Endoscopist characteristics that influence the quality of colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIM: Several factors have been shown to be related to colonoscopy quality; however, little is known about the effects of endoscopist factors. This study analyzed the influence of endoscopist-related characteristics on quality indicators for colonoscopy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study included 48 endoscopists who each performed at least 20 colonoscopies in the colonoscopy arm of a randomized controlled trial comparing fecal immunochemical test vs. colonoscopy in colorectal cancer screening. These endoscopists performed a total of 3838 procedures in the trial. The following were calculated for each endoscopist: adenoma detection rate (ADR), advanced ADR, proximal ADR, distal ADR, and adenoma per colonoscopy rate (APCR). The characteristics of endoscopists were assessed with regard to colonoscopy quality using multivariate regression analysis. Endoscopist characteristics included age, sex, exclusive endoscopy practice, years as a physician, years as a specialist, specialty, total (life-long) number of colonoscopies performed, annual colonoscopy volume, number of hours/week dedicated to endoscopy and number of educational activities in the previous year. RESULTS: Factors associated with ADR were age of the endoscopist (odds ratio [OR] 1.11, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.01 - 1.21; P = 0.01) and life-long number of colonoscopies (OR 1.06, 95 %CI 1.01 - 1.11; P = 0.01). Only exclusive dedication to endoscopy practice was found to be independently related to proximal ADR (OR 1.71, 95 %CI 1.15 - 2.74; P = 0.001). Life-long number of colonoscopies was independently related to detection of distal adenomas (OR 1.07, 95 %CI 1.01 - 1.13; P = 0.01). None of the analyzed endoscopist characteristics was associated with advanced ADR or APCR. CONCLUSIONS: This study found that the experience of the endoscopist and exclusive dedication to endoscopy practice, but not annual colonoscopy volume, were associated with better colonoscopy quality.

Colonoscopy versus fecal immunochemical testing in colorectal-cancer screening.

BACKGROUND: Colonoscopy and fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) are accepted strategies for colorectal-cancer screening in the average-risk population. METHODS: In this randomized, controlled trial involving asymptomatic adults 50 to 69 years of age, we compared one-time colonoscopy in 26,703 subjects with FIT every 2 years in 26,599 subjects. The primary outcome was the rate of death from colorectal cancer at 10 years. This interim report describes rates of participation, diagnostic findings, and occurrence of major complications at completion of the baseline screening. Study outcomes were analyzed in both intention-to-screen and as-screened populations. RESULTS: The rate of participation was higher in the FIT group than in the colonoscopy group (34.2% vs. 24.6%, P<0.001). Colorectal cancer was found in 30 subjects (0.1%) in the colonoscopy group and 33 subjects (0.1%) in the FIT group (odds ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61 to 1.64; P=0.99). Advanced adenomas were detected in 514 subjects (1.9%) in the colonoscopy group and 231 subjects (0.9%) in the FIT group (odds ratio, 2.30; 95% CI, 1.97 to 2.69; P<0.001), and nonadvanced adenomas were detected in 1109 subjects (4.2%) in the colonoscopy group and 119 subjects (0.4%) in the FIT group (odds ratio, 9.80; 95% CI, 8.10 to 11.85; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Subjects in the FIT group were more likely to participate in screening than were those in the colonoscopy group. On the baseline screening examination, the numbers of subjects in whom colorectal cancer was detected were similar in the two study groups, but more adenomas were identified in the colonoscopy group. (Funded by Instituto de Salud Carlos III and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00906997.).

Rate of detection of advanced neoplasms in proximal colon by simulated sigmoidoscopy vs fecal immunochemical tests.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: We compared the ability of biennial fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) and one-time sigmoidoscopy to detect colon side-specific advanced neoplasms in a population-based, multicenter, nationwide, randomized controlled trial. METHODS: We identified asymptomatic men and women, 50-69 years old, through community health registries and randomly assigned them to groups that received a single colonoscopy examination or biennial FIT. Sigmoidoscopy yield was simulated from results obtained from the colonoscopy group, according to the criteria proposed in the UK Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Trial for colonoscopy referral. Patients who underwent FIT and were found to have ≥75 ng hemoglobin/mL were referred for colonoscopy. Data were analyzed from 5059 subjects in the colonoscopy group and 10,507 in the FIT group. The main outcome was rate of detection of any advanced neoplasm proximal to the splenic flexure. RESULTS: Advanced neoplasms were detected in 317 subjects (6.3%) in the sigmoidoscopy simulation group compared with 288 (2.7%) in the FIT group (odds ratio for sigmoidoscopy, 2.29; 95% confidence interval, 1.93-2.70; P = .0001). Sigmoidoscopy also detected advanced distal neoplasia in a higher percentage of patients than FIT (odds ratio, 2.61; 95% confidence interval, 2.20-3.10; P = .0001). The methods did not differ significantly in identifying patients with advanced proximal neoplasms (odds ratio, 1.17; 95% confidence interval, 0.78-1.76; P = .44). This was probably due to the lower performance of both strategies in detecting patients with proximal lesions (sigmoidoscopy detected these in 19.1% of patients and FIT in 14.9% of patients) vs distal ones (sigmoidoscopy detected these in 86.8% of patients and FIT in 33.5% of patients). Sigmoidoscopy, but not FIT, detected proximal lesions in lower percentages of women (especially those 50-59 years old) than men. CONCLUSIONS: Sigmoidoscopy and FIT have similar limitations in detecting advanced proximal neoplasms, which depend on patients' characteristics; sigmoidoscopy underperforms for women 50-59 years old. Screening strategies should be designed on the basis of target population to increase effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT00906997.

Modifiable endoscopic factors that influence the adenoma detection rate in colorectal cancer screening colonoscopies.

BACKGROUND: Adenoma detection rate (ADR) has become the most important quality indicator for colonoscopy. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate which modifiable factors, directly related to the endoscopic procedure, influenced the ADR in screening colonoscopies. DESIGN: Observational, nested study. SETTING: Multicenter, randomized, controlled trials. PATIENTS: Asymptomatic people aged 50 to 69 years were eligible for a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial designed to compare colonoscopy and fecal immunochemical testing in colorectal cancer screening. A total of 4539 individuals undergoing a direct screening colonoscopy were included in this study. INTERVENTION: Colonoscopy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Bowel cleansing, sedation, withdrawal time in normal colonoscopies, and cecal intubation were analyzed as possible predictors of adenoma detection by using logistic regression analysis, adjusted for age and sex. RESULTS: In multivariate analysis, after adjustment for age and sex, factors independently related to the ADR were a mean withdrawal time longer than 8 minutes (odds ratio [OR] 1.51; 95% CI, 1.17-1.96) in normal colonoscopies and split preparation (OR 1.26; 95% CI, 1.01-1.57). For advanced adenomas, only withdrawal time maintained statistical significance in the multivariate analysis. For proximal adenomas, withdrawal time and cecal intubation maintained independent statistical significance, whereas only withdrawal time longer than 8 minutes and a <10-hour period between the end of preparation and colonoscopy showed independent associations for distal adenomas. LIMITATIONS: Only endoscopic variables have been analyzed. CONCLUSION: Withdrawal time was the only modifiable factor related to the ADR in colorectal cancer screening colonoscopies associated with an increased detection rate of overall, advanced, proximal, and distal adenomas.

Relationship of colonoscopy-detected serrated polyps with synchronous advanced neoplasia in average-risk individuals.

BACKGROUND: Serrated cancers account for 10% to 20% of all colorectal cancers (CRC) and more than 30% of interval cancers. The presence of proximal serrated polyps and large (≥10 mm) serrated polyps (LSP) has been correlated with colorectal neoplasia. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the prevalence of serrated polyps and their association with synchronous advanced neoplasia in a cohort of average-risk population and to assess the efficacy of one-time colonoscopy and a biennial fecal immunochemical test for reducing CRC-related mortality. This study focused on the sample of 5059 individuals belonging to the colonoscopy arm. DESIGN: Multicenter, randomized, controlled trial. SETTING: The ColonPrev study, a population-based, multicenter, nationwide, randomized, controlled trial. PATIENTS: A total of 5059 asymptomatic men and women aged 50 to 69 years. INTERVENTION: Colonoscopy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Prevalence of serrated polyps and their association with synchronous advanced neoplasia. RESULTS: Advanced neoplasia was detected in 520 individuals (10.3%) (CRC was detected in 27 [0.5%] and advanced adenomas in 493 [9.7%]). Serrated polyps were found in 1054 individuals (20.8%). A total of 329 individuals (6.5%) had proximal serrated polyps, and 90 (1.8%) had LSPs. Proximal serrated polyps or LSPs were associated with male sex (odds ratio [OR] 2.08, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.76-4.45 and OR 1.65, 95% CI, 1.31-2.07, respectively). Also, LSPs were associated with advanced neoplasia (OR 2.49, 95% CI, 1.47-4.198), regardless of their proximal (OR 4.15, 95% CI, 1.69-10.15) or distal (OR 2.61, 95% CI, 1.48-4.58) locations. When we analyzed subtypes of serrated polyps, proximal hyperplasic polyps were related to advanced neoplasia (OR 1.61, 95% CI, 1.13-2.28), although no correlation with the location of the advanced neoplasia was observed. LIMITATIONS: Pathology criteria for the diagnosis of serrated polyps were not centrally reviewed. The morphology of the hyperplasic polyps (protruded or flat) was not recorded. Finally, because of the characteristics of a population-based study carried out in average-risk patients, the proportion of patients with CRC was relatively small. CONCLUSION: LSPs, but not proximal serrated polyps, are associated with the presence of synchronous advanced neoplasia. Further studies are needed to determine the risk of proximal hyperplastic polyps.

Deficient Inhibitory Endogenous Pain Modulation Correlates With Periaqueductal Gray Matter Metabolites During Chronic Whiplash Injury.

OBJECTIVES: This study examined predictive correlations between periaqueductal gray (PAG) and anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) metabolite levels with deficient inhibitory endogenous pain modulation (EPM), including sensory and affective measures of pain during chronic whiplash injury (WHI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Healthy patients, and participants with chronic WHI, without (WHI-noP) or with pain (WHI-P), were screened with the Douleur Neuropathique 4 tool (DN4). EPM was assessed with C6 tonic heat pain stimuli with a Conditioned Pain Modulation (CPM) protocol. Magnetic resonance spectroscopy quantified ACC and PAG metabolite levels. RESULTS: WHI-P participants were characterized with high pain intensity and interference, and lower quality of life scores, compared with WHI-noP. Inhibitory CPM at 30 seconds was identified in the healthy noninjured (-45±16%; P<0.001) and WHI-noP groups (-36±8%; P<0.001). However, inhibitory EPM was not detected in the WHI-P group (-25±15%; P=0.06). Best fit and stepwise multiple regression revealed that the PAG glutamate/myoinositol metabolite ratio (P=0.01) and total creatine levels (P=0.02) predicted loss of EPM in the WHI-P group (r=0.71, α=0.97). Although myoinositol predicted loss of EPM in the ACC (P=0.04), this was below statistical power (r=0.31; α=0.56). The ACC N-acetyl-aspartate/myoinositol ratio (P=0.006) predicted chronic pain (DN4, r=0.53; α=0.87). DISCUSSION: The results of this study demonstrate deficient EPM at 30 seconds during tonic heat pain stimulation in WHI-P participants, compared with noninjured healthy volunteers or individuals with WHI-noP. In addition, quantification of PAG and ACC metabolites related to glutamate and glia predicted central chronic pain mechanisms related to loss of inhibitory EPM, while ACC metabolites characterized chronic pain described by descriptors and sensory changes.

Risk of advanced proximal neoplasms according to distal colorectal findings: comparison of sigmoidoscopy-based strategies.

BACKGROUND: Screening for colorectal cancer with sigmoidoscopy benefits from the fact that distal findings predict the risk of advanced proximal neoplasms (APNs). This study was aimed at comparing the existing strategies of postsigmoidoscopy referral to colonoscopy in terms of accuracy and resources needed. METHODS: Asymptomatic individuals aged 50-69 years were eligible for a randomized controlled trial designed to compare colonoscopy and fecal immunochemical test. Sigmoidoscopy yield was estimated from results obtained in the colonoscopy arm according to three sets of criteria of colonoscopy referral (from those proposed in the UK Flexible Sigmoidoscopy, Screening for COlon REctum [SCORE], and Norwegian Colorectal Cancer Prevention [NORCCAP] trials). Advanced neoplasm detection rate, sensitivity, specificity, and number of individuals needed to refer for colonoscopy to detect one APN were calculated. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify distal findings associated with APN. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: APN was found in 255 of 5059 (5.0%) individuals. Fulfillment of UK (6.2%), SCORE (12.0%), and NORCCAP (17.9%) criteria varied statistically significantly (P < .001). The NORCCAP strategy obtained the highest sensitivity for APN detection (36.9%), and the UK approach reached the highest specificity (94.6%). The number of individuals needed to refer for colonoscopy to detect one APN was 6 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 4 to 7), 8 (95% CI = 6 to 9), and 10 (95% CI = 8 to 12) when the UK, SCORE, and NORCCAP criteria were used, respectively. The logistic regression analysis identified distal adenoma ≥10 mm (odds ratio = 3.77; 95% CI = 2.52 to 5.65) as the strongest independent predictor of APN. CONCLUSIONS: Whereas the NORCCAP criteria achieved the highest sensitivity for APN detection, the UK recommendations benefited from the lowest number of individuals needed to refer for colonoscopy.