Interendoscopist variability in proximal colon polyp detection is twice higher for serrated polyps than adenomas
- PMID: 27784967
- PMCID: PMC5064036
- DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v22.i38.8549
Interendoscopist variability in proximal colon polyp detection is twice higher for serrated polyps than adenomas
Abstract
Aim: To assess the interendoscopist variability in the detection of colorectal polyps according to their location and histological type.
Methods: This study was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from a regional colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program; 2979 complete colonoscopies from 18 endoscopists were included. Variability in performance between endoscopists for detection of at least one adenoma (A), one proximal adenoma (PA), one distal adenoma (DA), and one proximal serrated polyp (PSP) was assessed by using multilevel logistic regression models.
Results: The observed detection rates among the 18 endoscopists ranged from 24.6% to 47.6% (mean = 35.7%) for A, from 19.1% to 39.0% (mean = 29.4%) for DA, from 6.0% to 22.9% (mean = 12.4%) for PA, and from 1.3% to 19.3% (mean = 6.9%) for PSP. After adjusting for patient-level variables (sex, age), the interendoscopist detection rates variability achieved a significant level for A, PA, and PSP but not for DA (P = 0.03, P = 0.02, P = 0.02 and P = 0.08, respectively). This heterogeneity, as measured by the variance partition coefficient, was approximately threefold higher for PA (6.6%) compared with A (2.1%), and twofold higher for PSP (12.3%) compared with PA.
Conclusion: These results demonstrate significant interendoscopist variability for proximal polyp particularly for serrated polyps, but not for distal adenoma detection. These findings contribute to explain the decreased effectiveness of complete colonoscopies at preventing proximal CRCs and the need to carefully assess the proximal colon during scope procedure.
Keywords: Adenoma; Colonoscopy; Colorectal cancer; Detection rate; Proximal polyp; Quality performance; Serrated polyp.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflict-of-interest statement: The authors have no potential conflict of interest.
Similar articles
-
The proximal serrated polyp detection rate is an easy-to-measure proxy for the detection rate of clinically relevant serrated polyps.Gastrointest Endosc. 2015 Nov;82(5):870-7. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2015.02.044. Epub 2015 Apr 29. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015. PMID: 25935704
-
Prevalence and variable detection of proximal colon serrated polyps during screening colonoscopy.Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2011 Jan;9(1):42-6. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2010.09.013. Epub 2010 Oct 1. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2011. PMID: 20888435
-
Findings in the distal colorectum are not associated with proximal advanced serrated lesions.Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015 Feb;13(2):345-51. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2014.07.044. Epub 2014 Jul 30. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015. PMID: 25083562
-
Magnitude, Risk Factors, and Factors Associated With Adenoma Miss Rate of Tandem Colonoscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Gastroenterology. 2019 May;156(6):1661-1674.e11. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2019.01.260. Epub 2019 Feb 6. Gastroenterology. 2019. PMID: 30738046
-
[Serrated, hyperplastic and hyperplasia-like colorectal polyps].Ugeskr Laeger. 2006 Nov 13;168(46):4005-9. Ugeskr Laeger. 2006. PMID: 17125655 Review. Danish.
Cited by
-
Serrated Colorectal Lesions in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease.Gastroenterol Hepatol (N Y). 2018 Jan;14(1):19-25. Gastroenterol Hepatol (N Y). 2018. PMID: 29491757 Free PMC article.
-
The National Endoscopy Database (NED) Automated Performance Reports to Improve Quality Outcomes Trial (APRIQOT) randomized controlled trial design.Endosc Int Open. 2020 Nov;8(11):E1545-E1552. doi: 10.1055/a-1261-3151. Epub 2020 Oct 21. Endosc Int Open. 2020. PMID: 33140009 Free PMC article.
-
Impact of high-volume, intermediate-volume and low-volume bowel preparation on colonoscopy quality and patient satisfaction: An observational study.United European Gastroenterol J. 2019 Feb;7(1):114-124. doi: 10.1177/2050640618809842. Epub 2018 Nov 4. United European Gastroenterol J. 2019. PMID: 30788123 Free PMC article.
-
Multitarget Stool DNA Screening in Clinical Practice: High Positive Predictive Value for Colorectal Neoplasia Regardless of Exposure to Previous Colonoscopy.Am J Gastroenterol. 2020 Apr;115(4):608-615. doi: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000000546. Am J Gastroenterol. 2020. PMID: 32068535 Free PMC article.
-
Prevalence and Clinical Features of Sessile Serrated Polyps: A Systematic Review.Gastroenterology. 2020 Jul;159(1):105-118.e25. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2020.03.025. Epub 2020 Mar 18. Gastroenterology. 2020. PMID: 32199884 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Cottet V, Jooste V, Fournel I, Bouvier AM, Faivre J, Bonithon-Kopp C. Long-term risk of colorectal cancer after adenoma removal: a population-based cohort study. Gut. 2012;61:1180–1186. - PubMed
-
- Brenner H, Chang-Claude J, Seiler CM, Rickert A, Hoffmeister M. Protection from colorectal cancer after colonoscopy: a population-based, case-control study. Ann Intern Med. 2011;154:22–30. - PubMed
-
- Lakoff J, Paszat LF, Saskin R, Rabeneck L. Risk of developing proximal versus distal colorectal cancer after a negative colonoscopy: a population-based study. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2008;6:1117–1121; quiz 1064. - PubMed
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous