Colonoscopy Withdrawal Time Research Articles

The challenge of quantifying screening colonoscopy quality: Development and psychometric properties of the Colonoscopy Quality Score instrument

Introduction and aimsColonoscopy quality is measured by the degree in which the examination increases the likelihood of obtaining adequate results on health. Our aim was to develop an instrument for evaluating the quality of screening colonoscopies, taking into account the performance of endoscopists and endoscopy units. Materials and methodsMixed methodology was employed. The first stage (qualitative) consisted of a Medline search, from which a group of experts developed the quality score items. The second stage (quantitative) utilized a modified Delphi technique to reach consensus (3 rounds). We evaluated the psychometric properties of the instrument (reliability and construct validity) in elective screening colonoscopies (in patients ≥ 50 years of age), performed within the January–April 2017 time frame. ResultsA final instrument with 8 items was produced: (1) the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale score; (2) cecal intubation rate; (3) colonoscopy withdrawal time; (4) image documentation; (5) adenoma detection rate; (6) endoscopic surveillance planning; (7) perforation rate, and (8) continuous improvement programs. The instrument was evaluated in 323 colonoscopies performed by 31 endoscopists and found to be one-dimensional and reliable (Cronbach’s alpha 0.76). Performance was compared between endoscopists (center 1) and an expert endoscopist from another center (center 2): Boston Bowel Preparation Scale score 8.3 vs. 7.36 (P < .001), cecal intubation rate 93.5 vs. 96%, colonoscopy withdrawal time 14.8 vs. 8.4 min (P < .001), and adenoma detection rate 34 vs. 52.2% (P < .001), respectively. ConclusionThe Colonoscopy Quality Score is a reliable and valid instrument for evaluating screening colonoscopy quality. Its results could be adapted to the usual endoscopic report to adjust monitorization frequency post-colonoscopy.

Longer withdrawal time is not associated with increased patient discomfort in colonoscopy: a retrospective observational study.

Withdrawal time of sufficient length is a quality indicator for colonoscopies. Nonetheless, whether extending the withdrawal time contributes to patient discomfort remains unknown. This study aimed to clarify the relationship between colonoscopy withdrawal time and patient discomfort. A cohort of consecutive patients who underwent colonoscopy at a single institution from October 2018 to January 2020 was retrospectively analyzed. Initially, the relationship between the mean withdrawal time for each colonoscopist in no-finding examinations and polyp detection rate was investigated in 2,043 patients. Subsequently, the primary outcome of association between withdrawal time and patient discomfort, as determined by patient questionnaire, was assessed for each examination in 481 patients from the initial cohort. The mean withdrawal time was strongly correlated with polyp detection rate (correlation coefficient, 0.72; P<0.001). In contrast, longer withdrawal time was not associated with increased discomfort; however, there was a weak inverse correlation between patient discomfort and longer withdrawal time (correlation coefficient, -0.25; P<0.001). Similarly, multiple regression analysis adjusted for confounding variables revealed that longer withdrawal time was not associated with increased patient discomfort (regression coefficient, -0.04 for each 1-minute increase in the length of withdrawal time; P=0.45). This study showed for the first time that longer withdrawal times did not result in increased discomfort, indicating that withdrawal time can be extended to sufficient length for optimal patient examination and polyp detection.

Do Gastroenterologists Have a "Weak" Day? Impact of Day of the Week on the Quality of Outpatient Screening Colonoscopies.

The goal of this study is to determine the significance of day of the work week and its contribution to endoscopist performance using adenoma detection rate (ADR) and proposed surrogate quality measures. Nearly a quarter of adenomas are missed on routine screening colonoscopy which contributes to between 50% and 60% of interval colorectal cancer. Adult patients who underwent outpatient screening colonoscopy between January 2015 and April 2020 were included. Measurement of ADR and proposed quality metrics were analyzed for each day of the work week. Secondary outcomes included rates of good or excellent bowel preparation, trainee fellow participation, performance quartile of individual endoscopists, and patient demographic data. A generalized linear mixed model was used to analyze predictors of ADR. A total of 1884 screening procedures were included in our analysis. ADR on Friday (35.6%) was significantly lower than all other days of the work week ( P <0.001). When compared with Friday, all days were found to be independent predictors of increased ADR. Male gender [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.12-1.65, P =0.002], good rather than excellent bowel preparation (95% CI: 1.22-2.28, P =0.001) and colonoscopy withdrawal time (CWT) (95% CI: 1.02-1.03, P <0.001) were all found to be predictors of increased ADR. Proposed quality indicators were all well correlated with ADR ( r >0.811, P ≤0.001) apart from CWT ( r =0.28, P =0.379). The data suggests there is a decline in endoscopist performance on Friday when compared with all other days of the work week. ADR correlates well with many proposed quality parameters, however, CWT may be of additional value as a quality metric.

Improving trainee colonoscopy performance by investigating the withdrawal time from individual colonic segments: a single-center observational study.

The colonoscopy withdrawal time (WT) and adenoma detection rate (ADR) are widely used quality indicators for colonoscopy. However, no study has investigated the appropriate colonoscopy WTs of individual colonic segments that will allow trainees to achieve a higher ADR. Thus, we analyzed for the first time the relationship between colonoscopy WT and the ADR/polyp detection rate (PDR) in the proximal, left-sided and entire colon among trainees. This retrospective study involved 611 consecutive patients who underwent colonoscopy from March 2018 to March 2019 performed by 6 trainees in the Endoscopy Center of Shanghai General Hospital. The WTs for the individual colonic segments and any significant findings of colonoscopies were retrospectively retrieved from the trainees' records and verified in the endoscopy center database. ADR/PDR was defined as the number of colonoscopies detecting at least 1 polyp/adenoma divided by the total number of colonoscopies. Comparisons of PDR and ADR between the 2 groups were conducted using chi-square test. Multilevel analysis was performed to consider individual differences among the 6 trainees. Multilevel binary logistic regression analysis was performed to analyze the factors that influenced the PDR, ADR and advanced adenoma detection rate (AADR) for the entire colon, and trainee status was included as a random effect. The mean WTs were 4.20±1.09, 4.27±1.12, and 8.48±1.87 minutes for the proximal, left-sided, and entire colon, respectively. A longer WT [odds ratio (OR) 1.499, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.381-1.628, P<0.001; OR 1.409, 95% CI: 1.265-1.569, P<0.001, respectively] was significantly associated with a higher PDR and ADR. The PDR (P<0.001) and ADR (P<0.001) were significantly higher when the WT was >4 minutes than when the WT was ≤4 minutes in both the proximal and left-sided colon, while the PDR (P<0.001) and ADR (P<0.001) were significantly higher when the WT was >8 minutes in the entire colon. In order to improve trainee colonoscopy performance, trainees were recommended to have WTs of at least 4 minutes in the proximal colon, 4 minutes in the left-sided colon and 8 minutes in the entire colon during negative screening colonoscopies.

Impact of the National Endoscopy Database (NED) on colonoscopy withdrawal time: a tertiary centre experience

ObjectiveColonoscopy withdrawal time (CWT) is a key performance indicator affecting polyp detection rate (PDR) and adenoma detection rate (ADR). However, studies have shown wide variation in CWT and ADR between...

Colonoscopy quality indicators in patients with and without prior colonic resection: A single-centre prospective comparative study.

Effective colonoscopy relies on meeting rigorous quality control thresholds. Some earlier studies evaluating colonoscopy key performance indicators (KPIs) have excluded patients who have previously undergone colonic resection (i.e., they have a nonintact colon); such patients also deserve high-quality colonoscopy. This study aimed to compare colonoscopy KPIs between patients with nonintact and intact colons. Consecutive colonoscopies performed at Whanganui Hospital (New Zealand) between September 2016 and March 2020 were included. The primary outcome was the caecal or ileal intubation rate (CIIR). Secondary outcomes were the adenoma detection rate (ADR), polyp detection rate (PDR), colonoscope withdrawal time (CWT) and caecal or ileal intubation time (CIIT). In total, 3017 colonoscopies were performed: 322 in nonintact colons and 2695 in intact colons. CIIR was significantly higher in nonintact than in intact colons (98.4% vs. 95.0%; P=0.0086). When all colonoscopies were included, the CIIR was 95.4%; this value decreased to 95.0% when nonintact colonoscopies were excluded. However, the ADR (39.9% vs. 38.8%; P=0.77) and PDR (58.4% vs. 59.1%; P=0.86) were similar for both nonintact and intact colons. CWT (P<0.0001) and CIIT (P<0.0001) were significantly shorter in participants with nonintact colons. The CIIR exceeded recommended targets and was 3.4% higher in patients with nonintact than intact colons. Patients with nonintact colons comprise a small proportion of the overall colonoscopy cohort and it is unlikely that this small difference is relevant for most endoscopists or endoscopy units. The ADR and PDR were similar among patients with nonintact and intact colons, despite nonintact colonoscopies being significantly quicker. Patients with nonintact colons deserve high-quality colonoscopy and therefore their KPIs should be included in colonoscopy performance reports.

Equity of colonoscopy provision and quality in Māori and New Zealand Europeans: a comparative retrospective study.

High-quality colonoscopy is essential for investigating suspected colorectal cancer and relies on endoscopists meeting key performance indicator (KPI) targets. The rising demand for colonoscopy raises concerns that Māori populations could be under-served. This study aimed to compare rates of colonoscopy provision and colonoscopy KPIs between Māori and New Zealand (NZ) European patients. This retrospective comparative study was conducted at Whanganui Hospital (NZ). Consecutive colonoscopies performed between September 2016 and March 2020 were included. Primary outcome was the rate of colonoscopy provision for the population. Secondary outcomes were the colonoscopy completion rate (CCR), colonoscope withdrawal time (CWT), polyp detection rate (PDR) and adenoma detection rate (ADR). Subgroup analysis of ADR in index symptomatic colonoscopies was also performed. A total of 2962 colonoscopies were analysed (385 Māori; 2577 NZ European). Rates of colonoscopy provision in participants aged ≥40 were significantly lower among Māori (6.1% versus 9.1%; P < 0.0001). The CCR (P=1.00), CWT (P=0.28) and PDR (P=0.24) were similar. Whilst the ADR in the overall cohort was significantly lower in Māori (32.7% versus 40.0%; P=0.028), this was not observed when stratified by 10-year age cohorts. The ADR was similar on subgroup analysis of index symptomatic colonoscopies (P=0.42). This study found inequities in access to colonoscopy services for Māori compared to NZ European patients. Among those that did receive colonoscopy, there were no differences in colonoscopy quality after age stratification. Improving equity will require the addition of colonoscopy provision rates to other mandatory KPIs and reporting these by ethnicity in all endoscopy units.

Colonoscopic techniques in polyp detection: An Egyptian study

Introduction and aimsThe polyp detection rate is defined as the percentage of colonoscopies in which one or more polyps are detected, and has been shown to be highly correlated with the adenoma detection rate. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the polyp detection rate at the Endoscopy Unit of the Kasr Al-Ainy Hospital, Cairo University, Egypt, through the i-SCAN, Endocuff, and underwater colonoscopy techniques. Materials and methodsThe study was conducted on 100 Egyptian subjects over 50 years of age. Their polyp detection rate was measured through 4 different colonoscopic techniques. An equal number of patients were divided into 4 groups: i-SCAN, Endocuff, underwater colonoscopy, and controls. The control group was examined using standard white light colonoscopy. The colonoscopy evaluation included the type of agent utilized for bowel preparation, preparation grade, and colonoscopy withdrawal time. ResultsThe general polyp detection rate was 48%. The i-SCAN technique had the highest rate (56%), followed by the underwater (52%) and the Endocuff (48%) techniques. ConclusionThe i-SCAN and underwater colonoscopy techniques produced higher polyp detection rates than the Endocuff-assisted and standard techniques, but with no statistical significance.

Colonoscopic techniques in polyp detection: An Egyptian study.

The polyp detection rate (PDR) is defined as the percentage of colonoscopies in which one or more polyps are detected, and has been shown to be highly correlated with the adenoma detection rate. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the PDR at the Endoscopy Unit of the Kasr Al-Ainy Hospital, Cairo University, Egypt, through the i-SCAN, Endocuff, and underwater colonoscopy techniques. The study was conducted on 100 Egyptian subjects over 50 years of age. Their polyp detection rate was measured through 4 different colonoscopic techniques. An equal number of patients were divided into 4 groups: i-SCAN, Endocuff, underwater colonoscopy, and controls. The control group was examined using standard white light colonoscopy. The colonoscopy evaluation included the type of agent utilized for bowel preparation, preparation grade, and colonoscopy withdrawal time. The general PDR was 48%. The i-SCAN technique had the highest rate (56%), followed by the underwater (52%) and the Endocuff (48%) techniques. The i-SCAN and underwater colonoscopy techniques produced higher PDR than the Endocuff-assisted and standard techniques, but with no statistical significance.

Improved adenoma detection with linked color imaging technology compared to white-light colonoscopy

ObjectivesLinked color imaging (LCI) is a new endoscopic technology that may increase colorectal adenoma detection rate (ADR) and polyp detection rate (PDR) by virtual chromoendoscopy. Aim of the present study was to evaluate the effectiveness of LCI in ADR and PDR compared to the HD white-light colonoscopy (WLC) technique.Materials and methodsBetween October 2016 and June 2018, we enrolled consecutive outpatients prospectively. Eligible patients allocated randomly to undergo HD WLC or LCI colonoscopy technique during instrument withdrawal. Each colonoscopy was performed in a single center by the same three expert endoscopists (with expertise more than 5000 colonoscopies).ResultsA total of 1278 patients underwent colonoscopy in the study period. ADR and PDR were significantly higher in the LCI group compared to the WLC group (34.4% vs. 26.8%; p = .007; and 53.3% vs 46.4%; p = .023, respectively). Similarly, the mean number of adenomas per patient (MAP) was significantly higher with the LCI than WLC (0.64 vs 0.44, respectively; p = .002). The mean age of patients at the time of colonoscopy was 51.95 years (SD = 13.861) in the LCI group and 51.96 years (SD = 14.028) in the WLC group. No significant differences observed in patient demographic characteristics (there was no difference in gender and age distribution, p = .986), quality of colonoscopy preparation and withdrawal times (WT) between the two groups (WLC and the LCI groups, 493.9 (SD: 143.5) and 514.0 (SD: 139.5) sec, respectively).ConclusionsAccording to our results, LCI virtual chromoendoscopic technology was superior compared to conventional HD WLC in detecting colorectal polyps and adenomas.

The Relationship between Post-colonoscopy Colorectal Cancer and Quality Indicators of Colonoscopy: The Latest Single-center Cohort Study with a Review of the Literature.

Objective This study aims to elucidate the association between the clinical characteristics of post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer (PCCRC) and quality indicators (QIs) of colonoscopy. Methods Patients with PCCRC who underwent total colonoscopy (TCS) and were histologically diagnosed with adenocarcinoma within six months to five years of the last examination were included in this study. PCCRC and normally detected cancer (NDC) identified within the same period were compared in terms of their clinicopathological characteristics. Furthermore, the QIs at PCCRC detection were compared to those at the last examination. Results Patients with PCCRC had a significantly higher rate of colon surgery history than those with NDC (PCCRC: 25/76, 32.9%; NDC: 31/1,437, 2.2%; p<0.001), but the invasion depth in these patients was significantly shallower (PCCRC: ≤Tis/≥T1, 37/39; NDC: ≤Tis/≥T1, 416/1,021; p<0.001). Among patients with PCCRC, the T1b group had significantly more non-polypoid growth (NPG)-type cases than PG-type CRC cases (p=0.018). The adenoma detection rate (ADR) of colonoscopists performing TCS was 30.2-52.8%. Furthermore, the ADR of colonoscopists at the time of PCCRC detection (36.7%±5.9%) was significantly higher than that of colonoscopists who performed the last examination (34.9%±4.4%; p=0.034). The withdrawal time for negative colonoscopy (WT-NC) at detection was significantly longer than that at the last examination (at detection: 494.3±253.8 s; at last examination: 579.5±243.6 s; p=0.010). Conclusion Given that these PCCRC cases were post-colon surgery cases, had a long WT-NC, and were detected by colonoscopists with a high ADR, most cases showed lesions that were missed during the previous colonoscopy. Caution should be practiced in order to avoid missing flat, NPG-type tumors.

Longer Withdrawal Time Is More Important than Excellent Bowel Preparation in Colonoscopy of Adequate Bowel Preparation.

Adequate bowel preparation is crucial for effective screening colonoscopy. However, it is unclear whether higher bowel preparation scores correspond to beneficial effects on the adenoma and polyp detection rate (ADR and PDR) in the adequate bowel preparation group. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of bowel preparation, according to the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS), and colonoscopy withdrawal time (CWT) on ADR and PDR in the adequate bowel preparation group. Healthy examinees between 50 and 75years old who underwent colonoscopy between September 2015 and August 2016 were included. BBPS scores, CWT, ADR, and PDR were reviewed retrospectively. Predictors of ADR and PDR were analyzed with a generalized linear mixed model. A total of 5073 cases with adequate bowel preparation (BBPS ≥ 6) were analyzed. Examinees with good (BBPS = 6, 7) and excellent (BBPS = 8, 9) bowel preparation were 1898 (37.4%) and 3175 (62.6%), respectively. Both ADR and PDR were higher in the good bowel preparation group than in the excellent bowel preparation group (ADR 47.3% vs. 45.0%, P = 0.035; PDR 73.7% vs. 69.5%, P = 0.004, respectively). In the multivariate analysis, CWT, rather than BBPS, was significantly associated with both ADR (OR 1.04; 95% CI 1.02-1.06; P < 0.001) and PDR (OR 1.05; 95% CI 1.02-1.07; P = 0.002). Both ADR and PDR were lower when bowel preparation was excellent rather than good. However, CWT, not BBPS, was significantly associated with ADR and PDR in the adequate bowel preparation group. Therefore, meticulous inspection is important for high-quality colonoscopy regardless of the BBPS score in examinees with adequate bowel preparation.

Impact of Endoscopists' Personality Traits on Adenoma and Polyp Detection Rates in Colonoscopy: A KASID Multicenter Study.

The personality traits of endoscopists have been suggested to affect the adenoma detection rate (ADR). We thus evaluated the relationship between endoscopists' personality traits and the ADR during colonoscopy using the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2). In total, 1230 patients (asymptomatic and aged 50-80years) who underwent screening or surveillance (≥ 5years) colonoscopy were recruited from 13 university hospitals by 20 endoscopists between September 2015 and December 2017. We retrospectively measured the ADR, polyp detection rate (PDR), and number of adenomas per colonoscopy (APC). All 20 endoscopists completed all 567 true/false MMPI-2 items. The overall mean colonoscopy withdrawal time, PDR, ADR, and APC were 7.3 ± 2.8min, 55%, 45.3%, and 0.97 ± 1.58, respectively. No significant difference was observed in the MMPI-2 clinical scales (e.g., hypochondriasis and psychasthenia), content scales (e.g., obsessiveness and type A character), or supplementary scales (e.g., dominance and social responsibility) between the high ADR group (ADR ≥45%, n = 10) and the low ADR group (ADR < 45%, n = 10). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, the ADR was associated significantly with patient age and sex. The ADR was related significantly to endoscopists' colonoscopy experience and the per-minute increase in the colonoscopy withdrawal time (OR 1.21, 95% CI 1.06-1.38, p = 0.005). In a logistic regression analysis adjusted for patient factors, the ADR was associated significantly with ego strength (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.00-1.09, p = 0.044), as measured by the MMPI-2. With the exception of ego strength, the endoscopists' personality traits were not associated with adenoma or polyp detection.

Detection of colorectal adenomas with a real-time computer-aided system (ENDOANGEL): a randomised controlled study

Colonoscopy performance varies among endoscopists, impairing the discovery of colorectal cancers and precursor lesions. We aimed to construct a real-time quality improvement system (ENDOANGEL) to monitor real-time withdrawal speed and colonoscopy withdrawal time and to remind endoscopists of blind spots caused by endoscope slipping. We also aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of this system for improving adenoma yield of everyday colonoscopy. The ENDOANGEL system was developed using deep neural networks and perceptual hash algorithms. We recruited consecutive patients aged 18-75 years from Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University in China who provided written informed consent. We randomly assigned patients (1:1) using computer-generated random numbers and block randomisation (block size of four) to either colonoscopy with the ENDOANGEL system or unassisted colonoscopy (control). Endoscopists were not masked to the random assignment but analysts and patients were unaware of random assignments. The primary endpoint was the adenoma detection rate (ADR), which is the proportion of patients having one or more adenomas detected at colonoscopy. The primary analysis was done per protocol (ie, in all patients having colonoscopy done in accordance with the assigned intervention) and by intention to treat (ie, in all randomised patients). This trial is registered with http://www.chictr.org.cn, ChiCTR1900021984. Between June 18, 2019, and Sept 6, 2019, 704 patients were randomly allocated colonoscopy with the ENDOANGEL system (n=355) or unassisted (control) colonoscopy (n=349). In the intention-to-treat population, ADR was significantly greater in the ENDOANGEL group than in the control group, with 58 (16%) of 355 patients allocated ENDOANGEL-assisted colonoscopy having one or more adenomas detected, compared with 27 (8%) of 349 allocated control colonoscopy (odds ratio [OR] 2·30, 95% CI 1·40-3·77; p=0·0010). In the per-protocol analysis, findings were similar, with 54 (17%) of 324 patients assigned ENDOANGEL-assisted colonoscopy and 26 (8%) of 318 patients assigned control colonoscopy having one or more adenomas detected (OR 2·18, 95% CI 1·31-3·62; p=0·0026). No adverse events were reported. The ENDOANGEL system significantly improved the adenoma yield during colonoscopy and seems to be effective and safe for use during routine colonoscopy. Hubei Provincial Clinical Research Center for Digestive Disease Minimally Invasive Incision, Hubei Province Major Science and Technology Innovation Project, and the National Natural Science Foundation of China.

Colonoscopy withdrawal time and polyp/adenoma detection rate: a single-site retrospective study in regional Queensland.

Bowel cancer is the second most common non-cutaneous cancer diagnosed in Australia among both genders. Colonoscopy withdrawal time of at least 6 min has been accepted as the standard to achieve the target polyp detection rate (PDR) and adenoma detection rate (ADR). A retrospective review was conducted in Bundaberg Hospital to evaluate the relationship between colonoscopy withdrawal time against polyp, adenoma and cancer detection rates. A retrospective study was carried out in Bundaberg Hospital on patients who had colonoscopies performed between 1 October 2016 and 30 September 2017 by the general surgical team. Data collection was conducted by reviewing patient charts, general practitioner referral letters and endoscopy reports. Statistical analysis was performed with chi-squared test using Prism 8.2.1. A total of 1579 colonoscopies were analysed. The median age of patients undergoing a colonoscopy was 64 years (95% confidence interval (CI) 60.55-61.93). Median total duration of colonoscopy was 19 min (95% CI 20.9-22.0), with median withdrawal time of 9 min (95% CI 10.06-10.95). PDR, ADR and sessile serrated adenoma (SSA) detection rates were 43.3%, 33.1% and 5.4%, respectively. Cancer detection rate was 2.8%. Longer withdrawal times were associated with higher PDR, ADR and SSA detection rates (P < 0.0001) and higher mean number of polyp/adenoma/SSA detected. Colonoscopies with withdrawal times of less than 6 min did not achieve the target detection rates. It is clear that achieving the advocated withdrawal time for screening colonoscopy improves detection rates.

P299 A prospective randomised trial comparing dye-based chromoendoscopy with electronic virtual chromoendoscopy for detection of colonic neoplastic lesions during IBD surveillance colonoscopy

Abstract Background Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) have an increased risk of colorectal cancer. Dye-based chromoendoscopy (CE) is the currently recommended method for the detection of dysplasia in IBD surveillance colonoscopy; the role of virtual chromoendoscopy (VCE) is not yet well defined. To compare CE with VCE using iSCAN1 digital image enhanced colonoscopy in the detection of colonic neoplastic lesions in IBD patients. Methods Randomised, single-centre trial to assess the detection rate of colonic neoplastic lesions in patients with long-standing IBD. Patients were randomised in two arms: dye-spraying CE using indigo carmine and electronic VCE using iSCAN1 digital image. Detection rates of dysplasia or any neoplastic lesion were compared by the two endoscopic techniques. Results A total of 129 patients were studied (67 by CE and 62 by VCE). Demographic and clinical characteristics were homogeneous in the two groups; 26 Crohn′s disease and 103 ulcerative colitis, 52% women, mean age 50 years, median duration of IBD 204 months, family history of colorectal cancer in 10 (8%), associated primary sclerosing cholangitis in 8 (6%), personal history of colorectal dysplastic lesions in 12 (9%), and more than 50% colonic involvement in 72 (56%). In total, 27 lesions (9 hyperplastic, 8 adenomatous and 10 low-grade dysplasia) were detected in 23 patients, without differences between CE and VCE arms (15 [22%] and 12 [19%] lesions, respectively; p = 0.98); on the other hand, neoplastic lesion (dysplasia or adenoma) detection rates was similar (12 [18%] in CE and 6 [10%] in VCE arms, p = 0.2). The duration of the withdrawal time of colonoscopy in minutes for patients in the CE group was median 14 min and in the VCE group was median 10 min (p &amp;lt; 0.001). Conclusion There is no statistical difference between CE and VCE using iSCAN1 in the detection rate of colonic neoplastic lesions in IBD patients. Surveillance colonoscopy with VCE (iSCAN1) spends less time than conventional CE.

Determination of withdrawal times in individualized opportunistic screening colonoscopies.

To investigate effects of bowel preparation, experience level of colonoscopists, and colonoscopy withdrawal time (CWT) on the quality of an individual opportunistic screening colonoscopy, according to adenoma detection rate (ADR).Data were retrospectively analyzed from opportunistic screening colonoscopies (n = 16,951) at 4 hospitals of various care levels in China.The ADR positively correlated with the experience level of the colonoscopist. The individualized CWT varied, depending on the quality of bowel preparation and the number of colonoscopies performed previously by the colonoscopist. In a setting of adequate bowel preparation, the mean CWT decreased with the increased experience of the colonoscopist. With poor and inadequate bowel preparation, no colonoscopist at any level of experience could obtain a satisfactory ADR.For adequately prepared colonoscopies, minimum CWTs have been determined. Repeat colonoscopy is strongly recommended for patients with poor bowel preparation, regardless of the colonoscopist's experience.

Case report of synchronous post-lung transplant colon cancers in the era of colorectal cancer screening recommendations in cystic fibrosis: screening \u201ctoo early\u201d before it\u2019s too late

BackgroundThe increasing life expectancy of individuals with Cystic Fibrosis (CF) is likely to be associated with new age-related challenges, colorectal cancer (CRC) most notably; recent consensus recommendations for CRC screening published in 2018 represent an important early step in addressing the emerging awareness of CF as a gastrointestinal cancer syndrome. These recommendations, however, need to be further refined based on more systematic data. We discuss an illustrative first-ever case of synchronous CRC arising in a post-lung transplant individual with CF within the recommended surveillance interval after a well-documented prior normal colonoscopy.Case presentationA 51-year-old female individual with homozygous F508del CF, presents to clinic with abdominal discomfort and intermittent blood in stools. She had previously undergone bilateral lung transplantation 18 years earlier, as well as two kidney transplants related to immunosuppression-related nephrotoxicity. A diagnostic colonoscopy was performed which revealed the presence of two separate synchronous colon cancers in the cecum and transverse colon; she had undergone a colonoscopy three years prior to this exam which was structurally normal. Endoscopic quality indicators, including a good quality bowel preparation, colonoscopic withdrawal time > 12 min, and quarterly Adenoma Detection Rate (ADR) ranging from 50 to 70% for both male and female patients for the endoscopist from both colonoscopic exams, as well as secondary retrospective comparative review of the pertinent case images, diminish the risk for a “missed” cancer or advanced lesion on the index exam. These cancers did not demonstrate any immunohistochemical features suggestive of Lynch Syndrome, though the rapid progression to cancer within the surveillance interval (possibly non-polypoid in nature) is similar. This cancer presentation within the newly-established recommended colon cancer screening interval warrants concern.ConclusionsThis case prompts serious discussion regarding the length of surveillance intervals in the post-transplant CF population (a population at 20–30 times greater risk for CRC compared to the general non-CF population), as well as the importance of documenting endoscopic quality benchmarks, particularly if a narrative of interval CRC development continues to develop with further prospective monitoring and multi-center experience.

The Effect of Midyear Report Cards on Colonoscopy Quality Measures.

Introduction Since 2011, our institution has distributed annual reports, in June, to providers with personalized data regarding adenoma detection rate (ADR), colonoscope withdrawal time (CW), and cecal intubation (CI) rate, using standardized reporting systems. We examined the impact of distribution of individualized reports at the midpoint of each year on colonoscopy outcomes in the latter half of each year. Methods Providers with endoscopy privileges, performing ≥20 colonoscopies/year, at our center throughout a five-year period (2011-2015) were included. The three metrics recorded and reported were ADR, CW, and CI using standard benchmark rates. The mean values of each metric from January through June (1st half) and July through December (2nd half) were calculated. Curve estimation test was used to determine the significance of ADR in the respective time period. Results Fifteen providers were eligible for the study. Collective ADR in the 1st half of all years was 26.9% and in the second half of all years was 28.1% (p = 0.476). CW for all years was more than 9 minutes while CI was above 90% for all providers. There was no significant increase in the CI and CW during the 5-year study period. Overall, ADR increased from 26.43% (2011) to 33.47% (2015) (p = 0.137). When examining ADR during each of the 12 months following the June report cards, there was no month-to-month trend observed (p = 0.893). Conclusion Endoscopists at our institutions met/exceeded the quality metrics in the first half of each year from the beginning of the study. Routine reporting may maintain, but not improve, outcomes. Long-term studies to determine if periodic feedback to endoscopists improves the quality of endoscopy as per national standards for detection of early colorectal cancers are required.

Does the withdrawal time affect adenoma detection in non-screening colonoscopies?

AimsThere are no studies looking at the relationship between colonoscopy withdrawal time (CWT) and adenoma detection rate (ADR) in non-screening patients. Our aim is to explore the relationship between CWT...