Significance of a normal surveillance colonoscopy in patients with a history of adenomatous polyps

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine the appropriate surveillance for patients with a history of adenomatous polyps whose last colonoscopic examination was normal. METHODS: This was a retrospective review of a database of 7,677 colonoscopies (1990 to 1996). In patients under colonoscopic surveillance, we reviewed cases of patients who had received three colonoscopies (an index (initial) colonoscopy positive for adenomas and 2 follow-up colonoscopies (interim and final)). The risk of adenomas and cancers at final follow-up colonoscopy was compared between patients having a normal interim colonoscopy and those with a positive interim colonoscopy. The risk at final colonoscopy was also stratified by time interval and the size and number of adenomas at the initial index colonoscopy. RESULTS: Two hundred four patients undergoing surveillance for adenomas met inclusion criteria. At index colonoscopy the median polyp size was 1 cm and median frequency was three polyps. At all follow-up colonoscopies, we detected 493 adenomas and one cancer (median follow-up, 55 months). At 36 months patients with a normal interim colonoscopy (n = 91) had significantly fewer polyps than patients with a positive interim colonoscopy (n = 113; 15 vs. 40 percent; P = 0.0001). By 40 months, adenomas were detected in more than 40 percent of patients in both groups. The risk after a normal interim colonoscopy was not affected by time interval or number or size of polyps. Adenomas found subsequent to a normal interim colonoscopy were dispersed throughout the colon in 28 patients and isolated to the rectosigmoid in 6 patients. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with a history of adenomas, a normal follow-up colonoscopy is associated with a statistically but not clinically significant reduction in the risk of subsequent colonic neoplasms. These patients require follow-up surveillance colonoscopy at a four-year to five-year interval.     

Metabolic syndrome and colorectal neoplasms:An ominous association

AIM:To evaluate the association of metabolic syndrome(MS) and colorectal cancer and adenomas in a Western country,where the incidence of MS is over 27%.METHODS:This was a prospective study between March 2013 and March 2014.MS was diagnosed according to the National Cholesterol Education ProgramATP III.Demographic characteristics,anthropometric measurements,metabolic risk factors,and colonoscopic pathologic findings were assessed in patients with MS(group 1) who underwent routine colonoscopy at our department.This data was compared with consecutive patients without metabolic syndrome(group 2),with no differences regarding sex and age.Patients with incomplete colonoscopy,family history,or past history of colorectal neoplasm were excluded.Informed consent was obtained and the ethics committee approved this study.Statistical analysis was performed using Student's t-test and χ2 test,with a P value ≤ 0.05 being considered statistically significant.RESULTS:Of 258 patients,129 had MS;51% males;mean-age 67.1 years(50-87).Among the MS group,94% had high blood pressure,91% had increased waist circumference,60% had diabetes,55% had low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol level,50% had increased triglyceride level,and 54% were obese [body mass index(BMI) 30 kg/m2].51% presented 4 criteria of MS.MS was associated with increased prevalence of adenomas(43% vs 25%,P = 0.004) and colorectal cancer(13% vs 5%,P = 0.027),compared with patients without MS.MS was also positively associated with multiple(≥ 3) adenomas(35% vs 9%,P = 0.024) and sessile adenomas(69% vs 53%,P = 0.05).No difference existed between location(P = 0.086),grade of dysplasia(P = 0.196),or size(P= 0.841) of adenomas.In addition,no difference was found between BMI(P = 0.078),smoking(P = 0.146),alcohol consumption(P = 0.231),and the presence of adenomas.CONCLUSION:MS is positively associated with adenomas and colorectal cancer.However,there is not enough information in western European countries to justify screening in patients with MS.To our knowledge,no previous study has evaluated this association in Portuguese patients.     

Risk factors for colonoscopic perforation: A population-based study of 80118 cases

AIM: To assess the incidence and risk factors associated with colonic perforation due to colonoscopy. METHODS: This was a retrospective cross-sectional study. Patients were retrospectively eligible for inclusion if they were 18 years and older and had an inpatient or outpatient colonoscopy procedure code in any facility within the Geisinger Health System during the period from January 1, 2002 to August 25, 2010. Data are presented as median and inter-quartile range, for continuous variables, and as frequency and percentage for categorical variables. Baseline comparisons across those with and without a perforation were made using the two-sample t -test and Pearson’s χ2 test, as appropriate.RESULTS: A total of 50 perforations were diagnosed out of 80118 colonoscopies, which corresponded to an incidence of 0.06% (95%CI: 0.05-0.08) or a rate of 6.2 per 10000 colonoscopies. All possible risk factors associated with colonic perforation with a P -value < 0.1 were checked for inclusion in a multivariable logbinomial regression model predicting 7-d colonic perforation. The final model resulted in the following risk factors which were significantly associated with risk of colonic perforation: age, gender, body mass index, albumin level, intensive care unit (ICU) patients, inpatient setting, and abdominal pain and Crohn’s disease as indications for colonoscopy. CONCLUSION: The cumulative 7 d incidence of colonic perforation in this cohort was 0.06%. Advanced age and female gender were significantly more likely to have perforation. Increasing albumin and BMI resulted in decreased risk of colonic perforation. Having a colonoscopy indication of abdominal pain or Crohn’s disease resulted in a higher risk of colonic perforation. Colonoscopies performed in inpatients and particularly the ICU setting had substantially greater odds of perforation. Biopsy and polypectomy did not increase the risk of perforation and only three perforations occurred with screening colonoscopy.     

Conventional endoscopic features are not sufficient to differentiate small,early colorectal cancer

AIM:To evaluate the depth of invasion of small,early colorectal cancers(ECCs)using conventional endoscopic features.METHODS:From January 2005 to September 2011,colonoscopy cohort showed that a total of 72 patients with small colorectal cancers with the size less than 20mm underwent colonoscopy at the Yonsei University College of Medicine,Seoul,South Korea.Among them,8 patients were excluded due to incomplete medical records.Finally,a total of 64 ECCs with submucosa(SM)invasion and size less than 20 mm were included.One hundred fifty-two adenomas with size less than 20 mm were included as controls.Nine endoscopic features,including seven morphological findings(i.e.,loss of lobulation,excavation,demarcated and depressed areas,stalk swelling,fullness,fold convergence,and bleeding ulcers),pit patterns,and non-lifting signs,were evalu-ated retrospectively.All endoscopic features were evaluated by two experienced endoscopists who have each performed over 1000 colonoscopies annually for more than five years without knowledge of the histology.RESULTS:Among the morphological findings,the size of deep submucosal cancers was bigger than that of superficial lesions(16.9 mm vs 12.3 mm,P<0.001).Also,demarcated depressed areas,stalk swelling,and fullness were more common in deep SM cancers than in superficial tumors(demarcated depressed areas:52.0%vs 15.7%,P<0.001;stalk swelling:100%vs4.2%,P<0.001;fullness:25.0%vs 0%,P=0.001).Among deep SM cancers,96%of polyps showed invasive pit patterns,whereas 19.4%of superficial tumors showed invasive pit patterns(P<0.001).A positive non-lifting sign was more common in deep SM cancers(85.0%vs 28.6%,P<0.001).Diagnostic accuracy of invasive morphology,invasive pit patterns,and nonlifting signs for deep SM cancers were 71%,82%,and75%,respectively.CONCLUSION:Conventional endoscopic findings were insufficient to discriminate small,deep SM cancers from superficial SM cancers by white light,standard colonoscopy.     

Incidence of advanced adenomas at surveillance colonoscopy in patients with a personal history of colon adenomas: a meta-analysis and systematic review

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines stratify patients with a personal history of adenomas as low risk (ie, 1-2 small [<10 mm] adenomas at index colonoscopy) or high risk (> or =3 small adenomas or advanced adenoma at index colonoscopy) for recurrent advanced adenomas. Guidelines recommend longer intervals between surveillance colonoscopies for low-risk patients, but physicians frequently perform surveillance colonoscopy at shorter intervals for these patients. OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to perform a meta-analysis about the incidence of advanced adenomas at 3-year surveillance colonoscopy among high- and low-risk patients. METHODS: Computer searches of MEDLINE, PREMEDLINE, and EMBASE were performed to identify appropriate studies. Study selection criteria were (1) study design--prospective or registry-based study, (2) study population--patients with a personal history of adenomas, and (3) intervention--completion of surveillance colonoscopy at an interval of > or =2 years. Data were extracted on (1) incidence of advanced adenomas at surveillance colonoscopy, (2) interval between colonoscopies, and (3) risk factors associated with recurrent adenomas. After the validity of study design was assessed and independent, duplicate data extraction was performed from selected trials, summary relative risks (RR) for the incidence of advanced adenomas at 3-year colonoscopy were calculated. RESULTS: Fifteen studies met study selection criteria, but only 5 studies stratified surveillance colonoscopy results according to findings at the index colonoscopy. Patients with > or =3 adenomas at index colonoscopy were more likely to have recurrent advanced adenomas than were patients with 1 to 2 adenomas: RR 2.52, 95% CI 1.07-5.97. Patients with adenomas with high-grade dysplasia at index colonoscopy were also at increased risk for recurrent advanced adenomas: RR 1.84, 95% CI 1.06-3.19. In the individual studies, increasing size of adenomas and increasing number of adenomas at index colonoscopy were the most commonly reported risk factors associated with recurrent advanced adenomas. No studies stratified surveillance colonoscopy results according to the definitions of low risk and high risk used in current guidelines. CONCLUSION: Few published studies stratify the incidence of advanced adenomas at surveillance colonoscopy according to index colonoscopy findings. In the future, large prospective studies or studies using pooled data from existing randomized controlled trial databases or polyp registries should be used to better define which patients are at low risk for advanced adenoma recurrence.     

Is early colonoscopy after CT-diagnosed diverticulitis still necessary?

Purpose

WHO GLOBOCAN 2012 data showed that Australia and New Zealand have the highest incidence rates of colorectal cancer in the world (Ferlay et al. 1). Current guidelines recommend that patients admitted for an episode of acute diverticulitis require an early follow-up colonoscopy to rule out colorectal malignancy as reported by Fozard et al. (Colorectal Dis 13:1–11, 2011). Recent studies however have indicated that this may not be warranted (Brar et al. Dis Colon rectum 56:1259–1264, 2013). This study aimed to review the current practice by looking at our institution’s rate of colorectal malignancy diagnosed after an episode of acute diverticulitis.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients who presented with acute diverticulitis at our institution between 2011 and 2013. Included in the study were patients who received follow-up colonic evaluation in the next 12 months after admission. Patients who had a colonoscopy in the last year prior to emergency presentation were excluded. The primary outcome measure was the incidence of histologically confirmed colorectal carcinoma diagnosed on follow-up colonoscopy. Secondary outcome measures were incidence of low-grade or advanced adenoma on follow-up colonic evaluation.

Results

A total of 523 cases of acute diverticulitis were diagnosed on CT scan. Out of 351 patients with uncomplicated diverticulitis, 196 had follow-up colonoscopy, with one case of colorectal malignancy recorded. Low-grade and advanced adenomas were found on 10.7 and 2.0% of colonoscopies performed respectively in this subgroup. Seventy-four out of 172 patients with complicated diverticulitis had follow-up evaluation, with four cases of colorectal malignancy discovered. Low-grade and advanced adenomas were found on 6.75 and 5.41% of colonoscopies performed respectively in this subgroup.

Conclusion

Routine interval colonoscopy following an episode of conservatively managed uncomplicated diverticulitis may not be necessary. Interval colonoscopy is still indicated in patients with complicated diverticulitis. Further collaborative study across different institutions may be warranted to gain better statistical significance.

     

Repeat colonoscopy’s value in gastrointestinal bleeding

AIM:To assess the diagnostic yield and clinical value of early repeat colonoscopies for indications other than colorectal cancer(CRC) screening/surveillance.METHODS:A retrospective review of patients who had more than one colonoscopy performed for the same indication within a three year time frame at our tertiary care referral hospital between January 1,2000 and January 1,2010 was conducted.Exclusion criteria included repeat colonoscopies performed for CRC screening/surveillance,poor bowel preparation,suspected complications from the index procedure,and incomplete initial procedure.Primary outcome was new endoscopic finding that led to an endoscopic therapeutic intervention or any change in clinical management.Clinical parameters including age,sex,race,interval between procedures,indication of the procedure,presenting symptoms,severity of symptoms,hemodynamic instability,duration between onset of symptoms and when the procedure was performed,change in endoscopist,withdrawal time,location of colonic lesions and improvement of quality of bowel preparation were analyzed using bivariate analysis and logistic regression analysis to examine correlation with this primary outcome.RESULTS:Among 19 772 colonoscopies performed during the above mentioned period,947 colonoscopies(4.79%) were repeat colonoscopies performed within 3 years from the index procedure.Out of these repeat colonoscopies,139 patient pairs met the inclusion criteria.The majority of repeat colonoscopies were for lower gastrointestinal bleeding(88.4%),change in bowel habits(6.4%) and abdominal pain(5%).Among 139 eligible patient pairs of colonoscopies,only repeat colonoscopies that were done for lower gastrointestinal bleeding and abdominal pain produced endoscopic findings that led to a change in management [25 out of 123(20.33%) and 2 out of 7(28.57%),respectively].When looking at only recurrent lower gastrointestinal bleeding cases,new endoscopic findings included 8 previously undetected hemorrhoid lesions(6.5%),7 actively bleeding lesions requiring endoscopic intervention,which included 3 bleeding arterio-venous malformations(2.43%),2 bleeding radiation colitis(1.6%),and 2 bleeding internal hemorrhoids(1.6%),5 previously undetected tubular adenomas [4 were smaller than 1 cm(4.9%) and 1 was larger than 1 cm(0.8%)],3 radiation colitis(2.43%),1 rectal ulcer(0.8%),and 1 previously undetected right sided colon cancer(0.8%).Of the 25 new endoscopic findings,18(72%) were found when repeat colonoscopy was done within the first year after the index procedure.These findings were 1 rectal ulcer,3 radiation colitis,4 new hemorrhoid lesions,3 previously undetected tubular adenomas,and 7 actively bleeding lesions requiring endoscopic intervention.Of all parameters analyzed,only the interval between procedures less than one year was associated with higher likelihood of finding a clinically significant change in repeat colonoscopy(odds ratios of interval between procedures of 1-2 year and 2-3 year compared to 0-1 year were 0.09;95%CI 0.01-0.74,P = 0.025 and 0.26;95%CI 0.09-0.72,P = 0.010 respectively).No complications were observed among all 139 colonoscopy pairs.CONCLUSION:There is clinical value of repeating a colonoscopy for recurrent lower gastrointestinal bleeding,especially within the first year after the index procedure.     

The yield of colonoscopy in average-risk patients with non-specific colonic symptoms

OBJECTIVES: The need for full colonoscopies in average-risk patients with non-specific colonic symptoms is controversial. We aimed to evaluate: (1) the yield of full colonoscopy; (2) the prevalence of proximal neoplasia in these patients; (3) the yield if any of doing full colonoscopies to diagnose proximal lesions in patients in whom the distal colon was clear; (4) the significance of this yield with respect to age. DESIGN: This is a retrospective analysis to assess the value of open access colonoscopy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients who underwent a colonoscopy in our Endoscopy Unit during January 1996 to December 1999 were assessed (n = 3357). RESULTS: We analysed 945 patients with average risk and non-specific colonic symptoms (significant risk factors excluded). The overall yield of adenomas was 5.8%. The yield of distal adenomas in patients > or= 50 years of age was 8.2% (37 out of 450) versus 0.2% in the 50 years group (one out of 495; = 0.0001). The proximal adenoma yield in > or= 50 year olds was 3.8% (17 out of 495) versus 0.2% in < 50 year olds (one out of 495) (P = 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: In a cohort of average-risk patients with non-specific colonic symptoms attending an "open access" colonoscopy clinic, the yield for proximal adenomas is small in the < 50 years group. In patients aged < 50 years, distal colonic examination is all that is required, whereas a full colonoscopy may be justified in patients > or = 50 years old.     

Bowel preparations as quality indicators for colonoscopy

Colonoscopy is the principal investigative procedure for colorectal neoplasms because it can detect and remove most precancerous lesions.The effectiveness of colonoscopy depends on the quality of the examination.Bowel preparation is an essential part of high-quality colonoscopies because only an optimal colonic cleansing allows the colonoscopist to clearly view the entire colonic mucosa and to identify any polyps or other lesions.Suboptimal bowel preparation not only prolongs the overall procedure time,decreases the cecal intubation rate,and increases the costs associated with colonoscopy but also increases the risk of missing polyps or adenomas during the colonoscopy.Therefore,a repeat examination or a shorter colonoscopy follow-up interval may be suitable strategies for a patient with suboptimal bowel preparation.     

Patient age and duration of colonoscopy are predictors for adenoma detection in both proximal and distal colon

AIM: To investigate the relation of patient characteristics and procedural parameters to the endoscopic detection rate of colonic adenomas. Further to study,which factors may be capable to predict the localization of adenomatous lesions.METHODS: We used the data base of a prospective randomized colonoscopy study(The Colo Cap trial) to identify patients being diagnosed with colon adenoma. Logistic regression analysis was conducted to reveal predictors for adenoma detection in the entire colon and also with respect to the proximal and distal part. Covariates including age, gender, duration of colonoscopy and comorbidities were defined to determine association between predictors and adenoma detection.RESULTS: Equal numbers of adenomas were detected in the proximal and distal side of the splenic flexure [126(57%) vs 94(43%), P = 0.104]. Simultaneous occurrence of adenomas in both sides of the colon was rare. The appearance of both proximal and distal adenoma was associated with increasing age(P = 0.008 and P = 0.024) and increasing duration of colonoscopy(P < 0.001 and P = 0.001). Male gender was a predictor for adenoma detection in the proximal colon(P = 0.008) but statistical significance was slightly missed with respect to the distal colon(P = 0.089). Alcohol abuse was found to be a predictor for the detection of distal adenoma(P = 0.041). CONCLUSION: Increasing age and longer duration of colonoscopy are factors with a strong impact on adenoma detection both in the proximal and distal colon. Since proximal adenomas occurred in absence of distal adenomas, complete colonoscopy should be performed for screening.     

Prevalence and Characteristics of Colonic Polyps and Adenomas in 2654 Colonoscopies in Saudi Arabia

Background/Aims:

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most common malignancy in the Saudi population, with an increasing incidence over the past 20 years. We aim to determine the baseline polyp as well as adenoma prevalence in a large cohort of patients and to find the possible age in which, if deemed appropriate, a CRC screening program should be initiated.

Patients and Methods:

A retrospective cohort study was conducted using an endoscopic reporting database of individuals seen at a major tertiary care university hospital (King Khalid University Hospital) in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Consecutive Saudi patients who underwent a colonoscopy between August 2007 and April 2012 were included. Patients were excluded if the indication for the colonoscopy was colon cancer, colonic resection, active colitis, active diverticulitis, inflammatory bowel disease, or if the patient was referred for polypectomy.

Results:

2654 colonoscopies were included in the study. The mean age of the study population was 50.5 years [standard deviation (SD) 15.9] and females represented 57.7%. The polyp detection rate in completed colonoscopies was 20.8% (95% CI: 19.2-22.5). Adenomas were found in 8.1% (95% CI: 7.1-9.1), while advanced adenomas were found in only 0.5% (95% CI: 0.2-0.7). Adenomas were found in the left side of the colon in 33.9%, followed by the rectum in 14.6%, ascending colon and cecum in 14.2%, transverse colon in 8.7%, and in multiple locations in 28.7%. Those with a prior history of polyps or CRC were more likely to have an adenoma at colonoscopy than those who did not (14.3% vs. 6.6%; P < 0.01). The adenoma prevalence varied between age groups and ranged from 6.2% to 13.6% with a higher proportion in older individuals; this trend was seen both in males (6.0-14.5%) and females (6.4-14.6%) as well as in those who had screening colonoscopies (6.3-18.4%). No age could be found at which a CRC screening program would be appropriate to initiate.

Conclusion:

The prevalence of polyps and adenomas in this cohort is less than that reported in the Western populations. But as this cohort included younger and symptomatic patients with only a small proportion undergoing screening, further studies in an asymptomatic population are needed.     

Birthplace is not a determinant of colorectal adenomas

AIM: To examine the impact of the patient’s birthplace on the prevalence of colonic polyps and histopathological subtypes.METHODS: This is a retrospective audit of the colonoscopy practice of one Gastroenterologist in a tertiary-referral hospital from 2008 to 2011. Data collected include demography, birthplace, language spoken, details of the colonoscopy including indications, completion rates, complications, results including prevalence and histopathology of polyps. Statistical methods used were binary logistic regression, χ² and Mann-Whitney U.RESULTS: A total of 623 patients (48% male, 67% aged over 50 years) were recruited and categorised according to birthplace: Australia/New Zealand 42%, European 20%, Asian 15%, Middle Eastern/African 11%, South American 9% and Pacific Islander 3%. The median age of the cohort was 56.3 years (range: 17-91 years), median body mass index 27.3 kg/m² (range: 16-51 kg/m²), 25% were smokers, 25% had hypercholesterolemia, 20% had diabetes mellitus 16% were on aspirin and 7% were on non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. A total of 651 colonoscopies were performed for standard indications. The prevalence of polyps varied according to patient’s birthplace: Europe 45.1%, Australia and New Zealand 39.5%, Pacific Islands 33.3%, Asia 30.3%, Middle East and Africa 26.9% and South America 24.5% (P = 0.027, df = 6). However, multivariate analysis revealed that birthplace was not an independent predictor of developing polyps, including adenomas and advanced adenomas after correcting for age and male sex.CONCLUSION: Birthplace is not a predictor for developing colorectal neoplasia, including adenomas and advanced adenomas; hence, should not influence the recommendations for colorectal cancer screening.     

Is proliferative colonic disease presentation changing?

AIM: To compare the site, age and gender of cases of colorectal cancer (CRC) and polyps in a single referral center in Rome, Italy, during two periods.METHODS: CRC data were collected from surgery/pathology registers, and polyp data from colonoscopy reports. Patients who met the criteria for familial adenomatous polyposis, hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer syndrome or inflammatory bowel disease were excluded from the study. Overlap of patients between the two groups (cancers and polyps) was carefully avoided. The χ² statistical test and a regression analysis were performed.RESULTS: Data from a total of 768 patients (352 and 416 patients, respectively, in periods A and B) who underwent surgery for cancer were collected. During the same time periods, a total of 1693 polyps were analyzed from 978 patients with complete colonoscopies (428 polyps from 273 patients during period A and 1265 polyps from 705 patients during period B). A proximal shift in cancer occurred during the latter years for both sexes, but particularly in males. Proximal cancer increased > 3-fold in period B compared to period A in males [odds ratio (OR) 3.31, 95%CI: 2.00-5.47; P < 0.0001). A similar proximal shift was observed for polyps, particularly in males (OR 1.87, 95%CI: 1.23-2.87; P < 0.0038), but also in females (OR 1.62, 95%CI: 0.96-2.73; P < 0.07).CONCLUSION: The prevalence of proximal proliferative colonic lesions seems to have increased over the last decade, particularly in males.     

Hepatectomy vs radiofrequency ablation for colorectal liver metastasis:A propensity score analysis

AIM:To compare outcomes from radiofrequency ablation(RFA) and hepatectomy for treatment of colorectal liver metastasis(CRLM).METHODS:From January 2000 to December 2009,408 patients underwent curative intent treatment for CRLM.We excluded patients using the criteria:size of CRLM 3 cm,number of CRLM ≥ 5,percutaneous RFA,follow-up period 12 mo,double primary cancer,or treatment with both RFA and hepatectomy.We matched 51 patients who underwent RFA with 102 patients who underwent hepatectomy by propensity scores.RESULTS:The median follow-up period was 45 mo(range,12 mo to 158 mo).Hepatic recurrence was more frequent in the RFA than the hepatectomy group(P = 0.021) although extrahepatic recurrence curves were similar(P = 0.716).Survival curves of hepatectomy group were better than that of RFA for multiple,large( 2 cm) CRLM(P = 0.034).However,survival curves were similar for single or small(≤ 2 cm) CRLM(P = 0.714,P = 0.740).CONCLUSION:Hepatectomy is better than RFA for the treatment of CRLM.However,RFA might be suitable for selected patients with single,small(≤ 2 cm) CRLM.     

Colorectal cancer incidence is low in patients following a colonoscopy

Background/Aims

Colonoscopy has been proven a valuable tool in preventing colorectal cancer in controlled studies; we conducted a longitudinal confirmation study in everyday clinical practice.

Methods

In a retrospective study, we monitored the outcome of patients with a total colonoscopy at our hospital between 1994 and 2007. We analysed the data of in-house follow-up colonoscopies, a national person registry and the morphological tumour registry centralizing all histopathological data at a national level. Patients with a particular colorectal cancer risk were excluded.

Results

8950 patients were included in our study. 2032 (22.7%) patients had at least one colorectal adenoma at index colonoscopy. Adenoma prevalence was significantly higher in men than in women (27.9% vs. 17.4%, p < 0.001) and was increasing with age in both sexes. Patients were followed for a mean of 5.2 years and 19 had invasive colorectal cancer detected over 47,725 person years of follow-up. The incidence rate was 0.40 cases/1000 person years of follow-up (95% confidence interval, 0.25–0.62), and the standardized incidence ratio was 0.37 (95% confidence interval, 0.24–0.58).

Conclusion

Incidence rates of colorectal cancer are low in the follow-up of patients having undergone a total colonoscopy in everyday practice. After standard therapy of colorectal adenomas at colonoscopy, there is little evidence for excess colorectal cancer incidence in this subgroup.     

Impacto del proceso de enseñanza endoscópica en la detección de adenomas colónicos

BackgroundThere has been little reported experience in the Latin American hospital setting in relation to the impact of the endoscopic training process on colonoscopy quality.AimsTo determine the effect that training in the technique of colonoscopy has on adenoma detection in an Argentinian teaching hospital.Material and methodWithin the time frame of July 2012 and July 2013, 3 physicians received training in colonoscopy from 4 experienced endoscopists. The colonoscopies performed by the supervised trainees were compared with those carried out by the experienced endoscopists.ResultsA total of 318 colonoscopies performed by any one of the 3 supervised trainees and 367 carried out by any one of the experienced endoscopists were included. The univariate analysis showed a non-significant difference in the detection rate of adenomas (30.4 vs. 24.7%, P = .09). In the multivariate analysis, the detection rate of adenomas was significantly higher in the colonoscopies performed by one of the 3 trainees (odds ratio = 1.72 [1.19-2.48]).ConclusionsThe supervised involvement of endoscopic trainees has a positive effect on adenoma detection.     

CT colonography: Friend or foe of practicing endoscopists

AIM: To investigate the perceived impact of computed tomographic colonography (CTC) on endoscopists’ current and future practice.METHODS: A 21-question survey was mailed to 1570 randomly chosen American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) members. Participants reported socio-demographics, colonoscopy volume, percentage of colonoscopies performed for screening, and likelihood of integration of CTC into their practice.RESULTS: A total of 367 ASGE members (23%) returned the questionnaire. Respondents were predominantly male (> 90%) and white (83%) with an average age of 49 years. Most respondents (58%) had no plans to incorporate CTC into daily practice and only 7% had already incorporated CTC into daily practice. Private practice respondents were the least likely to incorporate this modality into their daily practice (P = 0.047). Forty-three percent of participants were willing to take courses on CTC reading, particularly those with the highest volume of colonoscopy (P = 0.049). Forty percent of participants were unsure of CTC’s impact on future colonoscopy volume while 21% and 18% projected a decreased and increased volume, respectively. The estimated impact of CTC volume varied significantly by age (P = 0.002). Respondents > 60 years felt that CTC would increase colonoscopy, whereas those < 40 years thought CTC would ultimately decrease colonoscopy.CONCLUSION: Practicing endoscopists are not enthusiastic about the incorporation of CTC into their daily practice and are unsure of its future impact on their practice.     

Benefits and Limitations of Cap-Fitted Colonoscopy in Screening Colonoscopy

Background

Colonoscopy is widely used to detect colorectal cancer and to remove precancerous lesions to reduce the risk of colonic cancer.

Aims

To examine the benefits and limitations of cap-fitted colonoscopy compared to conventional colonoscopy in terms of technical performance and colorectal adenoma detection rate.

Methods

Screening colonoscopies performed from 2009 to 2010 with or without a transparent cap were retrospectively examined to compare the rate of successful intubation, cecal intubation time, and number, size, shape, and location of adenomas detected. An inclusion criterion was visualization of >95 % of the right colon.

Results

Data from 2,301 colonoscopies (1,165 with cap-fitted colonoscopy, 1,136 without the transparent cap) were retrospectively analyzed. Procedures were performed by four experienced endoscopists. The subjects’ demographic characteristics and technical performances were similar between the two methods. The only significant difference in the technical performance between the two techniques was a shorter cecal intubation time with cap-fitted colonoscopy (5.3 vs. 6.6 min; p = 0.045) by one endoscopist. The total number of adenomas detected was significantly higher with cap-fitted colonoscopy than without the cap (586 vs. 484, respectively; p < 0.0001). Adenoma detection with cap-fitted endoscopy was significantly higher in the right colon than in the left colon (19 vs. 12 %, respectively; p = 0.0001).

Conclusion

Cap-fitted colonoscopy did not improve the technical aspects of colonoscopy but significantly increased adenoma detection, especially in the right colon. It did not increase the detection rate of flat or depressed adenomas.     

Surveillance after colorectal polyp removal

Surveillance colonoscopy is aimed to reduce CRC incidence and mortality by removing adenomas and detecting CRC in early stage. However, colonoscopy is an invasive and expensive procedure and surveillance colonoscopy should be targeted at those who are most likely to benefit at the minimum frequency required to protect for cancer. Surveillance recommendations are based on guidelines, but the recommendations in those guidelines are based on moderate to low quality evidence and adherence to these guidelines is poor. As surveillance colonoscopy is one of the main indications for colonoscopy and surveillance colonoscopies are filling colonoscopy lists, the current surveillance practice results in spending lots of money and capacity in a suboptimal way.Randomized controlled trials to compare surveillance intervals are not available. However, current evidence based on several case–control and cohort studies suggests there is no need for surveillance in patients with low-risk adenomas, i.e. 1–2 adenomas smaller than 10 mm. Patients with 3 or more adenomas or any adenoma larger than 10 mm seem to be the ones at real risk for metachronous adenomas or cancer. In those patients, surveillance colonoscopy is indicated at 3 years after baseline until ongoing studies will confirm the safety of enlarging this interval. Randomized controlled trials and experimental research are important in order to provide the necessary scientific evidence for the optimization of follow-up strategies for patients with adenomas and serrated polyps.     

The appropriate use of colonoscopy in the curative management of colorectal cancer

A total of 175 patients who underwent a curative resection for a colonic (n = 130) or a rectal cancer (n = 45) between 1986 and 1992 were entered into a routine clonoscopy program. Colonoscopies were performed 1 year after the operation, and then at 2-year intervals. The findings at colonoscopy, as well as those of preoperative colonoscopy (when performed), were recorded. Eleven anastomotic recurrences were diagnosed at an asymptomatic stage, at a mean follow-up of 14 months. All of them were identified in patients with a stage B or C primary rectosigmoid cancer. Eight patients underwent another potentially curative re-operation. Only perioperative colonoscopy (preoperative colonoscopy; first postoperative colonoscopy in patients for whom the preoperative procedure was incomplete or not performed) allowed diagnosis of second cancers (n = 7) and adenomatous polyps greater than 10 mm (n = 17). Further colonoscopies detected only polyps less than 10 mm. Positive examination rates for successive follow-up colonoscopies were 15, 20 and 23%, respectively; they were significantly higher in patients who had previously had adenomatous polyps than in patients who had not: 30% versus 6% (P<0.025), 46% vs 5% (P<0.005) and 38% vs 11% (P<0.025), respectively. From these data, the following recommendations are made: (1) All colorectal cancer patients should have a total colonoscopy either before (whenever possible) or soon after operation; (2) Based on results of the perioperative colonoscopy, patients: should undergo their first follow-up colonoscopy only 3 yearly (presence of synchronous adenomatous polyps) or 5 yearly (absence of synchronous adenomatous polyps) after resection; (3) In patients with stage B or C primary rectosigmoid cancer, a surveillance of the suture line by rigid proctosigmoidoscopy should be added during the first 2 postoperative years: 6, 15 and 24 months after the operation.