Literature DB >> 25744733

[Inappropriateness rate for colonoscopy indications in an open access unit].

Xavier Andújar1, Empar Sainz1, Alex Galí1, Carme Loras1, Montserrat Aceituno1, Jorge C Espinós1, Josep M Viver1, Maria Esteve1, Fernando Fernández-Bañares2.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION AND
OBJECTIVE: The suitability of indications for colonoscopy is important to optimize the available resources. The aim of this study was to assess the appropriateness of colonoscopy indications in an open access endoscopy unit using the EPAGE II criteria.
METHODS: Colonoscopies performed between October 1 and November 30, 2011 were retrospectively included. The appropriateness of the colonoscopy was established according to the EPAGE II criteria. Demographics, medical applicants, indications and relevant findings from these examinations were recorded.
RESULTS: We included 440 colonoscopies (60.8 ± 016.3 years, 54% women). The indication was appropriate in 75.4% (CI, 71-79.3%), uncertain in 13.1% (CI, 10.2-16.6%) and inappropriate in 11.4% (CI, 8.7-14.8%). In the univariate analysis, the relevant findings in the colonoscopy were associated with age, sex, colonoscopy indications and EPAGE II. In the logistic regression analysis, factors independently associated with the presence of relevant findings were age (≥ 50 years) (OR, 1.84), male sex (OR, 2.7) and two indications, inflammatory bowel disease and post-polypectomy surveillance (P < .03). The diagnostic yield of EPAGE II criteria was 37.3% for appropriate colonoscopies and 28.3% for inappropriate colonoscopies (P = .09).
CONCLUSIONS: The rate of unnecessary colonoscopy is high, especially in young patients (<50 years) and some colonoscopy indications. Age (≥ 50 years) and male sex are independently associated with the presence of relevant findings in colonoscopy. The diagnostic yield of EPAGE II criteria does not differ between appropriate and inappropriate examinations.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier España, S.L.U. and AEEH y AEG. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Colonoscopia; Colonoscopy; EPAGE II; Open access unit; Unidad de acceso abierto

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25744733     DOI: 10.1016/j.gastrohep.2014.11.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastroenterol Hepatol        ISSN: 0210-5705            Impact factor:   2.102


  2 in total

1.  The EPAGE guidelines are not an effective strategy for managing colonoscopies during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Authors:  Lorena Rodríguez-Alonso; Francisco Rodríguez-Moranta; Sandra Maisterra; Josep M Botargues; Ana Berrozpe; Alexandra Ruíz-Cerulla; Gerard Suris; Blau Camps; Joan B Gornals; Jordi Guardiola
Journal:  Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2021-02-02       Impact factor: 2.102

2.  Age-period-cohort effects in utilization of diagnostic procedures leading to incidental colorectal cancer detection.

Authors:  Andrea Salvatori; Anita Andreano; Adriano Decarli; Antonio Giampiero Russo
Journal:  Eur J Cancer Prev       Date:  2022-01-01       Impact factor: 2.164

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.