A prospective analysis of 13,580 colonoscopies. Reevaluation of credentialing guidelines

How should we establish the clinical case numbers required to achieve proficiency in flexible endoscopy?

BACKGROUND

Recommended procedure numbers for upper endoscopy (UE) and colonoscopy (C) are 35 and 50 for surgical residents, and 130 and 140 for gastroenterology fellows, respectively. The purpose of this study was to challenge the methods used to determine proficiency in flexible endoscopy.

METHODS

Global assessment of gastrointestinal endoscopic skills (GAGES) was used to evaluate 139 procedures. Scores for UE were compared using self-reported case numbers and grouped according to requirements for each discipline. C scores were compared using the requirements to define novice and experienced endoscopists. Procedure volumes were plotted against GAGES scores.

RESULTS

Three groups were compared for UE based on case volumes: fewer than 35 cases (group 1), 35 to 130 cases (group 2), and more than 130 cases (group 3). There was no difference between group 2 (17.8 +/- 1.8) and group 3 (19.1 +/- 1.1), but both scored higher than group 1 (14.4 +/- 3.7; P < .05). For C, the scores were 11.8 +/- 3.8 (novices) and 18.8 +/- 1.34 (experienced; P < .001) at a 50-case minimum and 12.4 +/- 4.2 and 18.8 +/- 1.3 (P < .001) for a 140-case proficiency cut-off level, respectively. The curve of procedures versus GAGES plateaued at 50 (UE) and 75 (C).

CONCLUSIONS

The surgical and gastroenterology case recommendations may not represent the experience needed to achieve proficiency. GAGES scores could help define proficiency in basic endoscopy.

Training and transfer of colonoscopy skills: a multinational, randomized, blinded, controlled trial of simulator versus bedside training

BACKGROUND

The Olympus colonoscopy simulator provides a high-fidelity training platform designed to develop knowledge and skills in colonoscopy. It has the potential to shorten the learning process to competency.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the efficacy of the simulator in training novices in colonoscopy by comparing training outcomes from simulator training with those of standard patient-based training.

DESIGN

Multinational, multicenter, single-blind, randomized, controlled trial.

SETTING

Four academic endoscopy centers in the United Kingdom, Italy, and The Netherlands.

PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTION

This study included 36 novice colonoscopists who were randomized to 16 hours of simulator training (subjects) or patient-based training (controls). Participants completed 3 simulator cases before and after training. Three live cases were assessed after training by blinded experts.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Automatically recorded performance metrics for the simulator cases and blinded expert assessment of live cases using Direct Observation of Procedural Skills and Global Score sheets.

RESULTS

Simulator training significantly improved performance on simulated cases compared with patient-based training. Subjects had higher completion rates (P=.001) and shorter completion times (P < .001) and demonstrated superior technical skill (reduced simulated pain scores, correct use of abdominal pressure, and loop management). On live colonoscopy, there were no significant differences between the 2 groups.

LIMITATIONS

Assessment tools for live colonoscopies may lack sensitivity to discriminate between the skills of relative novices.

CONCLUSION

Performance of novices trained on the colonoscopy simulator matched the performance of those with standard patient-based colonoscopy training, and novices in the simulator group demonstrated superior technical skills on simulated cases. The simulator should be considered as a tool for developing knowledge and skills prior to clinical practice.

The frequency of early repeat tests after colonoscopy in elderly medicare recipients

BACKGROUND

The frequency of early repeat and follow-up tests (RAFTs) occurring after colonoscopy has not been previously examined in the literature. RAFTs incur cost, discomfort, and inconvenience to patients who have undergone colonoscopic examination; therefore, it is important to identify factors associated with their use.

METHODS

We identified elderly Medicare recipients who had colonoscopy performed in 1999 from the 5% Medicare administrative files (N = 69,282). We determined the number of early RAFTs (repeat colonoscopy, barium enema, flexible sigmoidoscopy) occurring within the year of initial colonoscopy.

RESULTS

Of the study sample, 8.3% required at least one RAFT during the year. Using multivariable analysis, we found that RAFTs varied significantly with age, race, sex, income, comorbidity, provider type, and place of service. RAFTs were 22% higher in African Americans compared to whites. Gastroenterologists used 20-35% fewer RAFTs than the other provider types performing colonoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

The frequency of early RAFTs after colonoscopy occurs in 8.3% of the Medicare population. Important differences exist in the frequency of RAFTs by race and provider type.

Global Assessment of Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Skills (GAGES): a valid measurement tool for technical skills in flexible endoscopy

BACKGROUND

Simulators may improve the efficiency, safety, and quality of endoscopic training. However, no objective, reliable, and valid tool exists to assess clinical endoscopic skills. Such a tool to measure the outcomes of educational strategies is a necessity. This multicenter, multidisciplinary trial aimed to develop instruments for evaluating basic flexible endoscopic skills and to demonstrate their reliability and validity.

METHODS

The Global Assessment of Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Skills (GAGES) Upper Endoscopy (GAGES-UE) and Colonoscopy (GAGES-C) are rating scales developed by expert endoscopists. The GAGES scale was completed by the attending endoscopist (A) and an observer (O) in self-assessment (S) during procedures to establish interrater reliability (IRR, using the intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC]) and internal consistency (IC, using Cronbach's alpha). Instrumentation was evaluated when possible and correlated with total scores. Construct and external validity were examined by comparing novice (NOV) and experienced (EXP) endoscopists (Student's t-test). Correlations were calculated for GAGES-UE and GAGES-C with participants who had performed both.

RESULTS

For the 139 completed evaluations (60 NOV, 79 EXP), IRR (A vs. O) was 0.96 for GAGES-UE and 0.97 for GAGES-C. The IRR between S and A was 0.78 for GAGES-UE and 0.89 for GAGES-C. The IC was 0.89 for GAGES-UE, and 0.95 for GAGES-C. There were mean differences between the NOV and the EXP endoscopists for GAGE-UE (14.4 +/- 3.7 vs. 18.5 +/- 1.6; p < 0.001) and GAGE-C (11.8 +/- 3.8 vs. 18.8 +/- 1.3; p < 0.001). Good correlation was found between the scores for the GAGE-UE and the GAGE-C (r = 0.75; n = 37). Instrumentation, when performed, demonstrated correlations with total scores of 0.84 (GAGE-UE; n = 73) and 0.86 (GAGE-C; n = 45).

CONCLUSIONS

The GAGES-UE and GAGES-C are easy to administer and consistent and meet high standards of reliability and validity. They can be used to measure the effectiveness of simulator training and to provide specific feedback. The GAGES results can be generalized to North American and European endoscopists and may contribute to the definition of technical proficiency in endoscopy.

Management of anticoagulation before and after gastrointestinal endoscopy

The management of anticoagulants and antiplatelet agents in patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures is a common clinical problem. Although guidelines have been published, they are supported by little prospective or randomized trial data, but are primarily based on observational studies, expert opinion, and best clinical practices. As a general principle, the risks of thromboembolism need to be balanced against the risks of bleeding during the endoscopic procedure. By understanding these risks, management plans for individual cases may be made. This article reviews the current data and guidelines on the management of anticoagulants, antiplatelet agents, use of reversal agents, and the role and risks of concomitant proton pump inhibitors.

Performance measures of surgeon-performed colonoscopy in a Veterans Affairs medical center

BACKGROUND

Quality indicators are increasingly emphasized in the performance of colonoscopy. This study aimed to determine the standard of care rendered by surgeon-endoscopists in a Veterans Affairs (VA) medical center by evaluating the indications for colonoscopy and outcome performance measures according to established quality indicators for colonoscopy.

METHODS

A prospective standardized computer endoscopic reporting database (ProVation MD) was retrospectively reviewed. All colonoscopies performed by attending surgeons at the San Diego VA medical center between 1 January 2004 and 31 July 2007 were included in the study. Patients with charts that had incomplete reporting were excluded. The quality indicators used included the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) criteria for colorectal cancer screening, the American Cancer Society (ACS) guidelines for postcancer resection surveillance, and the American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopists (ASGE) quality indicators for colonoscopy.

RESULTS

The data for 558 patients (96% men) were analyzed. The average patient age was 63 years (range, 25-93 years). Almost all the colonoscopies (99%) were performed in accordance with established criteria. The most common indications for colonoscopy were screening (n = 143, 26%), non-acute gastrointestinal bleeding (n = 127, 23%), polyp surveillance (n = 100, 18%), postcancer resection surveillance (n = 91, 17%), abdominal pain (n = 19, 4%), and anemia (n = 14, 3%). Postcancer resection surveillance colonoscopies were performed according to recommended criteria in 98% of the cases. The cecal intubation rate was 97%, and the overall adenoma detection rate was 26%. Two patients (<1%) experienced complications requiring intervention.

CONCLUSION

The study data indicate that surgeon-performed colonoscopies meet standard quality criteria for indications and performance measures. The authors therefore conclude that surgeon-endoscopists demonstrate proficiency in the standard of care for colonoscopy examinations.

What are the risk factors of colonoscopic perforation?

Background

Knowledge of the factors influencing colonoscopic perforation (CP) is of decisive importance, especially with regard to the avoidance or minimization of the perforations. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence and risk factors of CP in one of the endoscopic training centers accredited by the World Gastroenterology Organization.

Methods

The prospectively collected data were reviewed of all patients undergoing either colonoscopy or flexible sigmoidoscopy at the Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand between January 2005 and July 2008. The incidence of CP was evaluated. Eight independent patient-, endoscopist- and endoscopy-related variables were analyzed by a multivariate model to determine their association with CP.

Results

Over a 3.5-year period, 10,124 endoscopic procedures of the colon (8,987 colonoscopies and 1,137 flexible sigmoidoscopies) were performed. There were 15 colonic perforations (0.15%). Colonoscopy had a slightly higher risk of CP than flexible sigmoidoscopy (OR 1.77, 95%CI 0.23-13.51; p = 1.0). Patient gender, emergency endoscopy, anesthetic method, and the specialty or experience of the endoscopist were not significantly predictive of CP rate. In multivariate analysis, patient age of over 75 years (OR = 6.24, 95%CI 2.26-17.26; p < 0.001) and therapeutic endoscopy (OR = 2.98, 95%CI 1.08-8.23; p = 0.036) were the only two independent risk factors for CP.

Conclusion

The incidence of CP in this study was 0.15%. Patient age of over 75 years and therapeutic colonoscopy were two important risk factors for CP.

Comparison of CT colonography vs. conventional colonoscopy in mapping the segmental location of colon cancer before surgery

Once presence of a colorectal cancer has been diagnosed, a key factor for patient's prognosis in view of surgical intervention is the correct segmental localization and resection of the tumor. The aim of this work was to compare the accuracy of the current gold standard technique, conventional colonoscopy (CC), to computed tomography colonography (CTC) in the segmental localization of tumor. Sixty-five patients (mean age 64; 45 female and 19 male) with colorectal cancer diagnosed at colonoscopy underwent CTC before surgery. In 45 out of 65 cases (69%), patients were referred to CTC after incomplete CC. Reasons were patient intolerance to CC or presence of stenosing cancer, with consistent difficulties in crossing the tract of the colon involved by the lesion. CTC allowed the complete colonic examination in 63/65 cases, since in 2 patients with an obstructing lesion of the sigmoid colon, pneumocolon could not be obtained. However, per patient and per lesion sensitivity of CTC was 100%. Difference from colonoscopy was statistically significant (P < 0.05). In terms of segmental localization of masses, CTC located precisely all lesions, while colonoscopy failed in 16/67 (24%) lesions, though six were missed for incomplete colonoscopy (9%). In the remaining 10/67 (15%) lesions, detected by colonoscopy but incorrectly located, the mismatch occurred in the rectum (n = 3), sigmoid (n = 2), descending (n = 1), transverse (n = 2), ascending colon, and cecum. Agreement between CTC and CC was fair (k value 0.62). Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of CTC in determining the precise location of colonic masses were respectively 100%, 96%, 85%, and 100%. CT detected hepatic (6/65 patients) and lung metastases (3/65 patients). CT colonography has better performance in the identification of colonic masses (diameter > 3 cm), in the completion of colonic evaluation and in the segmental localization of tumor. CTC should replace colonoscopy for preoperative staging of colorectal cancer.

Effect of GI endoscopy nurse experience on screening colonoscopy outcomes

BACKGROUND

The effect of the GI endoscopy nurse experience on colonoscopy outcomes is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether the nurse experience was associated with screening colonoscopy complications, procedure length, and cecal intubation.

DESIGN

A retrospective analysis of screening colonoscopies performed by attending physicians between August 2003 and August 2005. Nurse experience was measured in weeks.

SETTING

University of North Carolina Hospitals.

SUBJECTS

Twenty-nine nurses were employed during the study period, 19 of whom were newly hired. A total of 3631 eligible screening colonoscopies were analyzed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome was any immediate complication; secondary outcomes included time to cecum, total procedure time, and cecal intubation rate.

RESULTS

In procedures staffed by nurses with 2 weeks of experience or less, 3.2% had complications compared with 0.3% for procedures with more experienced nurses (odds ratio [OR] 10.4 [95% CI, 3.55-30.2]). For nurses with 6 months or less of experience, 18% of procedures had cecal-intubation times more than 1 standard deviation above the mean compared with 12% for more experienced nurses (OR 1.60 [95% CI, 1.30-1.97]). Similar results were seen for the total procedure duration (OR 1.61 [95% CI, 1.32-1.97]) and cecal-intubation rates (OR 1.81 [95% CI, 1.37-2.39]). All relationships held after adjusting for potential confounding factors.

LIMITATIONS

A retrospective, single-center study.

CONCLUSIONS

GI endoscopy nurse inexperience is associated with an increase in immediate complications, prolonged procedure times, and decreased cecal-intubation rates for screening colonoscopies. These findings have implications for nurse training, procedure efficiency, colonoscopy quality assessment, and patient safety.

The quality of screening colonoscopies in an office-based endoscopy clinic

BACKGROUND

Wait times for hospital screening colonoscopy have increased dramatically in recent years, resulting in an increase in patient referrals to office-based endoscopy clinics. There is no formal regulation of office endoscopy, and it has been suggested that the quality of service in some office locations may be inferior to hospital procedures.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the quality of office-based screening colonoscopies at a clinic in Oakville, Ontario, with published benchmarks for cecal intubation, withdrawal times, polyp detection, adenoma detection, cancer detection and patient complications.

METHODS

Demographic information on consecutive patients and colonoscopy reports by all nine gastroenterologists at the Oakville Endoscopy Centre between August 2006 and December 2007 were prospectively obtained.

RESULTS

A total of 3741 colonoscopies were analyzed. The mean age of patients was 57.1 years and 51.9% were women. The cecal intubation rate was 98.98% with an average withdrawal time of 9.75 min. A total of 3857 polyps were retrieved from 1725 patients (46.11%), and 1721 adenomas were detected in 953 patients (25.47%). A total of 126 patients (3.37%) had advanced polyps and 18 (0.48%) were diagnosed with colon cancer. One patient (0.027%) had a colonic perforation and two patients had postpolypectomy bleeding (0.053%). These results meet or exceed published benchmarks for quality colonoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

The Ontario Endoscopy Centre data demonstrate that office-based colonoscopies, performed by well-trained physicians using adequate sedation and hospital-grade equipment, result in outcomes at least equal to or better than those of published academic/community hospital practices and are therefore a viable option for the future of screening colonoscopy in Canada.

The role of laparoscopy in the treatment of complications after colonoscopy

Perforations of the colonic wall or splenic injury during colonoscopy are rare complications. Treatment of these complications by laparoscopy is an advisable compromise instead of an invasive surgery with a laparotomy or a noninvasive and potentially risky nonoperative therapy. All surgical procedures that can be performed by open approach can also be performed laparoscopically. We present in this report 15 patients who were treated for a perforation after colonoscopy. In addition, 2 cases of splenic injury after colonoscopy are described. Twelve perforations were sutured laparoscopically and 3 perforations were sutured via laparotomy. Except for 1 minor wound infection, there were no complications. One splenic injury was treated by spleen wrapping via an open approach due to former pancreatic surgery, and 1 injury was treated laparoscopically with a hemostypticum. Mortality was 0%. Early laparoscopic intervention is a safe and effective method in the treatment of serious complications after colonoscopy.

Risk of perforation from a colonoscopy in adults: a large population-based study

BACKGROUND

Previous studies that reported the incidence of perforation from a colonoscopy are limited by small sample sizes, restricted age groups, or single-center data.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the incidence and risk factors of colonic perforation from a colonoscopy in a large population cohort.

DESIGN

Retrospective, population-based, cohort study, followed by a nested case-control study.

SETTING

California Medicaid program claims database.

PATIENTS

A total of 277,434 patients (aged 18 years and older) who underwent a colonoscopy during 1995 to 2005, age, sex, and time matched to 4 unique general-population controls.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Perforation incidence in the 7 days after colonoscopy (or matched index date for controls) with odds ratio (OR); multivariate logistic regression to calculate adjusted ORs for subsequent analysis of risk factors.

RESULTS

A total of 228 perforations were diagnosed after 277,434 colonoscopies, which corresponded to a cumulative 7-day incidence of 0.082%. The OR of getting a perforation from a colonoscopy compared with matched controls (n = 1,072,723) who did not undergo a colonoscopy was 27.6 (95% CI, 19.04-39.92), P < .001. On multivariate analysis, when comparing the group that had a perforation after a colonoscopy (n = 216) with those who did not (n = 269,496), increasing age, significant comorbidity, obstruction as an indication for the colonoscopy, and performance of invasive interventions during colonoscopy were significant positive predictors. Performance of biopsy or polypectomy did not affect the perforation risk. The rate of perforation did not change significantly over time.

LIMITATIONS

Validity of coding and capturing of all perforation diagnoses may possibly be deficient.

CONCLUSION

The risk of perforation from a colonoscopy is low, but, despite increased experience with the procedure, it remains unchanged over time.

Impact of a transparent hood on the performance of total colonoscopy: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Clinical demand for total colonoscopy (TCS) is increasing. Improvement of the cecal intubation rate and shortening of the examination time would expand the capacity for TCS.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy of a transparent hood attached to the tip of a colonoscope for cecal intubation in TCS.

DESIGN

Prospective, randomized, controlled study.

SETTING

Single tertiary-referral center.

INTERVENTIONS

TCS.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Cecal intubation time and rate, complications, patient discomfort, and detection rate of colonic polyps.

METHODS

Patients who were to undergo screening and/or surveillance TCS for colorectal cancer were invited to participate in the study. Cecal intubation time and rate, complications, patient discomfort, and detection rate of colonic polyps were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 592 patients enrolled in this study were randomly allocated to the hood group and no-hood group. The mean (SD) cecal intubation time in the hood group and the no-hood group was 10.2 +/- 12.5 minutes and 13.4 +/- 15.8 minutes, respectively (P = .0241). The effect of its use was more prominent in the expert endoscopists group compared with those with moderate experience. The cecal intubation rate and the detection rate of small polyps in the 2 groups were similar. The grade of patient discomfort was significantly lower in the hood group. No complications were encountered with the use of the hood.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of a transparent hood on the tip of a colonoscope shortened the time required for cecal intubation and decreased patient discomfort; such use was more effective among experts in shortening the examination time.

Efficacy of cap-assisted colonoscopy in comparison with regular colonoscopy: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

Colonoscopy cannot be completed in up to 10% of cases. We postulate that cap-assisted colonoscopy (CAC), by fitting a mucosectomy cap to the tip of a colonoscope, could improve the outcome.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective randomized controlled trial in two regional endoscopy centers. All colonoscopies were performed by experienced colonoscopists. Patients 18 years or older undergoing their first colonoscopy were recruited. Patients were randomized to the CAC group or to the regular colonoscopy (RC) group. The first successful cecal intubation rate, rescue cecal intubation rate, cecal intubation and total colonoscopy times, and polyp detection rate were compared.

RESULTS

One thousand patients were enrolled (mean age 52.6 years, 46% men). There was no statistically significant difference in the first successful cecal intubation rate between CAC and RC groups (96.2% vs. 94.6%, P=0.23). The cecal intubation and total colonoscopy times were shorter in the CAC group than in the RC group (6.0+/-4.0 min vs. 7.2+/-4.8 min, P<0.001; 14.7+/-8.6 min vs. 16.7+/-10.3 min, P=0.001). The adenoma detection rate was significantly lower in the CAC group than in the RC group (30.5% vs. 37.5%, P=0.018), but there was no significant difference in the detection of advanced lesions. In case of failing cecal intubation, use of CAC as a rescue method could achieve a higher success rate than RC (66.7% vs. 21.1%, P=0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Among experienced colonoscopists, CAC did not improve the initial cecal intubation rate and had a lower adenoma detection rate. However, it shortened the cecal intubation time and performed better as a rescue method. Its utilization should be reserved for selected cases, especially when initial cecal intubation fails.

Screening colonoscopies by primary care physicians: a meta-analysis

PURPOSE

There is currently too few endoscopists to enact a national colorectal cancer screening program with colonoscopy. Primary care physicians could play an important role in filling this shortage by offering screening colonoscopy in their practice. The purpose of this study was to examine the safety and effectiveness of colonoscopies performed by primary care physicians.

METHODS

We identified relevant articles through searches of MEDLINE and EMBASE bibliographic databases to December 2007 and through manual searches of bibliographies of each citation. We found 590 articles, 12 of which met inclusion criteria. Two authors independently abstracted data on study and patient characteristics. Descriptive statistics were performed. For each outcome measure, a random effects model was used to determine estimated means and confidence intervals.

RESULTS

We analyzed 12 studies of colonoscopies performed by primary care physicians, which included 18,292 patients (mean age 59 years, 50.5% women). The mean estimated adenoma and adenocarcinoma detection rates were 28.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 20.4%-39.3%) and 1.7% (95% CI, 0.9%-3.0%), respectively. The mean estimated reach-the-cecum rate was 89.2% (95% CI, 80.1%-94.4%). The major complication rate was 0.04% (95% CI, 0.01%-0.07%); no deaths were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Colonoscopies performed by primary care physicians have quality, safety, and efficacy indicators that are comparable to those recommended by the American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, the American College of Gastroenterology, and the Society of American Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Surgeons. Based on these results, colonoscopy screening by primary care physicians appears to be safe and effective.

Assessment of endoscopic training of general surgery residents in a North American health region

BACKGROUND

Ensuring competency of trainees is a challenge for residency programs. The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) recommends that a minimum of 130 EGDs and 140 colonoscopies be performed to assess competency.

OBJECTIVE

We assessed the number of endoscopies performed by surgery and gastroenterology residents during their training. Endoscopy patterns were also assessed for staff gastroenterology specialists and general surgeons in Alberta, Canada.

DESIGN

Physician billing data were used to determine endoscopic practice patterns, and the number of endoscopies performed by gastroenterology fellows and surgery residents were obtained.

SETTING

Major teaching hospital.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENT

Procedure numbers.

RESULTS

In large cities, the number of colonoscopies performed by gastroenterologists increased ( approximately 2-fold) over the study period (there was minimal change in endoscopy numbers by surgeons). In contrast, in smaller communities, EGDs and colonoscopies by surgeons increased about 2-fold (from approximately 4065 to 7288) and about 4-fold (from approximately 1909 to approximately 7629), respectively (with only a minimal increase in colonoscopies ( approximately 3000), by gastroenterologists. During training, gastroenterology fellows performed significantly more procedures (EGDs, 29 +/- 5.6 by surgery residents vs 363.9 +/- 12.7 by gastroenterology fellows; colonoscopies, 91 +/- 14.2 by surgery residents vs 247.8 +/- 21.6 by gastroenterology fellows).

LIMITATION

All training data are from a single teaching center.

CONCLUSIONS

All gastroenterology fellows, but none of the surgery residents, achieved the minimum number of endoscopic procedures recommended by the ASGE to assess competency. These data suggest that we must reexamine our training programs and/or our methods for evaluating endoscopic competence.

Colonoscopic perforation: A report from World Gastroenterology Organization endoscopy training center in Thailand

AIM: To determine the incidence of colonoscopic perforation (CP), and evaluate clinical findings, management and outcomes of patients with CP from the World Gastroenterology Organization (WGO) Endoscopy Training Center in Thailand.

METHODS: All colonoscopies and sigmoidoscopies performed between 1999 and 2007 in the Endoscopic unit, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok were reviewed. Incidence of CP, patients’ characteristics, endoscopic information, intra-operative findings, management and outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS: A total of 17 357 endoscopic procedures of the colon (13 699 colonoscopies and 3658 flexible sigmoidoscopies) were performed in Siriraj hospital over a 9-year period. Fifteen patients (0.09%) had CP: 14 from colonoscopy and 1 from sigmoidoscopy. The most common site of perforation was in the sigmoid colon (80%), followed by the transverse colon (13%). Perforations were caused by direct trauma from either the shaft or the tip of the endoscope (n = 12, 80%) and endoscopic polypectomy (n = 3, 20%). All patients with CP underwent surgical management: primary repair (27%) and bowel resection (73%). The mortality rate was 13% and postoperative complication rate was 53%.

CONCLUSION: CP is a rare but serious complication following colonoscopy and sigmoidoscopy, with high rates of morbidity and mortality. Incidence of CP was 0.09%. Surgery is still the mainstay of CP management.

Rupture of the spleen after colonoscopy: a life-threatening complication

During colonoscopy, the risk of injuring the spleen or other viscera except the colon is negligible. We report here a patient in whom spleen rupture did complicate the very early course of colonoscopy, but this remains an extremely rare complication with no more than 50 cases so far described. Diagnosis may be difficult, and the risk of spleen rupture seems to be greatest within 24 hours of colonoscopy. Mechanisms leading to spleen injury in the setting of colonoscopy are unclear; however, direct trauma, colon distension by insufflated air, and the excessive traction on the splenocolic ligament may be involved. Patients with splenomegaly and those with preexisting adhesions are at greater risk for this complication. Patients complaining of persistent abdominal pain after colonoscopy should be closely monitored and aggressively investigated for the suspect of spleen injury and rupture.

Who provides gastrointestinal endoscopy in Canada?

PURPOSE

To determine who provides gastrointestinal endoscopy in Canada and to understand provincial and regional differences in endoscopy providers.

METHODS

Aggregate physician sociodemographic and activity data for 2002 were obtained from the Canadian Institute of Health Information's National Physician Database. Physicians were classified as gastroenterologists, general surgeons and others.

RESULTS

In 2002, 1444 physicians, including 735 surgeons, 551 gastroenterologists and 158 others, performed at least 100 colonoscopies or 100 gastroscopies. Gastroenterologists performed 53% of all colonoscopies and 59% of all gastroscopies. Gastroenterologists were the primary providers of colonoscopies in large urban areas, whereas surgeons were the primary providers in smaller urban and rural areas. An average of 317 colonoscopies were performed by surgeons, 516 by gastroenterologists and 203 by other physicians. The proportion of surgeon colonoscopists in each province ranged from 47% to 71%.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgeons and gastroenterologists are the major providers of gastrointestinal endoscopy in Canada, but the distribution of these providers among provinces and urban and rural areas varies. Although surgeon endoscopists are more numerous, on average, they perform fewer procedures annually than internists.

Utility of computed tomographic colonography in surveillance for hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer syndrome

Computed tomographic colonography (CTC) is suggested to be an alternative to colonoscopy as a surveillance tool in subjects with a high risk for colorectal cancer (CRC). To evaluate the utility of CTC we successively examined 78 subjects, all with a DNA mismatch repair gene mutation, by CTC and colonoscopy. We detected altogether 37 polyps or tumors in 28 subjects (prevalence 35.9%), adenomas in 13 subjects (16.7%), CRC in two (2.6%), and hyperplastic polyps in 13 (16.7%). A great majority of the polyps were diminutive. The per-patient sensitivity for detecting all lesions with CTC was 0.25 and 0.29 by two radiologists and the specificities 0.82 and 0.76. For lesions of 10 mm or larger the sensitivities were 0.6 and 1.0 and the specificities 0.96 by each examiner. Each diagnosed the two cancers correctly. We concluded that CTC has an acceptable accuracy for large lesions in the colon but the detection rate for small polyps is not comparable to that in colonoscopy. Therefore CTC remains a second choice in surveillance for use when colonoscopy for some reason is incomplete or unsuitable.

Colonoscopy and flexible sigmoidoscopy practice patterns in Ontario: a population-based study

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a population-based study on the provision of large bowel endoscopic services in Ontario.

METHODS

Data from the following databases were analyzed: the Ontario Health Insurance Plan, the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences Physicians Database and Statistics Canada. The flexible sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy rates per 10,000 persons (50 to 74 years of age) by region between April 1, 2001, and March 31, 2002, were calculated, as well as the numbers and types of physicians who performed each procedure.

RESULTS

In 2001/2002, a total of 172,108 colonoscopies and 43,400 flexible sigmoidoscopies were performed in Ontario for all age groups. The colonoscopy rate was approximately five times that of flexible sigmoidoscopy; rates varied from 463.1 colonoscopies per 10,000 people in the north to 286.8 colonoscopies per 10,000 people in the east. Gastroenterologists in all regions tended to perform more procedures per physician, but because of the large number of general surgeons, the total number of procedures performed by each group was almost the same.

CONCLUSION

Population-based rates of colonoscopies and flexible sigmoidoscopies are low in Ontario, as are the procedure volumes of approximately one-quarter of physicians.

Sigmoid colon perforation at CT colonography secondary to a possible obstructive mechanism: report of a case

We report a case of colonic perforation in CT colonography, which was observed in a sigmoid colon segment contained within an inguinal hernia. At surgery, apart from the perforation, a normal large-bowel wall was found. Although rare, perforation may occur in patients with normal bowel wall, possibly resulting from a mechanical strain caused by gaseous overdistention. Radiologists performing the procedure must be aware of this possibility.

Colonoscopic perforation

Perforation is an uncommon but important complication of colonoscopy. This review looks at the incidence, clinical features, diagnosis and treatment of this condition.

Factors associated with the technical performance of colonoscopy: An EPAGE Study

BACKGROUND

Variations in colonoscopy practice exist, which may be related to healthcare quality.

AIMS

To determine factors associated with three performance indicators of colonoscopy: complete colonoscopy, adenomatous polyp diagnosis, and duration.

PATIENTS

Consecutive patients referred for colonoscopy from 21 centres in 11 countries.

METHODS

This prospective observational study used multiple variable regression analyses to identify determinants of the quality indicators.

RESULTS

Six thousand and four patients were included in the study. Patients from private, open-access centres (odds ratio: 3.17, 95% confidence interval: 1.87-5.38) were more likely to have a complete colonoscopy than patients from public, gatekeeper centres. Patients from centres where over 50% of the endoscopists were of senior rank were roughly twice as likely to have an adenoma diagnosed, and longer average withdrawal duration (odds ratio: 1.08, 95% confidence interval: 1.07-1.09) was associated with more frequent adenoma diagnoses. Patients who had difficulty during colonoscopy had longer durations to caecum (time ratio: 2.87, 95% confidence interval: 2.72-3.01) and withdrawal durations (time ratio: 1.26, 95% confidence interval: 1.18-1.33) than patients who had no difficulties.

CONCLUSIONS

Multiple factors have been identified as being associated with key quality indicators. The non-modifiable factors permit the identification of patients who may be at greater risk of not having quality colonoscopy, while changes to the modifiable factors may help improve the quality of colonoscopy.

Comparison of morning versus afternoon cecal intubation rates

BACKGROUND

Many factors impacting cecal intubation rates have been examined in detail; however, little information exists regarding the effect of the timing of the procedure. We sought to examine any difference in cecal intubation rates between morning and afternoon colonoscopies and identify factors contributing to a discrepancy.

METHODS

Retrospective, single-center study comparing cecal intubation rates for colonoscopies performed in the morning (begun prior to 12 noon) and colonoscopies performed in the afternoon (begun after 12 noon) over an approximately 12 month period. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed evaluating patient demographics, procedure indication(s), endoscopist, bowel preparation type and quality, and participation by a gastroenterology fellow.

RESULTS

6087 colonoscopies were evaluated in this study. Colonoscopies (n = 3729) performed in the morning were compared to colonoscopies performed in the afternoon (n = 2358). The crude completion rate to the cecum was 95.0% in the morning group while the completion rate to the cecum was 93.6% of the afternoon exams (p = 0.02). The morning colonoscopies had better bowel preparation quality (p < 0.001). The multivariate analyses demonstrated that gender, age, and bowel preparation quality impacted completion rates. After correcting for these factors, there was no significant difference in completion rates in the morning versus afternoon.

CONCLUSION

Uncorrected cecal intubation rates were lower in the afternoon compared to the morning in outpatients undergoing colonoscopy. Bowel preparation quality was worse in the afternoon compared with the morning. Efforts at improving afternoon bowel preparation may improve the outcome of afternoon colonoscopies.

Acquiring basic endoscopy skills by training on the GI Mentor II

BACKGROUND

Achieving proficiency in flexible endoscopy requires a great amount of practice. Virtual reality (VR) simulators could provide an effective alternative for clinical training. This study aimed to gain insight into the proficiency curve for basic endoscope navigation skills with training on the GI Mentor II.

METHODS

For this study, 30 novice endoscopists performed four preset training sessions. In each session, they performed one EndoBubble task and managed multiple VR colonoscopy cases (two in first session and three in subsequent sessions). Virtual reality colonoscopy I-3 was repeatedly performed as the last VR colonoscopy in each session. The assignment for the VR colonoscopies was to visualize the cecum as quickly as possible without causing patient discomfort. Five expert endoscopists also performed the training sessions. Additionally, the performance of the novices was compared with the performance of 20 experienced and 40 expert endoscopists.

RESULTS

The novices progressed significantly, particularly in the time required to accomplish the tasks (p < 0.05, Friedman's analysis of variance [ANOVA], p < 0.05, Wilcoxon signed ranks). The experts did not improve significantly, except in the percentage of time the patient was in excessive pain. For all the runs, the performance of the novices differed significantly from that of both the experienced and the expert endoscopists (p < 0.05, Mann-Whitney U). The performance of the novices in the latter runs differed less from those of both the experienced and the expert endoscopists.

CONCLUSIONS

The study findings demonstrate that training in both VR colonoscopy and EndoBubble tasks on the GI Mentor II improves the basic endoscope navigation skills of novice endoscopists significantly.

Capsule endoscopy changes patient management in routine clinical practice

Our objective was to evaluate the diagnostic yield and effect of capsule endoscopy on patient management in routine clinical practice. Three hundred examinations were performed (176 females; mean age, 51 years), with a median follow-up of 17 months. Indications included overt bleeding (n=55), anemia (n=104), suspected Crohn's disease (n=68), celiac disease (n=35), suspected functional symptoms (n=23), polyposis (n=5), and miscellaneous (n=10). The overall diagnostic yield was 39%, but it was notably higher in overt bleeders, 66%, compared to 46% in the anemia group (P<0.025), 32% in the suspected Crohn's group (P<0.001), and 17% in the functional group (P<0.001). As a result of capsule endoscopy, management was altered in 26% of patients. This study shows that capsule endoscopy has both a high diagnostic yield and an impact on subsequent patient management. These data further support the role of capsule endoscopy in routine clinical practice.

Splenic Rupture: An Unusual Complication of Colonoscopy

Splenic injury is a known, albeit rare, complication of diagnostic and therapeutic colonoscopy. Within a 6-month period, we observed two colonoscopic splenic injuries. We report these two cases of splenic injury who presented differently after colonoscopy: one presented as frank hemorrhagic shock, and the other as a subacute splenic hemorrhage with symptomatic anemia. The first patient presented with hemorrhagic shock several hours after a diagnostic colonoscopy and required an emergency splenectomy. The second patient presented with symptomatic anemia several days after a diagnostic colonoscopy and was treated by angiographic embolization. Clinical presentation and discussion of the mechanisms of injury, available treatment options, and strategies for preventing colonoscopic splenic injuries are presented. Awareness of this complication is paramount in early recognition and management of this potentially life-threatening injury.

Predictors of failed colonoscopy in nonagenarians: a single-center experience

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Data on the yield of conventional colonoscopy in very old patients remain limited. The aim of the study was to evaluate the outcome of colonoscopy in nonagenarian patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The safety, success rate to complete colonoscopy and findings of colonoscopies performed during the last 5 years in our center were compared between 41 nonagenarians (group 1) and 2 control groups: 50 consecutive patients aged 70 to 79 years (group 2) and 50 consecutive patients aged 50 to 59 years (group 3). Serum hemoglobin, albumin, patients' source, indications for and colonoscopies findings were retrieved for the total study cohort and comorbidities, mental and functional states for group 1 only. Reasons for colonoscopy failure and predictive factors for failed colonoscopy were analyzed. Chi-square test was used to detect differences in categorical variables by failure or age group. Failure was modeled using logistic regression analyses, and odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals were calculated. All tests were 2-sided and considered significant at P<0.05.

RESULTS

Failed colonoscopy was significantly more prevalent in group 1. The main reason for it was bad preparation. Malignant tumors were significantly more frequently observed in the elderly (groups 1 and 2) than in the younger age group. No complications during and 48 hours postcolonoscopy were observed in all study participants. In univariate analyses in group 1 mental and functional states were inversely and low serum hemoglobin and albumin levels were positively, significantly associated with failure to complete colonoscopy. In multivariate logistic regression analyses, only functional state retained significance as a predictor of failed colonoscopy (odds ratio 5.6, 95% confidence interval 1.5-21.06, P=0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Colonoscopy in nonagenarians is a safe procedure; however, it carries a significantly higher failure rate. Functional decline was found to be a significant predictive factor for failed colonoscopy.

Racial disparities in colon cancer. Primary care endoscopy as a tool to increase screening rates among minority patients

Colon cancer is a condition whose far-reaching effects have been well documented nationally and within the state of South Carolina. Fortunately, the disease is amenable to both primary and secondary prevention through screening colonoscopy. Despite the conceptual simplicity of recommending colonoscopy, barriers exist to universal (or even widespread) screening. Currently the infrastructure necessary to achieve screening goals set by the American Cancer Society (ACS), the American College of Gastroenterology (ACG), and the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (DHEC) has not been established. At current rates of training gastroenterologists, the medical community will not be able to come close to achieving widespread screening. Given the discrepancy between the public health benefit of achieving the goals and the deaths that have occurred because of the resource shortfall, we propose alternative measures to screen the at-risk population for consideration. This need is most acute in the black community, in which where screening rates tend to be lower and polyps have been found to progress more quickly than among white populations. In South Carolina, one model has used primary care physicians as the labor force to provide routine screening colonoscopy for their own patients. This model makes screening much more accessible to minority patients, as the wait is shorter and the cost typically lower. In combination with a faith-based partnership with minority religious organizations, this model has begun to make needed inroads toward addressing the disparities associated with colon cancer. Cancer 2007. (c) 2006 American Cancer Society.

Conventional colonoscopy: Technique, indications, limits

Colonoscopy has long been the gold standard for the diagnosis of colonic diseases. Recently, with the advent of CT colonografy, new alternatives seem to appear on the horizon, which seem to finally overcome some of colonoscopy's drawbacks like procedure related pain and discomfort during the examination. Polyp miss rate and the fact that not always the caecum can be reached are also the basis of debate. This article gives an overview about current technique, indications and limitations of diagnostic colonoscopy as well as a potential prospect for the future, discussing novel imaging technologies ranging from magnification endoscopy to virtual histopathology.

Splenic Rupture: An Unusual Complication of Colonoscopy

Splenic rupture after colonoscopy is rare. Only 44 cases previously have been reported in the English literature. Partial capsular avulsion is the proposed mechanism of injury. Any condition causing increased splenocolic adhesions may be a predisposing factor to splenic injury. One case of splenic injury after colonoscopy is reported in addition to a complete review of the literature.

Splenic rupture following colonoscopy: two cases with CT findings

Splenic injury following colonoscopy is extremely rare. We report a 75-year-old woman and a 35-year-old woman who presented to the emergency room with left upper quadrant and left shoulder pain following colonoscopy. Both patients were diagnosed by computed tomography (CT) with splenic injuries and hemoperitoneum. One patient was successfully managed conservatively, and one patient needed emergent open splenectomy. The possibility of splenic injury should be considered in post-colonoscopy patients with left upper quadrant or left shoulder pain.

NIS vs SAGES: a comparison of national and voluntary databases

BACKGROUND

Surgical outcomes are increasingly examined in an effort to improve quality and reduce medical error. The Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) is a retrospective, claims-derived and population-based database and the Society of American Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) Outcomes Project is a prospective, voluntary and specialty surgeon database. We hypothesized that these two sources of outcome data would differ in regard to a single, commonly performed procedure.

METHODS

Both the NIS, a national sample of all nonfederal hospital discharges, and the gastroesophageal reflux disease log of the SAGES Outcomes Project were queried for all fundoplications performed between 1999 and 2001 using either ICD-9 procedure code 44.66 or CPT codes 43280 or 43324. Patients with an emergency admission, age <17 years, and/or diagnoses for either esophageal cancer or achalasia were excluded. Both demographic and outcome variables were compared by either t-test or chi-square analysis, with a p value of <0.05 as significant.

RESULTS

Both data sets were comparable for age and gender; however, the SAGES group had a higher rate of teaching hospital affiliation (71 vs 48%, p < 0.001). SAGES fundoplications had a consistently higher rate of comorbidities, including Barrett's esophagus (2.3 vs 1.1%, p = 0.005). The NIS fundoplications had a clear trend toward more associated procedures, including cholecystectomy (7.2 vs 2%, p < 0.001). Complication rates for the NIS data set were higher, including pulmonary complications (1.7 vs 0.5%, p = 0.03). No statistically significant differences existed between the two data sets for either length of stay or mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

The two databases indicate that fundoplication is an operation with low morbidity and mortality. The SAGES Outcomes Project demonstrated that participating surgeons had a higher affiliation with teaching hospitals, higher reporting of comorbidity, and lower associated procedures than the NIS. Despite having more comorbidity and technical difficulty, patients from the SAGES Outcomes Project had equivalent or lower complication rates.

Colorectal cancer screening and surveillance: current standards and future trends

Its prevalence, long premalignant course, and favorable response to early intervention make colorectal cancer an ideal target for screening regimens. The success of these regimens depends on accurate assessment of risk factors, patient compliance with scheduled visits and tests, and physician knowledge of screening strategies. We review the current recommendations for colorectal cancer screening in general and at-risk populations, comment on surveillance methods in high-risk patients, and examine current trends that will likely influence screening regimens in the future.

Minimal preparation CT for the diagnosis of suspected colorectal cancer in the frail and elderly patient

Colorectal cancer is a common malignancy with an increased incidence in the elderly population. Traditional methods of evaluating this disease have included double contrast barium enema and colonoscopy. Unfortunately, in the frail and elderly patient, these investigations can be difficult to perform and are often not tolerated. Minimal preparation computed tomography (MPCT) of the colon has been suggested as an alternative in this patient population. In this technique, no bowel preparation is used apart from the administration of oral contrast medium. The patient is imaged only in the supine position, without per rectal insufflation of gas or barium. This article reviews the experience to date of MPCT in detecting colonic tumours, and compares its efficacy to the traditional methods. A meta-analysis of the studies allowed estimation of the pooled sensitivity of MPCT to be 83% (95% confidence interval: 76-89%), and pooled specificity to be 90% (95% CI: 85-94%). An added advantage of MPCT is the ability to identify extra-colonic pathology, and this aspect is also reviewed. In addition, the common radiological features and pitfalls in identifying colonic tumours by MPCT are discussed.