Joseph C Anderson1, William Hisey2, Todd A Mackenzie3, Christina M Robinson2, Amitabh Srivastava4, Reinier G S Meester5, Lynn F Butterly6. 1. Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, New Hampshire, USA; White River Junction VAMC, White River Junction, Vermont, USA. 2. Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, New Hampshire, USA; New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry, Lebanon, New Hampshire, USA. 3. Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, New Hampshire, USA. 4. Memorial Sloane Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA. 5. Erasmus Medical Center, Erasmus, Netherlands. 6. Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, New Hampshire, USA; Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, New Hampshire, USA; New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry, Lebanon, New Hampshire, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Higher adenoma detection rates reduce the risk of postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer (PCCRC). Clinically significant serrated polyps (CSSPs; defined as any sessile serrated polyp, traditional serrated adenoma, large [≥1 cm] or proximal hyperplastic polyp >5 mm) also lead to PCCRC, but there are no data on associated CSSP detection rates (CSSDRs). We used data from the New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry (NHCR) to investigate the association between PCCRC risk and endoscopist CSSDR. METHODS: We included NHCR patients with 1 or more follow-up events: either a colonoscopy or a colorectal cancer (CRC) diagnosis identified through linkage with the New Hampshire State Cancer Registry. We defined our outcome, PCCRC, in 3 time periods: CRC diagnosed 6 to 36 months, 6 to 60 months, or all examinations (6 months or longer) after an index examination. We excluded patients with CRC diagnosed at or within 6 months of the index examination, with incomplete examinations, or with inflammatory bowel disease. The exposure variable was endoscopist CSSDR at the index colonoscopy. Cox regression was used to model the hazard of PCCRC on CSSDR controlling for age, sex, index findings, year of examination, personal history of colorectal neoplasia, and having more than 1 surveillance examination. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-eight patients with CRC diagnosed at least 6 months after their index examination were included. Our cohort included 142 endoscopists (92 gastroenterologists). We observed that the risk for PCCRC 6 months or longer after the index examination was significantly lower for examinations performed by endoscopists with CSSDRs of 3% to <9% (hazard ratio [HR], .57; 95% confidence interval [CI], .39-.83) or 9% or higher (HR, .39; 95% CI, .20-.78) relative to those with CSSDRs under 3%. CONCLUSIONS: Our study is the first to demonstrate a lower PCCRC risk after examinations performed by endoscopists with higher CSSDRs. Both CSSDRs of 9% and 3% to <9% had statistically lower risk of PCCRC than CSSDRs of <3%. These data validate CSSDR as a clinically relevant quality measure for endoscopists. Published by Elsevier Inc.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Higher adenoma detection rates reduce the risk of postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer (PCCRC). Clinically significant serrated polyps (CSSPs; defined as any sessile serrated polyp, traditional serrated adenoma, large [≥1 cm] or proximal hyperplastic polyp >5 mm) also lead to PCCRC, but there are no data on associated CSSP detection rates (CSSDRs). We used data from the New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry (NHCR) to investigate the association between PCCRC risk and endoscopist CSSDR. METHODS: We included NHCR patients with 1 or more follow-up events: either a colonoscopy or a colorectal cancer (CRC) diagnosis identified through linkage with the New Hampshire State Cancer Registry. We defined our outcome, PCCRC, in 3 time periods: CRC diagnosed 6 to 36 months, 6 to 60 months, or all examinations (6 months or longer) after an index examination. We excluded patients with CRC diagnosed at or within 6 months of the index examination, with incomplete examinations, or with inflammatory bowel disease. The exposure variable was endoscopist CSSDR at the index colonoscopy. Cox regression was used to model the hazard of PCCRC on CSSDR controlling for age, sex, index findings, year of examination, personal history of colorectal neoplasia, and having more than 1 surveillance examination. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-eight patients with CRC diagnosed at least 6 months after their index examination were included. Our cohort included 142 endoscopists (92 gastroenterologists). We observed that the risk for PCCRC 6 months or longer after the index examination was significantly lower for examinations performed by endoscopists with CSSDRs of 3% to <9% (hazard ratio [HR], .57; 95% confidence interval [CI], .39-.83) or 9% or higher (HR, .39; 95% CI, .20-.78) relative to those with CSSDRs under 3%. CONCLUSIONS: Our study is the first to demonstrate a lower PCCRC risk after examinations performed by endoscopists with higher CSSDRs. Both CSSDRs of 9% and 3% to <9% had statistically lower risk of PCCRC than CSSDRs of <3%. These data validate CSSDR as a clinically relevant quality measure for endoscopists. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Authors: Douglas K Rex; John H Bond; Sidney Winawer; Theodore R Levin; Randall W Burt; David A Johnson; Lynne M Kirk; Scott Litlin; David A Lieberman; Jerome D Waye; James Church; John B Marshall; Robert H Riddell Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2002-06 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Douglas K Rex; John L Petrini; Todd H Baron; Amitabh Chak; Jonathan Cohen; Stephen E Deal; Brenda Hoffman; Brian C Jacobson; Klaus Mergener; Bret T Petersen; Michael A Safdi; Douglas O Faigel; Irving M Pike Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2006-04 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Joep E G IJspeert; Sascha C van Doorn; Ymkje M van der Brug; Barbara A J Bastiaansen; Paul Fockens; Evelien Dekker Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2015-04-29 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Mary Ann Greene; Lynn F Butterly; Martha Goodrich; Tracy Onega; John A Baron; David A Lieberman; Allen J Dietrich; Amitabh Srivastava Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2011-06-12 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Seth D Crockett; Rebecca A Gourevitch; Michele Morris; David S Carrell; Sherri Rose; Zhuo Shi; Julia B Greer; Robert E Schoen; Ateev Mehrotra Journal: Endoscopy Date: 2018-04-24 Impact factor: 10.093
Authors: Thomas R de Wijkerslooth; Esther M Stoop; Patrick M Bossuyt; Kristien M A J Tytgat; Jan Dees; Elisabeth M H Mathus-Vliegen; Ernst J Kuipers; Paul Fockens; Monique E van Leerdam; Evelien Dekker Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2013-01-12 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Joseph C Anderson; Lynn F Butterly; Christina M Robinson; Martha Goodrich; Julia E Weiss Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2014-05-10 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Angela Y Lam; Yan Li; Dyanna L Gregory; Joanne Prinz; Jacqueline O'Reilly; Michael Manka; John E Pandolfino; Rajesh N Keswani Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2020-02-21 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Faisal Kamal; Muhammad Ali Khan; Wade Lee-Smith; Sachit Sharma; Ashu Acharya; Zaid Imam; Umer Farooq; John Hanson; Vian Pulous; Muhammad Aziz; Saurabh Chandan; Abdul Kouanda; Sun-Chuan Dai; Craig A Munroe; Colin W Howden Journal: Endosc Int Open Date: 2022-10-17