Risk factors for adverse events related to polypectomy in the English Bowel Cancer Screening Programme^[*]

Background and study aims: The English National Health Service Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (NHSBCSP) is one of the world’s largest organized screening programs. Minimizing adverse events is essential for any screening program. Study aims were to determine rates and to examine risk factors for adverse events.

Patients and methods: Bleeding and perforations in NHSBCSP colonoscopies between August 2006 and January 2012 were examined. Logistic regression was used to examine risk factors for adverse events, including age, gender, polyp size, morphology, and location. For accurate attribution of adverse events, procedures with resection of only one polyp (“single-polypectomy”) were analyzed in detail.

Results: 130 831 colonoscopies (167 208 polypectomies) were analyzed, including 30 881 single-polypectomies. Overall bleeding rate was 0.65 %, rate of bleeding requiring transfusion was 0.04 % and perforation rate was 0.06 %. Polypectomy increased bleeding risk 11.14-fold and perforation risk 2.97-fold. Cecal location (but not elsewhere in the proximal colon) and increasing polyp size were the two most important risk factors for bleeding and perforation. After adjustment for polyp size, the odds ratio (OR) relative to the distal colon for bleeding requiring transfusion after cecal snare polypectomy was 13.5 (95 %CI 3.9 – 46.4) and for perforation after cecal nonpedunculated polypectomy it was 12.2 (95 %CI 1.2 – 119.5).

Conclusion: This is the largest study focusing on polyp-specific risk factors. We have confirmed that the greatest risk factor for both post-polypectomy bleeding and perforation is polyp size. This is the first demonstration of substantial and significantly increased risk for both noteworthy bleeding (requiring transfusion) and perforation from cecal polypectomy for a given polyp size, compared with elsewhere in the colon.

^* Work undertaken on behalf of the National Health Service (NHS) BCSP Evaluation Group

• References

• 1 Bowles CJ, Leicester R, Romaya C et al. A prospective study of colonoscopy practice in the UK today: are we adequately prepared for national colorectal cancer screening tomorrow?. Gut 2004; 53: 277-283
• 2 Lee TJ, Rutter MD, Blanks RG et al. Colonoscopy quality measures: experience from the NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme. Gut 2012; 61: 1050-1057
• 3 Gavin DR, Valori RM, Anderson JT et al. The national colonoscopy audit: a nationwide assessment of the quality and safety of colonoscopy in the UK. Gut 2013; 62: 242-249 Epub 2012 Jun 1
• 4 Zauber AG, Winawer SJ, O’Brien MJ et al. Colonoscopic polypectomy and long-term prevention of colorectal-cancer deaths. N Engl J Med 2012; 366: 687-696
• 5 Logan RFA, Patnick J, Nickerson C et al. Outcomes of the Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP) in England after the first 1 million tests. Gut 2012; 61: 1439-1446 Epub 2011 Dec 7
• 6 Korman LY, Overholt BF, Box T et al. Perforation during colonoscopy in endoscopic ambulatory surgical centers. Gastrointest Endosc 2003; 58: 554-557
• 7 Arora G, Mannalithara A, Singh G et al. Risk of perforation from a colonoscopy in adults: a large population-based study. Gastrointest Endos 2009; 69: 654-664
• 8 Iqbal CW, Cullinane DC, Schiller HJ et al. Surgical management and outcomes of 165 colonoscopic perforations from a single institution. Arch Surg 2008; 143: 701-706 ; discussion 706–707
• 9 Rabeneck L, Paszat LF, Hilsden RJ et al. Bleeding and perforation after outpatient colonoscopy and their risk factors in usual clinical practice. Gastroenterology 2008; 135: 1899-1906
• 10 Panteris V, Haringsma J, Kuipers EJ. Colonoscopy perforation rate, mechanisms and outcome: from diagnostic to therapeutic colonoscopy. Endoscopy 2009; 41: 941-951
• 11 Rosen L, Bub DS, Reed JF et al. Hemorrhage following colonoscopic polypectomy. Dis Colon Rectum 1993; 36: 1126-1131
• 12 Nelson DB, McQuaid KR, Bond JH et al. Procedural success and complications of large-scale screening colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2002; 55: 307-314
• 13 Heldwein W, Dollhopf M, Rösch T et al. The Munich Polypectomy Study (MUPS): prospective analysis of complications and risk factors in 4000 colonic snare polypectomies. Endoscopy 2005; 37: 1116-1122
• 14 Kim HS, Kim TI, Kim WH et al. Risk factors for immediate postpolypectomy bleeding of the colon: a multicenter study. Am J Gastroenterol 2006; 101: 1333-1341
• 15 Saraya T, Ikematsu H, Fu KI et al. Evaluation of complications related to therapeutic colonoscopy using the bipolar snare. Surg Endosc 2012; 26: 533-540 Epub 2011 Sep 23
• 16 Buddingh KT, Herngreen T, Haringsma J et al. Location in the right hemi-colon is an independent risk factor for delayed post-polypectomy hemorrhage: a multi-center case-control study. Am J Gastroenterol 2011; 106: 1119-1124
• 17 Chilton A, Rutter M. Quality assurance guidelines for colonoscopy. NHS BCSP Publication No 6. Sheffield, UK: NHS Cancer Screening Programmes; 2011
• 18 Watabe H, Yamaji Y, Okamoto M et al. Risk assessment for delayed hemorrhagic complication of colonic polypectomy: polyp-related factors and patient-related factors. Gastrointest Endosc 2006; 64: 73-78
• 19 Consolo P, Luigiano C, Strangio G et al. Efficacy, risk factors and complications of endoscopic polypectomy: ten year experience at a single center. World J Gastroenterol 2008; 14: 2364-2369
• 20 Sawhney MS, Salfiti N, Nelson DB et al. Risk factors for severe delayed postpolypectomy bleeding. Endoscopy 2008; 40: 115-119
• 21 Gimeno-Garcia AZ, de Ganzo ZA, Sosa AJ et al. Incidence and predictors of postpolypectomy bleeding in colorectal polyps larger than 10 mm. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2012; 24: 520-526
• 22 Choo WK, Subhani J. Complication rates of colonic polypectomy in relation to polyp characteristics and techniques: a district hospital experience. J Interv Gastroenterol 2012; 2: 8-11