Artificial Intelligence for Real-Time Prediction of the Histology of Colorectal Polyps by General Endoscopists.

BACKGROUND: Real-time prediction of histologic features of small colorectal polyps may prevent resection and/or pathologic evaluation and therefore decrease colonoscopy costs. Previous studies showed that computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) was highly accurate, though it did not outperform expert endoscopists. OBJECTIVE: To assess the diagnostic performance of histologic predictions by general endoscopists before and after assistance from CADx in a real-life setting. DESIGN: Prospective, multicenter, single-group study. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04437615). SETTING: 6 centers across the United States. PARTICIPANTS: 1252 consecutive patients undergoing colonoscopy and 49 general endoscopists with variable experience in real-time prediction of polyp histologic features. INTERVENTION: Real-time use of CADx during routine colonoscopy. MEASUREMENTS: The primary end points were the sensitivity and specificity of CADx-unassisted and CADx-assisted histologic predictions for adenomas measuring 5 mm or less. For clinical purposes, additional estimates according to location and confidence level were provided. RESULTS: The CADx device made a diagnosis for 2695 polyps measuring 5 mm or less (96%) in 1252 patients. There was no difference in sensitivity between the unassisted and assisted groups (90.7% vs. 90.8%; P = 0.52). Specificity was higher in the CADx-assisted group (59.5% vs. 64.7%; P < 0.001). Among all 2695 polyps measuring 5 mm or less, 88.2% and 86.1% (P < 0.001) in the CADx-assisted and unassisted groups, respectively, could be resected and discarded without pathologic evaluation. Among 743 rectosigmoid polyps measuring 5 mm or less, 49.5% and 47.9% (P < 0.001) in the CADx-assisted and unassisted groups, respectively, could be left in situ without resection. LIMITATION: Decision making based on CADx might differ outside a clinical trial. CONCLUSION: CADx assistance did not result in increased sensitivity of optical diagnosis. Despite a slight increase, the specificity of CADx-assisted diagnosis remained suboptimal. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Olympus America Corporation served as the clinical study sponsor.

Effect of an online educational module incorporating real-time feedback on accuracy of polyp sizing in trainees: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Although polyp size dictates surveillance intervals, endoscopists often estimate polyp size inaccurately. We hypothesized that an intervention providing didactic instruction and real-time feedback could significantly improve polyp size classification. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter randomized controlled trial to evaluate the impact of different components of an online educational module on polyp sizing. Participants were randomized to control (no video, no feedback), video only, feedback only, or video + feedback. The primary outcome was accuracy of polyp size classification into clinically relevant categories (diminutive [1-5mm], small [6-9mm], large [≥10mm]). Secondary outcomes included accuracy of exact polyp size (inmm), learning curves, and directionality of inaccuracy (over- vs. underestimation). RESULTS: 36 trainees from five training programs provided 1360 polyp size assessments. The feedback only (80.1%, P=0.01) and video + feedback (78.9%, P=0.02) groups had higher accuracy of polyp size classification compared with controls (71.6%). There was no significant difference in accuracy between the video only group (74.4%) and controls (P=0.42). Groups receiving feedback had higher accuracy of exact polyp size (inmm) and higher peak learning curves. Polyps were more likely to be overestimated than underestimated, and 29.3% of size inaccuracies impacted recommended surveillance intervals. CONCLUSIONS: Our online educational module significantly improved polyp size classification. Real-time feedback appeared to be a critical component in improving accuracy. This scalable and no-cost educational module could significantly decrease under- and overutilization of colonoscopy, improving patient outcomes while increasing colonoscopy access.

Baseline Characteristics and Longitudinal Outcomes of Traditional Serrated Adenomas: A Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Traditional serrated adenomas (TSAs) may confer increased risk for colorectal cancer (CRC). Our objective with this study was to examine clinical characteristics and long-term outcomes associated with TSA diagnosis. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of U.S. Veterans ≥18 years of age with ≥1 TSA between 1999 and 2018. Baseline characteristics, colonoscopy findings, and diagnosis of incident and fatal CRC were abstracted. Advanced neoplasia was defined by CRC or adenoma with high-grade dysplasia, villous histology, or size ≥1 cm. Follow-up was through CRC diagnosis, death, or end of study (December 31, 2018). RESULTS: A total of 853 Veterans with a baseline TSA were identified; 74% were ≥60 years of age, 96% were men, 14% were Black, and 73% were non-Hispanic White. About 64% were current or former smokers. Over 2044 total person-years at follow-up, there were 11 incident CRC cases and 1 CRC death. Cumulative CRC incidence was 1.34% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.67%-2.68%), and cumulative CRC death was 0.12% (95% CI, 0.00%-0.35%). Among the subset of 378 TSA patients with ≥1 surveillance colonoscopy, 65.1% had high-risk neoplasia on follow-up. CRC incidence among TSA patients was significantly higher than in a comparison cohort of patients with normal baseline colonoscopy at baseline (hazard ratio, 3.70; 95% CI, 1.63-8.41) and similar to a comparison cohort with baseline conventional advanced adenoma (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.45-1.64). CONCLUSION: Individuals with TSA have substantial risk for CRC based on their cumulative CRC incidence, as well as significant risk of developing other high-risk neoplasia at follow-up surveillance colonoscopy. These data underscore importance of current recommendations for close colonoscopy surveillance after TSA diagnosis.

Adenoma Detection Rate and Clinical Characteristics Influence Advanced Neoplasia Risk After Colorectal Polypectomy.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Postpolypectomy risk stratification for subsequent metachronous advanced neoplasia (MAN) is imprecise and does not account for colonoscopist adenoma detection rate (ADR). Our aim was to assess association of ADR with MAN and create a prediction model for postpolypectomy risk stratification incorporating ADR and other factors. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of individuals with baseline polypectomy and subsequent surveillance colonoscopy from 2004 to 2016 within the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). Clinical factors, polyp findings, and baseline colonoscopist ADR were considered for the model. Model performance (sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve) for identifying individuals with MAN was compared with 2020 U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer (USMSTF) surveillance recommendations. RESULTS: A total of 30,897 individuals were randomly assigned 2:1 into independent model training and validation sets. Increasing age, male sex, diabetes, current smoking, adenoma number, polyp location, adenoma ≥10 mm or with tubulovillous/villous features, and decreasing colonoscopist ADR were independently associated with MAN. A range of 1.48- to 1.66-fold increased risk for MAN was observed for ADR in the lowest 3 quintiles (ADR <19.7%-39.3%) vs the highest quintile (ADR >47.0%). When the final model selected based on the training set was applied to the validation set, improved sensitivity and specificity over 2020 USMSTF risk stratification were achieved (P = .001), with an area under the curve of 0.62 (95% confidence interval, 0.60-0.64). CONCLUSIONS: Colonoscopist ADR is associated with MAN. Combining clinical factors and ADR for risk stratification has potential to improve postpolypectomy risk stratification. Improving ADR is likely to improve postpolypectomy outcomes.

Varied Trainee Competence in Cold Snare Polypectomy: Results of the COMPLETE Randomized Controlled Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Cold snare polypectomy (CSP) is strongly recommended as the optimal technique for the complete removal of small polyps. Though significant variability in polypectomy technique and quality has been established, the learning curve and impact of targeted training on CSP are unknown. Video feedback has shown promise as an effective pedagogy to improve performance among surgical trainees. We aimed to compare CSP performance between trainees who received video-based feedback and those who received conventional apprentice-based concurrent feedback. We hypothesized that video-based feedback would accelerate competence. METHODS: We conducted a single-blinded, randomized controlled trial on competence for CSP of polyps <1 cm, comparing video-based feedback with conventional feedback. We randomly assigned deidentified consecutively recorded CSP videos to blinded raters to assess using the CSP Assessment Tool. We shared cumulative sum learning curves every 25 CSP with each trainee. The video feedback trainees also received biweekly individualized terminal feedback. Control trainees received conventional feedback during colonoscopy. The primary outcome was CSP competence. We also assessed competence across domains and change over polypectomy volume. RESULTS: We enrolled and randomized 22 trainees, 12 to video-based feedback and 10 to conventional feedback, and evaluated 2,339 CSP. The learning curve was long; 2 trainees (16.7%) in the video feedback achieved competence, after a mean of 135 polyps, and no one in the control ( P = 0.481) achieved competence. Overall and in all steps of CSP, a higher percentage of the video feedback group met competence, increasing 3% every 20 CSP ( P = 0.0004). DISCUSSION: Video feedback aided trainees to competence in CSP. However, the learning curve was long. Our findings strongly suggest that current training methods are not sufficient to support trainees to competency by the completion of their fellowship programs. The impact of new training methods, such as simulation-based mastery learning, should be assessed to determine whether such methods can result in achievement of competence at a faster rate; ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT03115008.

Longitudinal outcomes of the endoscopic resection of nonpolypoid dysplastic lesions in patients with inflammatory bowel disease.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are at risk of developing dysplasia. According to the Surveillance for Colorectal Endoscopic Neoplasia Detection and Management in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients: International Consensus Recommendations, "After complete removal of endoscopically resectable nonpolypoid dysplastic lesions, surveillance colonoscopy is suggested rather than colectomy." We sought to add data to the literature and hypothesized that the endoscopic resection of nonpolypoid colorectal dysplasia (NP-CRD) is safe and effective. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of a large cohort of patients with IBD at 2 medical centers who underwent colonoscopy between 2007 and 2018. Patients with at least 1 nonpolypoid lesion ≥10 mm were identified. We measured the feasibility of endoscopic resection, incidence of local recurrence, incidence of cancer, need for surgery, and frequency of adverse events. RESULTS: We studied 326 patients who underwent a mean ± standard deviation of 3.6 ± 3.0 (range, 1-16) colonoscopies during a total follow-up of 1208 patient-years. In 36 patients, 161 lesions ≥10 mm were identified, 63 of which were nonpolypoid (mean size, 17.8 ± 8.9 mm; range, 10-45 mm) (prevalence, 7.7%). The majority of nonpolypoid lesions (96.8% [61 of 63]) were managed endoscopically. Four lesions (mean index lesion size, 32.5 ±11.0 mm) had small local recurrences that were successfully retreated with endoscopy. There were no severe adverse events related to IBD or colorectal cancer observed in the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: In this IBD cohort, surveillance colonoscopy rather than colectomy was found to be safe and effective in patients with NP-CRD after undergoing endoscopic resection. After complete removal of endoscopically resectable NP-CRD, surveillance colonoscopy should be considered a safe and effective first-line strategy rather than colectomy.

Adenoma Detection Rate (ADR) Irrespective of Indication Is Comparable to Screening ADR: Implications for Quality Monitoring.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is a key measure of colonoscopy quality. However, efficient measurement of ADR can be challenging because many colonoscopies are performed for non-screening purposes. Measuring ADR without being restricted to screening indication may likely facilitate more widespread implementation of quality monitoring. We hypothesized that the ADR for all colonoscopies, irrespective of the indication, would be equivalent to the ADR for screening colonoscopies. METHODS: We reviewed consecutive colonoscopies at two Veterans Affairs centers performed by 21 endoscopists over 6 months in 2015. We calculated the ADR for screening exams, non-screening (surveillance and diagnostic) exams, and all exams (irrespective of indication), correcting for within-endoscopist correlation. We then performed simulation modeling to calculate the ADRs under 16 hypothetical scenarios of various indication distributions. We simulated 100,000 trials with 3,000 participants, randomly assigned indication (screening, surveillance, diagnostic, and FIT+) from a multinomial distribution, randomly drew adenoma using the observed ADRs per indication, and calculated 95% confidence intervals of the mean differences in ADR of screening and non-screening indications. RESULTS: Among 2628 colonoscopies performed by 21 gastroenterologists, the indication was screening in 28.9%, surveillance in 48.2% and diagnostic in 22.9%. There was no significant difference in the ADR, 50% (95%CI: 45-56%) for all colonoscopies vs 49% (95%CI: 43-56%) for screening exams (p=.55). ADRs were 56% for surveillance and 38% for diagnostic exams. In our simulation modeling, only one out of 16 scenarios (screening 10%, surveillance 70%, diagnostic 10% and FIT+ 10%) resulted in a significant difference between the calculated ADRs for screening and non-screening indications. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, the overall ADR computed from all colonoscopies was not significantly different than the conventional ADR based on screening colonoscopies. Assessing ADR for colonoscopy irrespective of indication may be adequate for quality monitoring, and could facilitate the implementation of quality measurement and reporting. Future prospective studies should evaluate the validity of using overall ADR for quality reporting in other jurisdictions before adopting this method in clinical practice.

Risk Factors for Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality are increasing among persons younger than 50 years old in the United States, but risk factors associated with early-onset CRC (EOCRC) have not been widely studied. METHODS: We conducted a case-control study of US veterans 18 to 49 years old who underwent colonoscopy examinations from 1999 through 2014. EOCRC cases were identified from a national cancer registry; veterans who were free of CRC at their baseline colonoscopy through 3 years of follow-up were identified as controls. We collected data on age, sex, race/ethnicity, body weight, body mass index (BMI), diabetes, smoking status, and aspirin use. Multivariate-adjusted EOCRC odds were estimated for each factor, with corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) values. RESULTS: Our final analysis included 651 EOCRC cases and 67,416 controls. Median age was 45.3 years, and 82.3% were male. Higher proportions of cases were older, male, current smokers, nonaspirin users, and had lower BMIs, compared with controls (P < .05). In adjusted analyses, increasing age and male sex were significantly associated with increased risk of EOCRC, whereas aspirin use and being overweight or obese (relative to normal BMI) were significantly associated with decreased odds of EOCRC. In post hoc analyses, weight loss of 5 kg or more within the 5-year period preceding colonoscopy was associated with higher odds of EOCRC (odds ratio 2.23; 95% CI 1.76-2.83). CONCLUSIONS: In a case-control study of veterans, we found increasing age and male sex to be significantly associated with increased risk of EOCRC, and aspirin use to be significantly associated with decreased risk; these factors also affect risk for CRC onset after age 50. Weight loss may be an early clinical sign of EOCRC. More intense efforts are required to identify the factors that cause EOCRC and signs that can be used to identify individuals at highest risk.

Cecal retroflexion is infrequently performed in routine practice and the retroflexed view is of poor quality.

BACKGROUND: As right colon polyps are challenging to detect, a retroflexed view of right colon (RV) may be useful. However, cecal retroflexion (CR) without a RV to the hepatic flexure (HF) is inadequate. We aimed to determine the frequency of CR and quality of the RV in routine practice. METHODS: This prospective observational study performed at an academic medical center assessed colonoscopy inspection technique of endoscopists who had performed ≥ 100 annual screening colonoscopies. We video recorded ≥ 28 screening/surveillance colonoscopies per endoscopist and randomly evaluated 7 videos per endoscopist. Six gastroenterologists blindly reviewed the videos to determine if CR was performed and HF withdrawal time (cecum to HF time, excluding ileal/polypectomy time). RESULTS: Reviewers assessed 119 colonoscopies performed by 17 endoscopists. The median HF withdrawal time was 3 min and 46 s. CR was performed in 31% of colonoscopies. CR frequency varied between endoscopists with 9 never performing CR and 2 performing CR in all colonoscopies. When performed, nearly half (43%) of RVs did not extend to the HF with median RV duration of 16 s (IQR 9-30 s). Three polyps were identified in the RV (polyp detection rate of 8.1%), all identified prior to a forward view. CONCLUSIONS: CR is performed infrequently in routine practice. When CR is performed, the RV is of low quality with a very short inspection duration and insufficient ascending colon examination. Further education is required to educate endoscopists in optimal technique to improve overall colonoscopy quality.

Simplifying Measurement of Adenoma Detection Rates for Colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND: Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is the colonoscopy quality metric with the strongest association to interval or "missed" cancer. Accurate measurement of ADR can be laborious and costly. AIMS: Our aim was to determine if administrative procedure codes for colonoscopy and text searches of pathology results for adenoma mentions could estimate ADR. METHODS: We identified US Veterans with a colonoscopy using Current Procedure Terminology (CPT) codes between January 2013 and December 2016 at ten Veterans Affairs sites. We applied simple text searches using Microsoft SQL Server full-text searches to query all pathology notes for "adenoma(s)" or "adenomatous" text mentions to calculate ADRs. To validate our identification of colonoscopy procedures, endoscopists of record, and adenoma detection from the electronic health record, we manually reviewed a random sample of 2000 procedure and pathology notes from the 10 sites. RESULTS: Structured data fields were accurate in identification of colonoscopies being performed (PPV = 0.99; 95% CI 0.99-1.00) and identifying the endoscopist of record (PPV of 0.95; 95% CI 0.94-0.96) for ADR measurement. Simple text searches of pathology notes for adenoma mentions had excellent performance statistics as follows: sensitivity 0.99 (95% CI 0.98-1.00), specificity 0.93 (95% CI 0.92-0.95), NPV 0.99 (95% CI 0.98-1.00), and PPV 0.93 (0.91-0.94) for measurement of ADR. There was no clinically significant difference in the estimates of overall ADR vs. screening ADR (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Measuring ADR using administrative codes and text searches from pathology results is an efficient method to broadly survey colonoscopy quality.

Colonoscopy-Naïve Raters Can Be Trained to Assess Colonoscopy Quality.

The ability of a colonoscopist to detect colon polyps is commonly measured by the adenoma detection rate (ADR). The outcome of colonoscopy varies based on ADR, and the relationship between decreasing provider ADR and the increased risk of subsequent fatal colorectal cancer has been clearly established.1 Despite the importance of provider ADR, it is of limited value at lower provider volumes due to imprecise measurements. We have previously shown that ratings of colonoscopy inspection quality (CIQ) from video-taped colonoscopies by experts highly correlate with provider ADR, and can provide colonoscopists with specific techniques in need of remediation.2 It is unclear, however, whether these video-based evaluations are a feasible method of assessing colonoscopy quality due to a reliance upon expert evaluations. The primary aim of this study was to determine whether video-based assessments of colonoscopy inspection quality by colonoscopy-naïve raters (novice raters) correlate with assessments by expert raters and with established colonoscopy quality metrics.

Right-Sided Location Not Associated With Missed Colorectal Adenomas in an Individual-Level Reanalysis of Tandem Colonoscopy Studies.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Interval cancers occur more frequently in the right colon. One reason could be that right-sided adenomas are frequently missed in colonoscopy examinations. We reanalyzed data from tandem colonoscopies to assess adenoma miss rates in relation to location and other factors. METHODS: We pooled data from 8 randomized tandem trials comprising 2218 patients who had diagnostic or screening colonoscopies (adenomas detected in 49.8% of patients). We performed a mixed-effects logistic regression with patients as cluster effects with different independent parameters. Factors analyzed included location (left vs right, splenic flexure as cutoff), adenoma size, form, and histologic features. Analyses were controlled for potential confounding factors such as patient sex and age, colonoscopy indication, and bowel cleanliness. RESULTS: Right-side location was not an independent risk factor for missed adenomas (odds ratio [OR] compared with the left side, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.75-1.17). However, compared with adenomas ≤5 mm, the OR for missing adenomas of 6-9 mm was 0.62 (95% CI, 0.44-0.87), and the OR for missing adenomas of ≥10 mm was 0.51 (95% CI, 0.33-0.77). Compared with pedunculated adenomas, sessile (OR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.16-2.85) and flat adenomas (OR, 2.47; 95% CI, 1.49-4.10) were more likely to be missed. Histologic features were not significant risk factors for missed adenomas (OR for adenomas with high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.34-1.37 and OR for sessile serrated adenomas, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.47-1.64 compared with low-grade adenomas). Men had a higher number of adenomas per colonoscopy (1.27; 95% CI, 1.21-1.33) than women (0.86; 95% CI, 0.80-0.93). Men were less likely to have missed adenomas than women (OR for missed adenomas in men, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.57-0.94). CONCLUSIONS: In an analysis of data from 8 randomized trials, we found that right-side location of an adenoma does not increase its odds for being missed during colonoscopy but that adenoma size and histologic features do increase risk. Further studies are needed to determine why adenomas are more frequently missed during colonoscopies in women than men.

Narrow-Band Imaging for Detection of Neoplasia at Colonoscopy: A Meta-analysis of Data From Individual Patients in Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is an important quality assurance measure for colonoscopy. Some studies suggest that narrow-band imaging (NBI) may be more effective at detecting adenomas than white-light endoscopy (WLE) when bowel preparation is optimal. We conducted a meta-analysis of data from individual patients in randomized controlled trials that compared the efficacy of NBI to WLE in detection of adenomas. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases through April 2017 for randomized controlled trials that assessed detection of colon polyps by high-definition WLE vs NBI and from which data on individual patients were available. The primary outcome measure was ADR adjusted for bowel preparation quality. Multilevel regression models were used with patients nested within trials, and trial included as a random effect. RESULTS: We collected data from 11 trials, comprising 4491 patients and 6636 polyps detected. Adenomas were detected in 952 of 2251 (42.3%) participants examined by WLE vs 1011 of 2239 (45.2%) participants examined by NBI (unadjusted odds ratio [OR] for detection of adenoma by WLE vs NBI, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.01-1.29; P = .04). NBI outperformed WLE only when bowel preparation was best: adequate preparation OR, 1.07 (95% CI, 0.92-1.24; P = .38) vs best preparation OR, 1.30 (95% CI, 1.04-1.62; P = .02). Second-generation bright NBI had a better ADR than WLE (second-generation NBI OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.05-1.56; P = .02), whereas first-generation NBI did not. NBI detected more non-adenomatous polyps than WLE (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.06-1.44; P = .008) and flat polyps than WLE (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.02-1.51; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: In a meta-analysis of data from individual patients in randomized controlled trials, we found NBI to have a higher ADR than WLE, and that this effect is greater when bowel preparation is optimal.

Trends in EMR for nonmalignant colorectal polyps in the United States.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Although most large nonpedunculated colorectal lesions can be safely and efficaciously removed using EMR, the use of colectomy for benign colorectal lesions appears to be increasing. The reason(s) is unclear. We aimed to determine the use and adverse events of EMR in the United States. METHODS: We used Optum's de-identified Clinformatics Data Mart Database (2003-2016), a database from a large national insurance provider, to identify all colonoscopies performed with either EMR or simple polypectomy on adult patients from January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2015. We measured time trends, regional variation, and adverse event rates. We assessed risk factors for adverse events using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: The rate of EMR use in the US increased from 1.62% of all colonoscopies in 2011 to 2.48% of colonoscopies in 2015 (P < .001). There were, however, significant regional differences in the use of EMRs, from 2.4% of colonoscopies in the western United States to 2.0% of colonoscopies in the southern United States. Between 2011 and 2015, we found stable rates of perforation, GI bleeding (GIB), infections, and cardiac adverse events and decreasing rates of admissions after EMR. In our multivariate model, EMR was an independent risk factor for adverse events, albeit the rates of adverse events were low (1.35% GIB, .22% perforation). CONCLUSIONS: Use of EMR is rising in the United States, although there is significant regional variation. The rates of adverse events after EMR and polypectomies were low and stable, confirming the continued safety of EMR procedures. A better understanding of the regional barriers and facilitators may improve the use of EMR as the standard management for benign colorectal lesions throughout the United States.

Adding efficiency to proficiency: a study of trainee polypectomy efficiency metrics.

BACKGROUND: Although validated colonoscopy assessment tools exist, they do not measure efficiency. This study aimed to assess content validity of polypectomy efficiency (PE) and neoplastic polypectomy efficiency (NPE) as colonoscopy efficiency indices. METHODS: Data from a randomized controlled trial evaluating polypectomy among gastroenterology trainees were utilized. PE and NPE were defined as number of polyps (or neoplastic polyps) removed/withdrawal time × 100. Content validity was assessed by determining the association between efficiency indices and polypectomy times. RESULTS: 20 trainees performed 601 colonoscopies. There was a strong association between PE/NPE and actual polypectomy times: as polypectomy time increased by 1 minute, the PE decreased by 0.48 (P = 0.001) and NPE decreased by 0.24 (P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: The study proposed and provided content validity for PE and NPE as colonoscopy efficiency indices.

Cost Effectiveness of Endoscopic Resection vs Transanal Resection of Complex Benign Rectal Polyps.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Complex benign rectal polyps can be managed with transanal surgery or with endoscopic resection (ER). Though the complication rate after ER is lower than transanal surgery, recurrence is higher. Patients lost to follow up after ER might therefore be at increased risk for rectal cancer. We evaluated the costs, benefits, and cost effectiveness of ER compared to 2 surgical techniques for removing complex rectal polyps, using a 50-year time horizon-this allowed us to capture rates of cancer development among patients lost from follow-up surveillance. METHODS: We created a Markov model to simulate the lifetime outcomes and costs of ER, transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM), and transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) for the management of a complex benign rectal polyp. We assessed the effect of surveillance by allowing a portion of the patients to be lost to follow up. We calculated the cost, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio or each intervention over a 50-year time horizon. RESULTS: We found that TEM was slightly more effective than TAMIS and ER (TEM, 19.54 QALYs; TAMIS, 19.53 QALYs; and ER, 19.53 QALYs), but ER had a lower lifetime discounted cost (ER cost $7161, TEM cost $10,459, and TAMIS cost $11,253). TEM was not cost effective compared to ER, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $485,333/QALY. TAMIS was dominated by TEM. TEM became cost effective when the mortality from ER exceeded 0.63%, or if the loss to follow up rate exceeded 25.5%. CONCLUSIONS: Using a Markov model, we found that ER, TEM, and TAMIS have similar effectiveness, but ER is less expensive, in management of benign rectal polyps. As the rate of loss to follow up increases, transanal surgery becomes more effective relative to ER.

Patients Prescribed Direct-Acting Oral Anticoagulants Have Low Risk of Postpolypectomy Complications.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Use of direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) is increasing, but little is known about the associated risks in patients undergoing colonoscopy with polypectomy. We aimed to determine the risk of post-polypectomy complications in patients prescribed DOACs. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis using Optum's de-identified Clinformatics Data Mart Database (2003-2016) (a de-identified administrative database from a large national insurance provider) to identify adults who underwent colonoscopy with polypectomy or endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) from January 1, 2011, through December 31, 2015. We collected data from 11,504 patients prescribed antithrombotic agents (1590 DOAC, 3471 warfarin, and 6443 clopidogrel) and 599,983 patients not prescribed antithrombotics of interest (controls). We compared 30-day post-polypectomy complications, including gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB), cerebrovascular accident (CVA), myocardial infarction (MI), and hospital admissions, of patients prescribed DOACs, warfarin, or clopidogrel vs controls. RESULTS: Post-polypectomy complications were uncommon but occurred in a significantly higher proportion of patients receiving any antithrombotic vs controls (P < .001). The percentage of patients in the DOAC group with GIB was 0.63% (95% CI, 0.3%-1.2%) vs 0.2% (95% CI, 0.2%-0.3%) in controls. The percentage of patients with CVA in the DOAC group was 0.06% (95% CI, 0.01%-0.35%) vs 0.04% (95% CI, 0.04%-0.05%) in controls. After we adjusted for bridge anticoagulation, EMR, Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), and CHADS2 (congestive heart failure, hypertension, age over 75, diabetes, stroke [double weight]) score, patients prescribed DOACs no longer had a statistically significant increase in the odds of GIB (odds ratio [OR], 0.90; 95% CI, 0.44-1.85), CVA (OR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.06-3.28), MI (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.14-7.72), or hospital admission (OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.64-1.16). Clopidogrel, warfarin, bridge anticoagulation, higher CHADS2, CCI, and EMR were associated with increased odds of complications. CONCLUSION: In our retrospective analysis of a large national dataset, we found that patients prescribed DOACs did not have significantly increased adjusted odds of post-polypectomy GIB, MI, CVA, or hospital admission. Bridge anticoagulation, higher CHADS2 score, CCI, and EMR were risk factors for GIB, MI, CVA, and hospital admissions. Studies are needed to determine the optimal peri-procedural dose for high-risk patients.

Video-Based Assessments of Colonoscopy Inspection Quality Correlate With Quality Metrics and Highlight Areas for Improvement.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Adenoma detection rate (ADR) and serrated polyp detection rate (SDR) vary significantly among colonoscopists. Colonoscopy inspection quality (CIQ) is the quality with which a colonoscopist inspects for polyps and may explain some of this variation. We aimed to determine the relationship between CIQ and historical ADRs and SDRs in a cohort of colonoscopists and assess whether there is variation in CIQ components (fold examination, cleaning, and luminal distension) among colonoscopists with similar ADRs and SDRs. METHODS: We conducted a prospective observational study to assess CIQ among 17 high-volume colonoscopists at an academic medical center. Over 6 weeks, we video-recorded >28 colonoscopies per colonoscopist and randomly selected 7 colonoscopies per colonoscopist for evaluation. Six raters graded CIQ using an established scale, with a maximum whole colon score of 75. RESULTS: We evaluated 119 colonoscopies. The median whole-colon CIQ score was 50.1/75. Whole-colon CIQ score (r=0.71; P<.01) and component scores (fold examination r=0.74; cleaning r=0.67; distension r=0.77; all P<.01) correlated with ADR. Proximal colon CIQ score (r=0.67; P<.01) and component scores (fold examination r=0.71; cleaning r=0.62; distension r=0.65; all P<.05) correlated with SDR. CIQ component scores differed significantly between colonoscopists with similar ADRs and SDRs for most of the CIQ skills. CONCLUSION: In a prospective observational study, we found CIQ and CIQ components to correlate with ADR and SDR. Colonoscopists with similar ADRs and SDRs differ in their performance of the 3 CIQ components-specific, actionable feedback might improve colonoscopy technique.

Ascertainment of Aspirin Exposure Using Structured and Unstructured Large-scale Electronic Health Record Data.

BACKGROUND: Aspirin impacts risk for important outcomes such as cancer, cardiovascular disease, and gastrointestinal bleeding. However, ascertaining exposure to medications available both by prescription and over-the-counter such as aspirin for research and quality improvement purposes is a challenge. OBJECTIVES: Develop and validate a strategy for ascertaining aspirin exposure, utilizing a combination of structured and unstructured data. RESEARCH DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort study. SUBJECTS: In total, 1,869,439 Veterans who underwent usual care colonoscopy 1999-2014 within the Department of Veterans Affairs. MEASURES: Aspirin exposure and dose were obtained from an ascertainment strategy combining query of structured medication records available in electronic health record databases and unstructured data extracted from free-text progress notes. Prevalence of any aspirin exposure and dose-specific exposure were estimated. Positive predictive value and negative predictive value were used to assess strategy performance, using manual chart review as the reference standard. RESULTS: Our combined strategy for ascertaining aspirin exposure using structured and unstructured data reached a positive predictive value and negative predictive value of 99.2% and 97.5% for any exposure, and 92.6% and 98.3% for dose-specific exposure. Estimated prevalence of any aspirin exposure was 36.3% (95% confidence interval: 36.2%-36.4%) and dose-specific exposure was 35.4% (95% confidence interval: 35.3%-35.5%). CONCLUSIONS: A readily accessible approach utilizing a combination of structured medication records and query of unstructured data can be used to ascertain aspirin exposure when manual chart review is impractical.

Colon polypectomy report card improves polypectomy competency: results of a prospective quality improvement study (with video).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Polypectomy competency varies significantly among providers. Poor polypectomy technique may lead to interval cancer and/or adverse events. Our aim was to determine the effect of a polypectomy skills report card on subsequent polypectomy performance. METHODS: We conducted a 3-phase, prospective, single-blinded study. In phase 1 ("baseline"), we graded 10 polypectomies per endoscopist using the Direct Observation of Polypectomy Skills (DOPyS) tool (scores 1-4); mean overall scores ≥3 are competent. In phase 2 ("pre-report card"), we selected 10 additional polypectomies per endoscopist. We subsequently gave endoscopists a report card with baseline scores and instructional videos demonstrating optimal polypectomy technique. In phase 3 ("post-report card"), 10 additional polypectomies per endoscopist were selected. Raters, blinded to study phase, graded 10 pre- and 10 post-report card polypectomies per endoscopist. We compared mean DOPyS scores and rate of competent polypectomy in the pre- and post-report card phases. RESULTS: We graded 110 pre- and 110 post-report card polypectomies performed by 11 endoscopists. The mean DOPyS score increased between the pre- and post-report card phases (2.7 ± .9 vs 3.0 ± .8, P = .01); this improvement was seen for diminutive (P < .0001) but not for small-to-large polyps. Rate of competent polypectomy significantly improved from the pre- to post-report card phase (56% vs 69%, P = .04); this improvement was seen for diminutive (57% vs 81%, P = .001) but not for small-to-large polyps (55% vs 36%, P = .2). CONCLUSIONS: Report cards with educational videos effectively improved polypectomy technique, primarily because of improvements in resecting diminutive polyps. The improved competency and decreased piecemeal resection may reduce the risk of polyp recurrence. Further education is needed to improve larger polyp resection.