Non-polypoid colorectal neoplasms are relatively common worldwide

Prevalence and Endoscopic Features of Colorectal Non-Polypoid Lesions: A Single-Center Retrospective Study from a Large Cohort of Fecal Immunochemical Test-Positive Screening Patients in Northern Italy

INTRODUCTION

Colorectal non-polypoid lesions (NPLs) are flat, hard-to-detect, and mainly right-sided lesions. We aimed to assess the prevalence and endoscopic features of NPL lesions in a large cohort of screening patients in Northern Italy.

METHODS

Fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-positive subjects between 50 and 69 years old who had undergone at least a screening colonoscopy from March 2005 to December 2017 at the Endoscopy Unit of Ferrara were included. We selected only non-diminutive (>5 mm) and neoplastic polyps (i.e., adenomas, serrated adenomas, and carcinomas). Patients' demographics and polyps' endoscopic-histopathological data were collected. Categorical variables were compared using the Pearson's χ2 test and Fisher's exact test, while odd ratios and confidence intervals were estimated with univariate analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 6,676 FIT-positive subjects underwent 7,616 colonoscopies during the study period. Total lesions were 3,231, of which 133 were NPLs and among these 123 were neoplastic. The prevalence of NPLs among total lesions was 4.1%, while prevalence of neoplastic NPLs among total neoplastic lesions was 4.6%. The prevalence of NPLs and neoplastic NPLs among total colonoscopies was 1.7% and 1.6%, respectively. Neoplastic NPLs were more frequent between 60 and 64 years old (p = 0.03) and associated with other colonic polyps in subjects older than 60 years (p = 0.016). Cancerized NPLs were more likely in younger patients (50-59 years old, p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Prevalence of NPLs is low among the screening population, but NPLs are frequently associated with other colorectal polyps in patients older than 60 years and carry a higher risk of cancer in patients younger than 60 years old.

No Interval Cancers in Endoscopic Practice

Colonoscopy is long time the most preferred method for CRC screening along with diagnosis and treatment for a range of colon diseases. Based on its difficulty in visualizing precursor CRC lesions, mostly those located on the right colon, this method can be subject of improvement. The colonoscopy quality can be influenced by many factors such as colon preparation, retraction time, the colonoscopists medical training and knowledges as well as the performance of endoscopy equipment. The bad quality of colonoscopy will result in the emergence of interval cancers defined, based on the author, as cancers that appear at 3-5 years up to 10 years from the colonoscopy procedure. Interval cancers have predominantly incriminated both the colonoscopy quality and the clinician competences and less the tumor biology. Subsequently there were set quality indicators of colonoscopy in order to raise the quality of the exploration. Among the important indicators, proving their utility in studies, the ADR (adenoma detection rate) is most commonly used along with PDR (polyp detection rate) and APC (adenoma per colonoscopy). Following the purpose of obtaining a higher colonoscopy quality the medical units should keep in check all indicators. Furthermore, there should be an active involvement in an additional training of non-conforming medical personnel or even restrain of practice, given the medical legal actions that have interval cancers as a main cause.

Risk factors associated with the detection and missed diagnosis of colorectal flat adenoma: a Chinese multicenter observational study

OBJECTIVES

Flat colorectal adenomas have a high risk of malignancy; however, their detection is often difficult due to their flat morphology. In this retrospective, large-scale study, we investigated the prevalence and characteristics of flat adenomas in a population in China.

METHODS

We analyzed the data collected for 16951 consecutive patients who underwent colonoscopy at four participating hospitals between September 2013 and September 2015. All colonoscopies were performed without magnification.

RESULTS

Among the 1,6951 patients, 2938 (17.3%) had adenoma and 796 (4.7%) had flat adenomas. The detection of flat adenoma showed a weak correlation with the detection of adenoma (r = 0.666). Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed the following independent factors influencing the detection of flat adenomas: patient-related factors of age, presence of warning symptoms, history of adenomas and bowel preparation as well as endoscopist-related factors of endoscopist's level of proficiency, number of colonoscopy operators and withdrawal time.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of flat adenomas in our study on Chinese patients was consistent with that reported from other countries. Factors conducive to the detection of flat adenomas were patient age of > 60 years, warning symptoms, history of adenoma, good bowel preparation, experienced endoscopist, single-operator colonoscopy and colonoscopy withdrawal time of >6 min.

Suboptimal Bowel Preparation Significantly Impairs Colonoscopic Detection of Non-polypoid Colorectal Neoplasms

BACKGROUND

It is unclear whether the quality of bowel preparation affects colonoscopic detection of non-polypoid colorectal neoplasms (NP-CRNs).

AIM

To evaluate the impact of bowel-cleansing quality on detection of NP-CRNs.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of asymptomatic screening colonoscopy cases after standardized bowel preparation at an academic teaching hospital between June 2011 and May 2013. Primary outcome was a comparison of the adenoma detection rate (ADR) of non-polypoid morphology according to quality of bowel preparation. Secondary outcomes included detection prevalence of non-polypoid adenomas.

RESULTS

Of the enrolled 6097 screening examinations, the preparation quality was rated as adequate (excellent or good) in 5224 (85.7 %), fair in 615 (10.1 %), and poor in 258 (4.2 %) patients. The prevalence of NP-CRNs was 40.5 % (1962/4847) of all CRNs. The overall ADR of non-polypoid morphology was 12.3 % (747/6097) of all colonoscopies, but it significantly differed among participating endoscopists (all P < 0.05). The ADR of non-polypoid morphology was significantly lower with fair- or poor-quality preparation, versus adequate-quality preparation (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.55, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.41-0.75; aOR 0.49, 95 % CI 0.30-0.79, respectively). Poor-quality preparation was also associated with impaired detection of polypoid, proximal colon, and sub-centimeter adenomas (all P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Suboptimal (fair or poor) bowel preparation significantly impairs colonoscopic detection of NP-CRNs. Given that the prevalence of NP-CRNs is substantial in our average-risk screening cohort, ongoing efforts to improve the preparation quality are practically valuable in increasing the detection of NP-CRNs, thereby improving the efficacy of screening colonoscopies.