Diagnostic miss rate for colorectal cancer: an audit
- PMID: 25609386
- PMCID: PMC4290010
Diagnostic miss rate for colorectal cancer: an audit
Abstract
Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a common cancer worldwide. While screening improves survival, avoiding delayed diagnosis in symptomatic patients is crucial. Computed tomographic colonography (CTC) or colonoscopy is recommended as first-line investigation and most societies recommend counseling patients undergoing colonoscopy about a miss rate of 5%. This audit evaluates "miss rate" of colorectal investigations, which have led to diagnostic delay in symptomatic cases in a district general hospital in the United Kingdom.
Methods: This is a retrospective review of 150 consecutive CRC cases presenting between August 2010 and July 2011. Evidence of bowel investigations done in the 3 years prior to diagnosis was obtained from computerized health records. Data regarding previous bowel investigations such as colonoscopy, CTC, double contrast barium enema (DCBE), and CT abdomen/pelvis were collected.
Results: 6.7% cases were identified via screening pathway while 93% were identified through symptomatic pathway. 17% (26/150) of newly diagnosed CRC had been investigated in the preceding 3 years. Of these, 8% (12/150) had false negative results. The false negative rate for CRC diagnosis was 3.5% for colonoscopy (3/85), 6.7% for CTC (1/17), 9.4% for CT (5/53), and 26.7% for DCBE (4/15). Some patients had a missed diagnosis despite more than one diagnostic test. Time delay to diagnosis ranged from 21-456 days.
Conclusions: 17% of patients diagnosed with CRC had been investigated in the previous 3 years. Higher miss rate of barium enema should preclude its use as a first-line modality to investigate CRC.
Keywords: Keywords Investigation; colorectal cancer; miss rate.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflict of Interest: None
References
-
- Halligan S, Wooldrage K, Dadswell E, et al. Computed tomographic colonography versus barium enema for diagnosis of colorectal cancer or large polyps in symptomatic patients (SIGGAR):a multicentre randomised trial. Lancet. 2013;381:1185–1193. - PubMed
-
- Atkin W, Dadswell E, Wooldrage K, et al. Computed tomographic colonography versus colonoscopy for investigation of patients with symptoms suggestive of colorectal cancer (SIGGAR):a multicentre randomised trial. Lancet. 2013;381:1194–1202. - PubMed
-
- Bressler B, Paszat LF, Chen Z, Rothwell DM, Vinden C, Rabeneck L. Rates of new or missed colorectal cancers after colonoscopy and their risk factors: a population-based analysis. Gastroenterology. 2007;132:96–102. - PubMed
-
- Burch JA, Soares-Weiser K, St John DJ, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of faecal occult blood tests used in screening for colorectal cancer: a systematic review. J Med Screen. 2007;14:132–137. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources