Literature DB >> 34216826

Practice Patterns and Predictors of Stopping Colonoscopy in Older Adults With Colorectal Polyps.

Soham Rege1, Elliot Coburn2, Douglas J Robertson3, Audrey H Calderwood4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Older adults with colorectal polyps undergo frequent surveillance colonoscopy. There is no specific guidance regarding when to stop surveillance. We aimed to characterize endoscopist recommendations regarding surveillance colonoscopy in older adults and identify patient, procedure, and endoscopist characteristics associated with recommendations to stop.
METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study at a single academic medical center of adults aged ≥75 years who underwent colonoscopy for polyp surveillance or screening during which polyps were found. The primary outcome was a recommendation to stop surveillance. Predictors examined included patient age, sex, family history of colorectal cancer, polyp findings, and endoscopist sex and years in practice. Associations were evaluated using multilevel logistic regression.
RESULTS: Among 1426 colonoscopies performed by 17 endoscopists, 34.6% contained a recommendation to stop and 52.3% to continue. Older patients were more likely to receive a recommendation to stop, including those 80-84 years (odds ratio [OR], 7.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.8-12.3) and ≥85 years (OR, 9.0; 95% CI, 3.3-24.6), compared with those 75-79 years. Family history of colorectal cancer (OR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.24-0.74) and a history of low-risk (OR, 0.17; 95% CI, 0.11-0.24) or high-risk (OR, 0.02; 95% CI, 0.01-0.04) polyps were inversely associated with recommendations to stop. The likelihood of a recommendation to stop varied significantly across endoscopists.
CONCLUSIONS: Only 35% of adults ≥75 years of age are recommended to stop surveillance colonoscopy. The presence of polyps was strongly associated with fewer recommendations to stop. The variation in endoscopist recommendations highlights an opportunity to better standardize recommendations following colonoscopy in older adults.
Copyright © 2022 AGA Institute. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Older Adults; Polyp History; Stopping Surveillance; Surveillance Colonoscopy

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34216826      PMCID: PMC8716643          DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2021.06.041

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol        ISSN: 1542-3565            Impact factor:   13.576


  22 in total

Review 1.  Adverse events in older patients undergoing colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Lukejohn W Day; Annette Kwon; John M Inadomi; Louise C Walter; Ma Somsouk
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 9.427

2.  European guidelines for quality assurance in colorectal cancer screening and diagnosis. First Edition--Professional requirements and training.

Authors:  R J C Steele; J-F Rey; R Lambert
Journal:  Endoscopy       Date:  2012-09-25       Impact factor: 10.093

3.  European guidelines for quality assurance in colorectal cancer screening and diagnosis. First Edition--Colonoscopic surveillance following adenoma removal.

Authors:  W S Atkin; R Valori; E J Kuipers; G Hoff; C Senore; N Segnan; R Jover; W Schmiegel; R Lambert; C Pox
Journal:  Endoscopy       Date:  2012-09-25       Impact factor: 10.093

Review 4.  Risk of Advanced Adenoma, Colorectal Cancer, and Colorectal Cancer Mortality in People With Low-Risk Adenomas at Baseline Colonoscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Catherine Dubé; Mafo Yakubu; Bronwen R McCurdy; Andrea Lischka; Anna Koné; Meghan J Walker; Leslea Peirson; Jill Tinmouth
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2017-10-31       Impact factor: 10.864

5.  The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data.

Authors:  J R Landis; G G Koch
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1977-03       Impact factor: 2.571

6.  Comprehensive validation of the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale.

Authors:  Audrey H Calderwood; Brian C Jacobson
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 9.427

7.  A pooled analysis of advanced colorectal neoplasia diagnoses after colonoscopic polypectomy.

Authors:  María Elena Martínez; John A Baron; David A Lieberman; Arthur Schatzkin; Elaine Lanza; Sidney J Winawer; Ann G Zauber; Ruiyun Jiang; Dennis J Ahnen; John H Bond; Timothy R Church; Douglas J Robertson; Stephanie A Smith-Warner; Elizabeth T Jacobs; David S Alberts; E Robert Greenberg
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2008-12-09       Impact factor: 22.682

8.  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

Review 9.  Colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Hermann Brenner; Matthias Kloor; Christian Peter Pox
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2013-11-11       Impact factor: 79.321

10.  British Society of Gastroenterology/Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland/Public Health England post-polypectomy and post-colorectal cancer resection surveillance guidelines.

Authors:  Matthew D Rutter; James East; Colin J Rees; Neil Cripps; James Docherty; Sunil Dolwani; Philip V Kaye; Kevin J Monahan; Marco R Novelli; Andrew Plumb; Brian P Saunders; Siwan Thomas-Gibson; Damian J M Tolan; Sophie Whyte; Stewart Bonnington; Alison Scope; Ruth Wong; Barbara Hibbert; John Marsh; Billie Moores; Amanda Cross; Linda Sharp
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2019-11-27       Impact factor: 31.793

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.