Matthew A Kluge1, J Lucas Williams2, Connie K Wu3, Brian C Jacobson4, Paul C Schroy4, David A Lieberman5, Audrey H Calderwood6. 1. Department of Medicine, Boston University Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 2. The Clinical Outcomes Research Initiative, Portland, Oregon, USA. 3. Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 4. Section of Gastroenterology, Boston University Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 5. Division of Gastroenterology, Oregon Health & Sciences University, Portland, Oregon, USA. 6. Section of Gastroenterology, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, New Hampshire, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The risks of missed findings after inadequate bowel preparation are not fully characterized in a diverse cohort. We aimed to evaluate the likelihood of missed polyps after an inadequate preparation as assessed by using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS). METHODS: In this observational study of prospectively collected data within a large, national, endoscopic consortium, we identified patients aged 50 to 75 years who underwent average-risk screening colonoscopy (C1) followed by a second colonoscopy for any indication within 3 years (C2). We determined the polyp detection rates (PDRs) and advanced PDRs during C2 stratified by C1 BBPS scores. RESULTS: Among segment pairs without polyps at C1 (N = 601), those with inadequate C1 BBPS segment scores had a higher PDR at C2 (10%) compared with those with adequate bowel preparation at C1 (5%; P = .04). Among segment pairs with polyps at C1 (N = 154), segments with inadequate bowel preparation scores at C1 had higher advanced PDRs at C2 (20%) compared with those with adequate bowel preparation scores at C1 (4%; P = .03). In multivariable analysis, the presence of advanced polyps at C1 (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 3.5; 95% confidence intervals [CIs], 1.1-10.8) but not inadequate BBPS scores at C1 (adjusted OR 1.8; 95% CI, 0.6-5.1) was associated with a significantly increased risk of advanced polyps at C2. CONCLUSIONS: Inadequate BBPS segment scores generally are associated with higher rates of polyps and advanced polyps at subsequent colonoscopy within a short timeframe. The presence of advanced polyps as well as inadequate BBPS segment scores can inform the risk of missed polyps and help triage which patients warrant a timely repeat colonoscopy.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The risks of missed findings after inadequate bowel preparation are not fully characterized in a diverse cohort. We aimed to evaluate the likelihood of missed polyps after an inadequate preparation as assessed by using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS). METHODS: In this observational study of prospectively collected data within a large, national, endoscopic consortium, we identified patients aged 50 to 75 years who underwent average-risk screening colonoscopy (C1) followed by a second colonoscopy for any indication within 3 years (C2). We determined the polyp detection rates (PDRs) and advanced PDRs during C2 stratified by C1BBPS scores. RESULTS: Among segment pairs without polyps at C1 (N = 601), those with inadequate C1BBPS segment scores had a higher PDR at C2 (10%) compared with those with adequate bowel preparation at C1 (5%; P = .04). Among segment pairs with polyps at C1 (N = 154), segments with inadequate bowel preparation scores at C1 had higher advanced PDRs at C2 (20%) compared with those with adequate bowel preparation scores at C1 (4%; P = .03). In multivariable analysis, the presence of advanced polyps at C1 (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 3.5; 95% confidence intervals [CIs], 1.1-10.8) but not inadequate BBPS scores at C1 (adjusted OR 1.8; 95% CI, 0.6-5.1) was associated with a significantly increased risk of advanced polyps at C2. CONCLUSIONS: Inadequate BBPS segment scores generally are associated with higher rates of polyps and advanced polyps at subsequent colonoscopy within a short timeframe. The presence of advanced polyps as well as inadequate BBPS segment scores can inform the risk of missed polyps and help triage which patients warrant a timely repeat colonoscopy.
Authors: Reena V Chokshi; Christine E Hovis; Thomas Hollander; Dayna S Early; Jean S Wang Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2012-02-28 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: B Joseph Elmunzer; Amit G Singal; Jeremy B Sussman; Amar R Deshpande; Daniel A Sussman; Marisa L Conte; Ben A Dwamena; Mary A M Rogers; Philip S Schoenfeld; John M Inadomi; Sameer D Saini; Akbar K Waljee Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2015-03 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Nancy N Baxter; Meredith A Goldwasser; Lawrence F Paszat; Refik Saskin; David R Urbach; Linda Rabeneck Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2008-12-15 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Audrey H Calderwood; Judith R Logan; Michael Zurfluh; David A Lieberman; Brian C Jacobson; Timothy C Heeren; Paul C Schroy Journal: J Clin Gastroenterol Date: 2014 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 3.062
Authors: Caitlin C Murphy; Robert S Sandler; Janet M Grubber; Marcus R Johnson; Deborah A Fisher Journal: Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2015-10-19 Impact factor: 11.382
Authors: Deborah Saraste; Anna Martling; Per J Nilsson; Johannes Blom; Sven Törnberg; Rolf Hultcrantz; Martin Janson Journal: J Med Screen Date: 2016-03-02 Impact factor: 2.136
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
Authors: Roberto Trasolini; Estello Nap-Hill; Matthew Suzuki; Cherry Galorport; Jordan Yonge; Jack Amar; Brian Bressler; Hin Hin Ko; Eric C S Lam; Alnoor Ramji; Gregory Rosenfeld; Jennifer J Telford; Scott Whittaker; Robert A Enns Journal: J Can Assoc Gastroenterol Date: 2019-09-04
Authors: Jin Lee; Su Jin Jeong; Tae Hyung Kim; Yong Eun Park; Joon Hyuk Choi; Nae-Yun Heo; Jongha Park; Seung Ha Park; Young Soo Moon; Tae Oh Kim Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) Date: 2020-01 Impact factor: 1.817