Number of polyps detected is a useful indicator of quality of clinical colonoscopy

Abstract

Background and study aims Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is a well-known quality indicator (QI) for colonoscopy. It is, however, difficult to evaluate ADR during practice. The aim of this study was to investigate the number of endoscopically detected polyps as a QI for colonoscopy.

Patients and methods This was a retrospective single-center cohort study of 5,190 consecutive patients who underwent colonoscopy from January 2015 to May 2016. Among these patients, we ultimately enrolled 1,937 patients for initial colonoscopy. We evaluated QIs including bowel preparation, cecum intubation time, withdrawal time, number of endoscopically detected polyps, ADR and advanced neoplasia detection rate (ANDR)

Results The mean number of endoscopically detected polyps, ADR and ANDR were 1.5 ± 2.3 (95 % confidence interval (CI)1.4 – 1.6), 38.6 % (95 % CI 36.5-40.8), and 18.3 % (95 % CI 16.6 – 20.1), respectively. ADR and ANDR increased with the number of endoscopically detected polyps, but the correlation reached a plateau at five or more polyps. We divided the patients into three groups based on the number of polyps (1 to 2, 3 to 4, and 5 or more). Logistic regression analysis adjusted by age and sex revealed that presence of a large number of polyps was a strong predictor of advanced neoplasia (odds ratio: 3.1 [95 % CI 2.2 – 4.3] for 3 to 4 polyps and 7.9 [95 % CI 5.4 – 11.8] for 5 or more polyps when using the presence of 1 or 2 polyps as a reference).

Conclusion The number of endoscopically detected polyps can predict risk of advanced neoplasia and may thus be a new QI for colonoscopy.

• References

• 1 Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Dikshit R. et al. Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. Int J Cancer 2015; 136: E359-386
• 2 Rex DK, Boland CR, Dominitz JA. et al. Colorectal cancer screening: recommendations for physicians and patients from the U.S. Multi-society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Am J Gastroenterol 2017; 112: 1016-1030
• 3 Rex DK. Colonoscopy: the dominant and preferred colorectal cancer screening strategy in the United States. Mayo Clin Proc 2007; 82: 662-664
• 4 Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Ho MN. et al. Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. The National Polyp Study Workgroup. N Engl J Med 1993; 329: 1977-1981
• 5 Zauber AG, Winawer SJ, OʼBrien MJ. et al. Colonoscopic polypectomy and long-term prevention of colorectal-cancer deaths. N Engl J Med 2012; 366: 687-696
• 6 Rex DK, Bond JH, Winawer S. et al. Quality in the technical performance of colonoscopy and the continuous quality improvement process for colonoscopy: recommendations of the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Am J Gastroenterol 2002; 97: 1296-1308
• 7 Kaminski MF, Regula J, Kraszewska E. et al. Quality indicators for colonoscopy and the risk of interval cancer. N Engl J Med 2010; 362: 1795-1803
• 8 Corley DA, Jensen CD, Marks AR. et al. Adenoma detection rate and risk of colorectal cancer and death. N Engl J Med 2014; 370: 1298-1306
• 9 Baxter NN, Sutradhar R, Forbes SS. et al. Analysis of administrative data finds endoscopist quality measures associated with postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer. Gastroenterology 2011; 140: 65-72
• 10 Rex DK, Schoenfeld PS, Cohen J. et al. Quality indicators for colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 81: 31-53
• 11 Rex DK, Petrini JL, Baron TH. et al. Quality indicators for colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2006; 101: 873-885
• 12 Barclay RL, Vicari JJ, Doughty AS. et al. Colonoscopic withdrawal times and adenoma detection during screening colonoscopy. N Engl J Med 2006; 355: 2533-2541
• 13 Shaukat A, Rector TS, Church TR. et al. Longer withdrawal time is associated with a reduced incidence of interval cancer after screening colonoscopy. Gastroenterology 2015; 149: 952-957
• 14 Barclay RL, Vicari JJ, Greenlaw RL. Effect of a time-dependent colonoscopic withdrawal protocol on adenoma detection during screening colonoscopy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2008; 6: 1091-1098
• 15 Imperiale TF, Rex DK. A new quality indicator of colonoscopy: caveat emptor. Gastrointest Endosc 2016; 84: 507-511
• 16 Lai EJ, Calderwood AH, Doros G. et al. The Boston bowel preparation scale: a valid and reliable instrument for colonoscopy-oriented research. Gastrointest Endosc 2009; 69: 620-625
• 17 Lieberman DA, Rex DK, Winawer SJ. et al. Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after screening and polypectomy: a consensus update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Gastroenterology 2012; 143: 844-857
• 18 Lieberman DA, Weiss DG, Bond JH. et al. Use of colonoscopy to screen asymptomatic adults for colorectal cancer. Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study Group 380. N Engl J Med 2000; 343: 162-168
• 19 Melson J, Berger D, Greenspan M. et al. Maintaining low non-neoplastic polypectomy rates in high-quality screening colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2017; 85: 581-587
• 20 Tanaka S, Kashida H, Saito Y. et al. JGES guidelines for colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection/endoscopic mucosal resection. Dig Endosc 2015; 27: 417-434
• 21 Patel SG, Schoenfeld P, Kim HM. et al. Real-time characterization of diminutive colorectal polyp histology using narrow-band imaging: implications for the resect and discard strategy. Gastroenterology 2016; 150: 406-418
• 22 Lieberman DA, Rex DK, Winawer SJ. et al. Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after screening and polypectomy: a consensus update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Gastroenterology 2012; 143: 844-857
• 23 Martinez ME, Baron JA, Lieberman DA. et al. A pooled analysis of advanced colorectal neoplasia diagnoses after colonoscopic polypectomy. Gastroenterology 2009; 136: 832-841
• 24 Lieberman DA, Weiss DG, Harford WV. et al. Five-year colon surveillance after screening colonoscopy. Gastroenterology 2007; 133: 1077-1085
• 25 Kahi CJ, Vemulapalli KC, Johnson CS. et al. Improving measurement of the adenoma detection rate and adenoma per colonoscopy quality metric: the Indiana University experience. Gastrointest Endosc 2014; 79: 448-454
• 26 Park SK, Kim HY, Lee CK. et al. Comparison of adenoma detection rate and adenoma per colonoscopy as a quality indicator of colonoscopy. Scand J Gastroenterol 2016; 51: 886-890
• 27 Denis B, Sauleau EA, Gendre I. et al. Measurement of adenoma detection and discrimination during colonoscopy in routine practice: an exploratory study. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 74: 1325-1336
• 28 Francis DL, Rodriguez-Correa DT, Buchner A. et al. Application of a conversion factor to estimate the adenoma detection rate from the polyp detection rate. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 493-497
• 29 Rex DK, Ponugoti PL. Calculating the adenoma detection rate in screening colonoscopies only: Is it necessary? Can it be gamed? . Endoscopy 2017; 49: 1069-1074