyps?: Standard versus jumbo forceps polypectomy.

Authors:  Fatih Aslan; Cem Cekiç; Mehmet Camci; Emrah Alper; Nese Ekinci; Zehra Akpinar; Serkan Alpek; Mahmut Arabul; Belkis Unsal
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 1.889

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.