Literature DB >> 25732415

Impact of retroflexion vs. second forward view examination of the right colon on adenoma detection: a comparison study.

Vladimir M Kushnir1, Young S Oh2, Thomas Hollander1, Chien-Huan Chen1, Gregory S Sayuk1, Nicholas Davidson1, Daniel Mullady1, Faris M Murad1, Noura M Sharabash1, Eric Ruettgers1, Themistocles Dassopoulos1, Jeffrey J Easler1, C Prakash Gyawali1, Steven A Edmundowicz1, Dayna S Early1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Although screening colonoscopy is effective in preventing distal colon cancers, effectiveness in preventing right-sided colon cancers is less clear. Previous studies have reported that retroflexion in the right colon improves adenoma detection. We aimed to determine whether a second withdrawal from the right colon in retroflexion vs. forward view alone leads to the detection of additional adenomas.
METHODS: Patients undergoing screening or surveillance colonoscopy were invited to participate in a parallel, randomized, controlled trial at two centers. After cecal intubation, the colonoscope was withdrawn to the hepatic flexure, all visualized polyps removed, and endoscopist confidence recorded on a 5-point Likert scale. Patients were randomized to a second exam of the proximal colon in forward (FV) or retroflexion view (RV), and adenoma detection rates (ADRs) compared. Logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate predictors of identifying adenomas on the second withdrawal from the proximal colon.
RESULTS: A total of 850 patients (mean age 59.1±8.3 years, 59% female) were randomly assigned to FV (N=400) or RV (N=450). Retroflexion was successful in 93.5%. The ADR (46% FV and 47% RV) and numbers of adenomas per patient (0.9±1.4 FV and 1.1±2.1 RV) were similar (P=0.75 for both). At least one additional adenoma was detected on second withdrawal in similar proportions (10.5% FV and 7.5% RV, P=0.13). Predictors of identifying adenomas on the second withdrawal included older age (odds ratio (OR)=1.04, 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.01-1.08), adenomas seen on initial withdrawal (OR=2.8, 95% CI=1.7-4.7), and low endoscopist confidence in quality of first examination of the right colon (OR=4.8, 95% CI=1.9-12.1). There were no adverse events.
CONCLUSIONS: Retroflexion in the right colon can be safely achieved in the majority of patients undergoing colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening. Reexamination of the right colon in either retroflexed or forward view yielded similar, incremental ADRs. A second exam of the right colon should be strongly considered in patients who have adenomas discovered in the right colon, particularly when endoscopist confidence in the quality of initial examination is low.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25732415      PMCID: PMC4535185          DOI: 10.1038/ajg.2015.21

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol        ISSN: 0002-9270            Impact factor:   10.864


  28 in total

1.  Colonoscopic polypectomy and the incidence of colorectal cancer.

Authors:  S J Winawer; A G Zauber
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 23.059

2.  Small-bowel endoscopy.

Authors:  C W Teshima; P B Mensink
Journal:  Endoscopy       Date:  2010-11-24       Impact factor: 10.093

3.  Retroflexion-assisted EMR in the colon with immediate closure of a procedure-related perforation.

Authors:  Dimitri Coumaros; Niki Tsesmeli
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 9.427

4.  Colonoscopy: what does it take to get it "right"?

Authors:  David S Weinberg
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2011-01-04       Impact factor: 25.391

5.  Colonoscopic polypectomy in retroflexion.

Authors:  Douglas K Rex; Mouen Khashab
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 9.427

6.  Utility of retroflexion in lower gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Authors:  S Varadarajulu; W H Ramsey
Journal:  J Clin Gastroenterol       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 3.062

7.  Trends in colorectal cancer incidence rates in the United States by tumor location and stage, 1992-2008.

Authors:  Rebecca L Siegel; Elizabeth M Ward; Ahmedin Jemal
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2012-01-04       Impact factor: 4.254

8.  Impact of proximal colon retroflexion on adenoma miss rates.

Authors:  Matthew Harrison; Navjot Singh; Douglas K Rex
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 10.864

9.  Boston Bowel Preparation Scale scores provide a standardized definition of adequate for describing bowel cleanliness.

Authors:  Audrey H Calderwood; Paul C Schroy; David A Lieberman; Judith R Logan; Michael Zurfluh; Brian C Jacobson
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2014-03-12       Impact factor: 9.427

10.  Advances in biophotonics detection of field carcinogenesis for colon cancer risk stratification.

Authors:  Vadim Backman; Hemant K Roy
Journal:  J Cancer       Date:  2013-03-15       Impact factor: 4.207

View more
  29 in total

1.  How I Approach Retroflexion and Prevention of Right-Sided Colon Cancer Following Colonoscopy.

Authors:  Douglas K Rex
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-01-12       Impact factor: 10.864

2.  Techniques for Terminal Ileal Intubation at Colonoscopy When Standard Maneuvers Fail.

Authors:  Shinichiro Sakata; Andrew R L Stevenson; Sanjeev Naidu; David G Hewett
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-11-01       Impact factor: 10.864

Review 3.  Contained colonic perforation due to cecal retroflexion.

Authors:  Zhuo Geng; Deepak Agrawal; Amit G Singal; Stephen Kircher; Samir Gupta
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-03-21       Impact factor: 5.742

4.  Response to Triantafyllou et al.

Authors:  Douglas Rex
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 10.864

Review 5.  Can Technology Improve the Quality of Colonoscopy?

Authors:  Selvi Thirumurthi; William A Ross; Gottumukkala S Raju
Journal:  Curr Gastroenterol Rep       Date:  2016-07

Review 6.  Advances in image enhancement in colonoscopy for detection of adenomas.

Authors:  Takahisa Matsuda; Akiko Ono; Masau Sekiguchi; Takahiro Fujii; Yutaka Saito
Journal:  Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2017-03-15       Impact factor: 46.802

7.  Prolonged Cecal Insertion Time Is Not Associated with Decreased Adenoma Detection When a Longer Withdrawal Time Is Achieved.

Authors:  Cassandra D L Fritz; Zachary L Smith; Jeffrey Elsner; Thomas Hollander; Dayna Early; Vladimir Kushnir
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2018-05-03       Impact factor: 3.199

8.  The Secondary Quality Indicator to Improve Prediction of Adenoma Miss Rate Apart from Adenoma Detection Rate.

Authors:  Satimai Aniwan; Piyachai Orkoonsawat; Vichai Viriyautsahakul; Phonthep Angsuwatcharakon; Rapat Pittayanon; Naruemon Wisedopas; Sakolkun Sumdin; Yuwadee Ponuthai; Sumitra Wiangngoen; Pinit Kullavanijaya; Rungsun Rerknimitr
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-01-26       Impact factor: 10.864

Review 9.  The Effect of Right Colon Retroflexion on Adenoma Detection: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jonah Cohen; Douglas Grunwald; Laurie B Grossberg; Mandeep S Sawhney
Journal:  J Clin Gastroenterol       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 3.062

10.  Endocuff assisted colonoscopy significantly increases sessile serrated adenoma detection in veterans.

Authors:  Michael D Baek; Christian S Jackson; John Lunn; Chris Nguyen; Nicole K Shah; Steve Serrao; David Juma; Richard M Strong
Journal:  J Gastrointest Oncol       Date:  2017-08
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.