Do indication and demographics for colonoscopy affect completion? A large national database evaluation

Causal insights from clinical information in radiology: Enhancing future multimodal AI development

PURPOSE

This study investigates the causal mechanisms underlying radiology report generation by analyzing how clinical information and prior imaging examinations contribute to annotation shifts. We systematically estimate why and how biases manifest, providing insights into the data generation process that influences radiology reporting.

METHODS

This retrospective study analyzes 172,380 chest X-ray reports from 45,561 distinct patients in the MIMIC-IV CXR database. The study focuses on conditional effects for the diseases pneumonia, pleurisy, heart failure, rib fracture, and COPD. Propensity score matching is employed to balance the treatment and control groups, followed by logistic regression and neural network models to estimate causal effects. Statistical analysis involves calculating risk differences and 95% confidence intervals to determine significance (p ≤ 0.05). Sensitivity analysis is deployed to estimate the robustness of the effect estimates.

RESULTS

The inclusion of clinical questions significantly influences the reporting of key observational findings. For instance, the probability of mentioning cardiomegaly increases by 15% (p ≤ 0.05) when a clinical question is posed conditioned on rib fracture. Similar effects are observed for support devices across multiple diseases. However, the impact of clinical information varies by disease. For instance, in the presence of clinical questions, the mention of pneumonia increases significantly for one disease, while for others there is no significant effect.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates how annotation bias in radiology reports arises from clinical context and prior imaging access. Understanding these causal mechanisms is essential for mitigating biases in dataset curation, ensuring more reliable AI models, and improving the generalizability of multimodal medical imaging systems.

Colonoscopy performance monitoring: do we need to adjust for case mix?

INTRODUCTION

Overall caecum intubation rate(oCIR) and overall polyp detection rate(oPDR) have been proposed as performance indicators, but varying complexity in case mix among endoscopists may potentially affect validity. The study aims to explore the effect of adjusting for case mix on individual endoscopist performance by calculating case mix-adjusted performance estimates (cmCIR and cmPDR) and comparing them to overall performance estimates (oCIR and oPDR). The study also provides an R program for case mix analysis.

METHODS

Logistic regression associated endoscopist, colonoscopy indication, patient age and patient gender with the binary outcomes of cecum intubation and polyp detection. Case mix-adjusted performance indicators were calculated for each endoscopist based on logistic regression and bootstraps. Endoscopists were ranked from best to worst by overall and case mix-adjusted performance estimates, and differences were evaluated using percentage points(pp) and rank changes.

RESULTS

The dataset consisted of 7376 colonoscopies performed by 47 endoscopists. The maximum rank change for an endoscopist comparing oCIR and cmCIR was eight positions, interquartile range (IQR 1-3). The maximum change in CIR was 1.95 percentage point (pp) (IQR 0.27-0.86). The maximum rank change in the oPDR versus cmPDR analysis was 17 positions (IQR 1.5-8.5). The maximum change in PDR was 11.21 pp (IQR 2.05-6.70). Three endoscopists improved their performance from significantly inferior to within the 95% confidence interval (CI) range of performance targets using case mix-adjusted estimates.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of endoscopists were unaffected by adjustment for case mix, but a few unfortunate endoscopists had an unfavourable case mix that could invite incorrect suspicion of inferior performance.

Correlation between adenoma detection rate and other quality indicators, and its variability depending on factors such as sedation or indication for colonoscopy

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is an important worldwide public health burden and colonoscopy is the main diagnostic and most importantly, preventive method. For this reason, many countries have implemented national or regional CRC screening programs. High-quality colonoscopy is a prerequisite to effectively detect premalignant lesions, like adenomas. The quality of colonoscopy is assessed using several quality indicators, the main one being adenoma detection rate (ADR). In Romania, despite CRC having the highest incidence of all cancers, there is no national screening program and quality in colonoscopy is not routinely assessed. We therefore wanted to evaluate the actual level of quality in colonoscopy in a region of Romania. Our study was conducted in two private endoscopy clinics over a period of 7 months. 1,440 consecutive colonoscopies performed by five physicians were included in the study. We found that the quality level is above the minimum one recommended by international societies and that the ADR calculation method does not significantly influence its value. Furthermore, ADR correlated well with other quality indicators such as polyp detection rate (PDR) and adenoma per colonoscopy (APC). An interesting finding was that ADR was higher among colonoscopies performed without sedation. Thus, our data encourage endoscopists to adopt a sedation-free colonoscopy in their practice without an impact on the quality of the procedure.

Odds of Incomplete Colonoscopy in Colorectal Cancer Screening Based on Socioeconomic Status

The aim of this study is to investigate the association between socioeconomic status (SES) and the risk of having an incomplete colonoscopy (IC) in the Danish Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Screening Program. In this register-based study we included 71,973 participants who underwent colonoscopy after a positive fecal immunochemical test in the Danish CRC Screening Program. The main exposure, SES, was defined by income and education, and the outcome by complete or incomplete colonoscopy. Among the participants, 5428 (7.5%) had an incomplete colonoscopy. The odds ratio (OR) for ICs due to inadequate bowel preparation was 1.67 (95% CI: 1.46; 1.91) for income in the 1 quartile compared to income in the 4th quartile. ORs for income in the 2nd quartile was 1.38 (95% CI: 1.21; 1.56) and 1.17 (95% CI: 1.03; 1.33) for income in the 3rd quartile. For the educational level, an association was seen for high school/vocational education with an OR of 0.87 (95% CI: 0.79; 0.97) compared to higher education. For ICs due to other reasons, the level of income was associated with the risk of having an IC with an OR of 1.19 (95% CI: 1.05; 1.35) in the 1st quartile and an OR of 1.19 (95% CI: 1.06; 1.34) in the 2nd quartile. For the educational level, there were no significant associations. Low income is associated with high risk of having an IC, whereas educational level does not show the same unambiguous association.

Colonoscopic Evaluation of Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding (LGIB): Practical Approach

BACKGROUND

Haematochesia (Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding (LGIB) is the most common reason for endoscopic examination. Generaly it is caused by hemorrhoids and diverticular disease, but other anorectal conditions can also lead to LGIB. Recurrent bleeding may result in secondary iron deficiency anemia. Colonoscopy is the primary diagnostic option for establishing a diagnosis of colonic bleeding.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to analyze symptoms and endoscopic finding (specialy hemorrhoids) who may be sources of LGIB.Second goal of this study is to estimate time from onset of symptoms to performance of a colonoscopy.

METHODS

A retrospective study included 603 adult patients who underwent colonoscopy in General Hospital "Sv. Apostol Luka", Doboj, Bosnia and Herzegovina, between 1.1.2020 and 31.12.2020.

RESULTS

Average age of the examined population was 62±13,3years. According to the gender they were mostly men. To be exact,by percentage it was 53.7% of men and 46,3% of women, or by number: 324 men and 279 women. The most common indications for colonoscopy were LGIB (48,8%), abdominal pain and irregular stool. Most frequent endoscopic findings were hemorrhoids 42%. Normal findings had almost one third of all examinated patients. Combined findings-presence of more clinical entities in one patient were presented in 95 cases. In the group with hemorrhoids were almost two thirds of males, but there was no gender difference noted in between group with LGIB and without LGIB. More than half patients were older than 61 years. Anemia was presented in almost 20% of cases. Significantly it is higher frequency of abdominal pain, irregular stool and weight loss observed on the group without LGIB. Also, significantly more frequently patients with LGIB underwent colonoscopy in 0-30 days when compared with patients without LGIB (p=0,016).

CONCLUSION

In patients with haematochezia, taking a careful medical history is mandatory. Hemorrhoids, diverticular disease and colorectal cancers are the most common causes of bleeding. Patients with LGIB and abdominal pain were previously examined with colonoscopy. Completely colonoscopy is advocated to detect probable proximal lesions.

State of the Science on Quality Indicators for Colonoscopy and How to Achieve Them

Colonoscopy is a safe and effective tool, but operator dependent. Room for improvement in the quality of colonoscopy is the impetus for the development and measurement of colonoscopy quality indicators and the focus of many efforts to improve colonoscopy quality indicator prevention and control in provider practices and health systems. We present the preprocedural, intraprocedural, and postprocedural quality indicators and benchmarks for colonoscopy. Every provider and practice must make a commitment to performing high-quality colonoscopy and implement and monitor quality metrics. There are a variety of tools available to assist in improving quality indicators that range from distal attachment devices to education and feedback. Although technology can help, it is not a substitute for proper technique. The commitment also requires provider feedback through audits and report cards. The impact of these efforts on patient outcomes is an important area of further research.

Quality measures improving endoscopic screening of colorectal cancer: a review of the literature

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a major health-care problem all over the world and CRC screening is effective in reducing mortality and increasing the 5-year survival. Colonoscopy has a central role in CRC screening. It can be performed as a primary test, as a recall policy after a positive result of another screening test, and for surveillance. Since effectiveness of endoscopic screening depends on adequate detection and removal of colonic polyps, consistent quality measures, which are useful in enhancing the diagnostic yield of examination, are essential. Areas covered: The aim of this review is to analyze current evidence from literature supporting quality measures able to refine endoscopic screening of colorectal cancer. Expert commentary: Quality measures namely a) time slot allotted to colonoscopy, b) assessment of indication, c) bowel preparation, d) Cecal intubation, e) withdrawal time, f) adenoma detection rate, g) proper management of lesions (polypectomy technique, polyps retrieval rate and tattooing of resection sites), and h) adequate follow-up intervals play a key role in identifying malignant and at-risk lesions and improving the outcome of screening. Adherence to these quality measures is critical to maximize the effectiveness of CRC screening, as well as, a proper technique of colonoscopy and a quality report of the procedure. Among all recommended measures, adenoma detection rate is the most important and must be kept above the recommended quality threshold by all physicians practicing in the setting of screening.

Colorectal cancer screening program using FIT: quality of colonoscopy varies according to hospital type

Background and study aims  To compare the quality of colonoscopy in a population-based coordinated program of colorectal cancer screening according to type of hospital (academic or non-academic). Patients and methods  Consecutive patients undergoing colonoscopy after positive FIT (≥ 20 ug Hb/g feces) between January 2009 and September 2016 were prospectively included at five academic and seven non-academic public hospitals. Screening colonoscopy quality indicators considered were adenoma detection rate, cecal intubation rate, complications and bowel preparation quality. Results  A total of 48,759 patients underwent colonoscopy, 34,616 (80 %) in academic hospitals and 14,143 in non-academic hospitals. Among these cases, 19,942 (37.1 %) advanced adenomas and 2,607 (5.3 %) colorectal cancers (CRCs) were detected, representing a total of 22,549 (46.2 %) cases of advanced neoplasia. The adenoma detection rate was 64 %, 63.1 % in academic hospitals and 66.4 % in non-academic hospitals ( P  < 0.001). Rates of advanced adenoma detection, cecal intubation and adequate colonic preparation were 45.8 %, 96.2 % and 88.3 %, respectively, and in all cases were lower (implying worse quality care) in academic hospitals (45.3 % vs 48.7 %; odds ratio [OR] 0.87, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.84 - 0.91; 95.9 % vs 97 %; OR 0.48, 95 % CI 0.38 - 0.69; and 86.4 % vs 93 %; OR 0.48, 95 % CI 0.45 - 0.5; respectively; P  < 0.001 in all cases). In 13 patients, all in the academic hospital group, CRC was diagnosed after colonoscopy (0.26 cases × 1000 colonoscopies). Rates of CRC treated by endoscopy were similar in both types of hospital (30 %). The rate of severe complication was 1.2 % (602 patients), with no significant differences by hospital type: bleeding occurred in 1/147 colonoscopies and perforation in 1/329. One patient died within 30 days after screening colonoscopy. Conclusions  The quality of colonoscopy was better in non-academic hospitals. The rate of detection of advanced neoplasia was higher in non-academic hospitals and correlated with the rate of post-colonoscopy CRC.

Cecum intubation rate as quality indicator in clinical versus screening colonoscopy

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Some guidelines recommend a minimum standard of 90 % cecal intubation rate (CIR) in routine clinics and 95 % in screening colonoscopy, while others have not made this distinction - both with limited evidence to support either view. This study questions the rationale for making such differentiation.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

 We assessed cecum intubation rates amongst colonoscopies recorded in the Norwegian national quality register Gastronet by 35 endoscopists performing both clinical and screening colonoscopies. Colonoscopies were categorized into primary screening colonoscopy, work-up colonoscopy of screen-positives and clinical colonoscopy or surveillance. Cases with insufficient bowel preparation or mechanical obstruction were excluded. Endoscopists were categorized into "junior" and "senior" endoscopists depending on training and experience. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were applied.

RESULTS

During a 2-year period, 10,267 colonoscopies were included (primary screening colonoscopy: 746; work-up colonoscopy of screen-positives: 2,604; clinical colonoscopy or surveillance: 6917). The crude CIR in clinical routine colonoscopy, primary screening colonoscopy and work-up colonoscopy was 97.1 %, 97.1 % and 98.6 %, respectively. In a multiple logistic regression analysis, there were no differences in CIR between the 3 groups. Poor bowel cleansing and female sex were independent predictors for intubation failure.

CONCLUSION

Cecal intubation rate in clinical colonoscopies and colonoscopy screening are similar. There is no reason to differentiate between screening and clinical colonoscopy with regard to CIR.

SPECT-computed tomography in rats with TNBS-induced colitis: A first step toward functional imaging

AIM

To assess the feasibility of SPECT-computed tomography (CT) in rats with trinitrobenzene sulfonic acid (TNBS)-induced acute colitis and confront it with model inflammatory characteristics.

METHODS

Colitis was induced in Sprague-Dawley rats by intrarectal injection of TNBS (n = 10) while controls received vehicle (n = 10). SPECT-CT with intravenous injection of 10 MBq of 67Ga-Citrate was performed at day 2. SPECT-CT criteria were colon wall thickness and maximal wall signal intensity. Laboratory parameters were assessed: colon weight:length ratio, colon cyclooxygenase-2 expression by western blot and histological inflammatory score.

RESULTS

Colon weight/length ratio, colon COX-2 expression and histological inflammatory score were significantly higher in the TNBS group than in the control group (P = 0.0296, P < 0.0001, P = 0.0007 respectively). Pixel max tend to be higher in the TNBS group than in the control group but did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.0662). Maximal thickness is significantly increased in the TNBS group compared to the control group (P = 0.0016) while colon diameter is not (P = 0.1904). Maximal thickness and colon diameter were correlated to colon COX-2 expression (P = 0.0093, P = 0.009 respectively) while pixel max was not (P = 0.22). Maximal thickness was significantly increased when inflammation was histologically observed (P = 0.0043) while pixel max and colon diameter did not (P = 0.2452, P = 0.3541, respectively).

CONCLUSION

SPECT-CT is feasible and easily distinguished control from colitic rats.

Expert opinions and scientific evidence for colonoscopy key performance indicators

Colonoscopy is a widely performed procedure with procedural volumes increasing annually throughout the world. Many procedures are now performed as part of colorectal cancer screening programmes. Colonoscopy should be of high quality and measures of this quality should be evidence based. New UK key performance indicators and quality assurance standards have been developed by a working group with consensus agreement on each standard reached. This paper reviews the scientific basis for each of the quality measures published in the UK standards.

What Can We Do to Optimize Colonoscopy and How Effective Can We Be?

In the USA, colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer and third leading cause of cancer death among both men and women. Declining rates of colon cancer in the past decade have been attributed in part to screening and removal of precancerous polyps via colonoscopy. Recent emphasis has been placed on measures to increase the quality and effectiveness of colonoscopy. These have been divided into pre-procedure quality metrics (bowel preparation), procedural quality metrics (cecal intubation, withdrawal time, and adenoma detection rate), post-procedure metrics (surveillance interval), and other quality metrics (patient satisfaction and willingness to repeat the procedure). The purpose of this article is to review the data and controversies surrounding each of these and identify ways to optimize the performance of colonoscopy.

Age Is the Only Predictor of Poor Bowel Preparation in the Hospitalized Patient

We examine the impact of key variables on the likelihood of inpatient poor bowel preparation for colonoscopy. Records of inpatients that underwent colonoscopy at our institution between January 2010 and December 2011 were retrospectively extracted. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models were fitted to assess the effect of clinical variables on the odds of poor preparation. Tested predictors included age; gender; use of narcotics; heavy medication burden; comorbidities; history of previous abdominal surgery; neurological disorder; product used for bowel preparation, whether or not the bowel regimen was given as split or standard dose; and time of endoscopy. Overall, 244 patients were assessed including 83 (34.0%, 95% CI: 28.1-39.9%) with poor bowel preparation. Cecal intubation was achieved in 81.1% of patients (95% CI: 76.2-86.0%). When stratified by quality of bowel preparation, cecal intubation was achieved in only 65.9% (95% CI: 60.0-71.9%) of patients with poor bowel preparation and 89.9% (95% CI: 86.1-93.7%) of patient with good bowel preparation. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, only advancing age was an independent predictor of poor bowel preparation (OR = 1.026, CI: 1.006 to 1.045, and p = 0.008). Age is the only independent predictor of poor bowel preparation amongst hospitalized patients.

Characterization of the Hispanic or latino population in health research: a systematic review

The size and diversity of the Hispanic population in the United States has dramatically increased, with vast implications for health research. We conducted a systematic review of the characterization of the Hispanic population in health research and described its implications. Relevant studies were identified by searches of PubMed, Embase Scopus, and Science/Social Sciences Citation Index from 2000 to 2011. 131 articles met criteria. 56% of the articles reported only "Hispanic" or "Latino" as the characteristic of the Hispanic research population while no other characteristics were reported. 29% of the articles reported language, 27% detailed country of origin and 2% provided the breakdown of race. There is great inconsistency in reported characteristics of Hispanics in health research. The lack of detailed characterization of this population ultimately creates roadblocks in translating evidence into practice when providing care to the large and increasingly diverse Hispanic population in the US.

Predicting Non-Adherence with Outpatient Colonoscopy Using a Novel Electronic Tool that Measures Prior Non-Adherence

BACKGROUND

Accurately predicting the risk of no-show for a scheduled colonoscopy can help target interventions to improve compliance with colonoscopy, and thereby reduce the disease burden of colorectal cancer and enhance the utilization of resources within endoscopy units.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to utilize information available in an electronic medical record (EMR) and endoscopy scheduling system to create a predictive model for no-show risk, and to simultaneously evaluate the role for natural language processing (NLP) in developing such a model.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective observational study using discovery and validation phases to design a colonoscopy non-adherence prediction model. An NLP-derived variable called the Non-Adherence Ratio ("NAR") was developed, validated, and included in the model.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients scheduled for outpatient colonoscopy at an Academic Medical Center (AMC) that is part of a multi-hospital health system, 2009 to 2011, were included in the study.

MAIN MEASURES

Odds ratios for non-adherence were calculated for all variables in the discovery cohort, and an Area Under the Receiver Operating Curve (AUC) was calculated for the final non-adherence prediction model.

KEY RESULTS

The non-adherence model included six variables: 1) gender; 2) history of psychiatric illness, 3) NAR; 4) wait time in months; 5) number of prior missed endoscopies; and 6) education level. The model achieved discrimination in the validation cohort (AUC= =70.2 %). At a threshold non-adherence score of 0.46, the model's sensitivity and specificity were 33 % and 92 %, respectively. Removing the NAR from the model significantly reduced its predictive power (AUC = 64.3 %, difference = 5.9 %, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

A six-variable model using readily available clinical and demographic information demonstrated accuracy for predicting colonoscopy non-adherence. The NAR, a novel variable developed using NLP technology, significantly strengthened this model's predictive power.

Comparison of polyethylene glycol vs sodium picosulphate vs sodium biphosphonate by efficacy in bowel cleansing and patients' tolerability: a randomised trial

INTRODUCTION

Adequate bowel preparation is necessary for a complete colonoscopy. Polyethylene glycol-electrolyte oral solution (PEG-EOS), sodium picosulphate (SS) and sodium biphosphonate (SP) are the three most commonly used purgative agents. We aimed to determine their efficacy and tolerability compared to each other in a randomised study.

METHODS

313 patients were randomly assigned to receive either PEG-EOS, SS or SP. Patients completed a tolerability score pre-colonoscopy. A cleanliness score was used to document adequacy of bowel preparation. A separate group of patients completed taste scores for the three cathartic agents before and after addition of flavour.

RESULTS

PEG-EOS was the worst-tolerated regimen but achieved the highest rates of right colonic cleansing and the lowest rate of incomplete colonoscopies. There were no statistical differences in the rates of rectosigmoid and mid-gut cleansing among the three agents. SS was by far the preferred purgative in the taste assessment study. Addition of flavour increased significantly taste scores for PEG-EOS.

CONCLUSION

For adequate bowel cleansing PEG-EOS is the most effective but is the least tolerated and least preferred among patients. Addition of flavour increases significantly patients' acceptance of PEG-EOS.

Predicting Colonoscopy Completion Among African American and Latino/a Participants in a Patient Navigation Program

Patient navigation (PN) effectively increases screening colonoscopy (SC) rates, a key to reducing deaths from colorectal cancer (CRC). Ethnic minority populations have disproportionately low SC rates and high CRC mortality rates and, therefore, especially stand to benefit from PN. Adapting the Health Belief Model as an explanatory model, the current analysis examined predictors of SC rates in two randomized studies that used PN to increase SC among 411 African American and 461 Latino/a patients at a large urban medical center. Speaking Spanish but not English (odds ratio (OR), 2.192; p < 0.005), having a higher income (OR, 1.218; p < 0.005), and scoring higher on the Pros of Colonoscopy scale (OR, 1.535; p = 0.023) independently predicted colonoscopy completion. Health education and PN programs that increase awareness of the benefits of getting a colonoscopy may encourage colonoscopy completion. In the context of language-appropriate PN programs for African American and Latino/a individuals, those with lower incomes and English speakers may require additional education and counseling to support their decision-making around colonoscopy.

An analysis of the learning curve to achieve competency at colonoscopy using the JETS database

OBJECTIVE

The number of colonoscopies required to reach competency is not well established. The primary aim of this study was to determine the number of colonoscopies trainees need to perform to attain competency, defined by a caecal intubation rate (CIR) ≥90%. As competency depends on completion, we also investigated trainee factors that were associated with colonoscopy completion.

DESIGN

The Joint Advisory Group on GI Endoscopy in the UK has developed a trainee e-portfolio from which colonoscopy data were retrieved. Inclusion criteria were all trainees who had performed a total of ≥20 colonoscopies and had performed ≤50 colonoscopies prior to submission of data to the e-portfolio. The primary outcome measure was colonoscopy completion. The number of colonoscopies required to achieve CIR ≥90% was calculated by the moving average method and learning curve cumulative summation (LC-Cusum) analysis. To determine factors which determine colonoscopy completion, a mixed effect logistic regression model was developed which allowed for nesting of patients within trainees and nesting of patients within hospitals, with various patient, trainee and training factors entered as fixed effects.

RESULTS

297 trainees undertook 36 730 colonoscopies. By moving average analysis, the cohort of trainees reached a CIR of 90% at 233 procedures. By LC-Cusum analysis, 41% of trainees were competent after 200 procedures. Of the trainee factors, the number of colonoscopies, intensity of training and previous flexible sigmoidoscopy experience were significant factors associated with colonoscopy completion.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the largest study to date investigating the number of procedures required to achieve competency in colonoscopy. The current training certification benchmark in the UK of 200 procedures does not appear to be an inappropriate minimum requirement. The LC-Cusum chart provides real time feedback on individual learning curves for trainees. The association of training intensity and flexible sigmoidoscopy experience with colonoscopy completion could be exploited in training programmes.

Variation in caecal intubation rates between screening and symptomatic patients

BACKGROUND

The caecal intubation rate (CIR) is an important quality standard for endoscopists, as well as for national bowel cancer screening programmes; however, individuals undergoing colonoscopy for bowel screening and symptomatic patients represent different groups, and their characteristics may affect colonoscopy performance.

OBJECTIVE

To compare colonoscopists' performance, as assessed by the CIR, in symptomatic patients compared to individuals undergoing colonoscopy for bowel cancer screening.

METHODS

Retrospective audit of CIRs for all patients undergoing colonoscopy at our institution during the year 2008. We retrieved the data from an endoscopy reporting software database and from the local bowel cancer screening programme database. Demographic data was extracted, as well as details of known factors that may affect completion of colonoscopy, such as poor bowel preparation, presence of diverticular disease, polyps, tumour and strictures. The unadjusted CIRs for colonoscopists participating in the screening programme were compared between the bowel screening and the symptomatic patient groups.

RESULTS

Five screening colonoscopists performed 1056 colonoscopies, of which 488 were bowel screening procedures. The overall CIR was significantly lower in the symptomatic, compared to the screening, individuals (88.5% versus 93%, P < 0.02). No significant differences were observed between the two groups for risk factors that could impair the CIR. The CIR was <90% for two of the five colonoscopists in symptomatic patients, and just under 90% for one colonoscopist in screening individuals. Multivariate analysis revealed that non-screening colonoscopy was an independent predictor for an incomplete procedure (OR 1.8; 95% CI 1.2-2.8).

CONCLUSIONS

The CIR, a key quality performance indicator for colonoscopy, is lower in symptomatic patients compared to individuals undergoing colorectal cancer screening. These results suggested that CIR should be monitored independently in screening and non-screening colonoscopies.

Effects of colon capsule endoscopy on medical decision making in patients with incomplete colonoscopies

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) is an orally ingested colon imaging tool used to evaluate patients with colonic disease. We evaluated the efficacy of CCE in helping physicians make decisions about patients with incomplete conventional colonoscopies (ICCs).

METHODS

In a prospective study, we analyzed data from 34 patients with nonocclusive ICC who were eligible for CCE between May 2010 and April 2011; patients with colectomy, occlusive lesions, or inadequate bowel cleansing for the colonoscopy were excluded. Two experienced observers who were blinded to colonoscopy findings analyzed the CCE data. Four months later, medical records were reviewed to determine the effects of CCE on medical decision making. CCE was considered conclusive when the findings facilitated a medical decision.

RESULTS

Bowel cleanliness was good or excellent for 22 patients (64.7%). CCE exceeded the most proximal point reached by conventional colonoscopy in 29 patients (85.3%). CCE findings allowed formulation of a specific medical plan for 20 patients (58.8%); 12 (35.2%) had irrelevant or no lesions, so the study was concluded; 7 (20.5%) underwent polypectomy or surgery for advanced colorectal neoplasia; and 1 (3%) was treated for Crohn's disease. Inconclusive CCEs resulted from poor preparation of the bowel (n = 12) and excessively slow (n = 1) or rapid (n = 1) capsule transit.

CONCLUSIONS

CCE might be an alternative procedure to complete colon examination in patients with nonocclusive ICC.

The role of colonoscopy in evaluating hematochezia: a population-based study in a large consortium of endoscopy practices

BACKGROUND

Data on the role of colonoscopy in hematochezia are almost exclusively derived from clinical experience in tertiary care practice.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize the patient population who received colonoscopy for hematochezia in a consortium of diverse gastroenterology practices.

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis.

SETTING

Clinical Outcomes Research Initiative Database, 2002 to 2008.

PATIENTS

Adults undergoing colonoscopy for the indication of hematochezia.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Demographics, comorbidity, practice setting, adverse events, and colonoscopy procedure characteristics and findings. Age-stratified analyses and analyses of inpatient- versus outpatient-performed colonoscopies were also performed.

RESULTS

A total of 966,536 colonoscopies were performed during the study period, 76,186 (7.9%) were performed for evaluation of hematochezia. The majority of patients were white non-Hispanic men younger than 60 years old who underwent colonoscopy at a community practice site (79.1%) and had a low-risk American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score (81.5%), in whom colonoscopy reached the cecum (94.8%), and serious adverse events were rare. Colonoscopy findings were hemorrhoids (64.4%), diverticulosis (38.6%), and polyp or multiple polyps (38.8%). From the overall cohort, 38.3% were 60 years of age and older. The older age cohort had significantly more white non-Hispanic females, high-risk ASA scores, incomplete colonoscopies, and unplanned events. Colonoscopy findings demonstrated significantly higher rates of diverticulosis, polyp or multiple polyps, mucosal abnormality/colitis, tumor, and solitary ulcer (P < .0001). There were 3941 (5.2%) who underwent inpatient-performed colonoscopy. One third of this cohort (32.6%) was defined as having a high ASA score.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective database review.

CONCLUSIONS

These results describe patient populations and characterize colonoscopy findings in individuals presenting with hematochezia primarily in a community practice setting.

Magnetic resonance colonography in rats with TNBS-induced colitis: a feasibility and validation study

BACKGROUND

Magnetic resonance colonography (MRC) has been recently developed to assess bowel inflammation in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients. Evaluating animal models of inflammation with MRC may be important in new drug-screening processes. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of MRC in colitic rats and confront it with model characteristics.

METHODS

Colitis was induced by rectal injection of trinitrobenzene-sulfonic acid (TNBS) in 13 rats while six rats received the vehicle. MRC was performed at day 2. Colon inflammation and production of inflammatory mediators were evaluated. Image quality was assessed by wall and motion artifacts. MRC criteria were bowel wall thickness, wall signal intensity on T2-weighted (T2w) and T1w images, the appearance of a target sign pattern, and irregular patterns of mucosal surface.

RESULTS

MRC quality was good or excellent in 16/21 examinations with no difference between groups. Colitis rats were significantly different from controls in terms of wall thickness (P = 0.004), the appearance of a target sign pattern (P = 0.02), irregular patterns of mucosal surface (P = 0.01), and hyperintensity on T1w images (P = 0.03). All MRC criteria except maximal bowel wall thickness were associated with colon weight:length ratio and inflammatory biomarkers (all P < 0.05). Minimal bowel wall thickness and wall signal intensity on T2w images were associated with histological score (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

MRC is feasible and reliable in rats with TNBS-induced colitis. MRC criteria including colon wall thickness, wall signal intensity on T2w images, hyperintensity in T1w sequence, and the appearance of a target sign pattern may be potential targets for new IBD drugs.

Colonoscopy completion rates and reasons for incompletion

OBJECTIVES

Colonoscopy is one of the major procedures in gastroenterology. Since the procedure is operator dependant, Quality of each procedure is the main element of reliable outcome. One of the elements is the completion rate. Completion rate of endoscopy unit is a reliable measure to improve the quality of the procedure.

METHODOLOGY

We here reviewed retrospectively our endoscopy database from the main tertiary hospital in Qassim province, central part of Saudi Arabia. The recommended completion based on several professional societies range from 90 - 95 % completion rate according to the indication. We retrospectively reviewed our endoscopy database over the period from 2005 to 2008 in King Fahad Specialist Hospital.

RESULTS

Our adjusted completion rate was 85.3 %. The main reason of incompletion was poor preparation. Our completion rate was comparable throughout the study period.

CONCLUSION

our completion rate is below recommended range. We think this result will stimulate the efforts to incorporate more quality measures in the endoscopy unit.

Utilization and predictors of early repeat colonoscopy in Medicare beneficiaries

OBJECTIVES

Early repeat colonoscopy after an index examination may be justifiable, but may also reflect quality issues during the first examination. The aims of this study were to examine the use of second colonoscopy within 1 year of an index colonoscopy, and to examine patient and provider factors associated with use of early repeat colonoscopy.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study using a 20% nationally representative sample of 2003 Medicare claims. Patients aged ≥ 66 years undergoing colonoscopy were included in this study. We identified the use of second colonoscopy and barium enema within 1 year of the index procedure. We used logistic regression analyses to examine the independent predictors of these procedures.

RESULTS

We included 328,167 outpatient colonoscopies. In all, 5% had second colonoscopy and 2.2% had barium enema within 1 year of the index examination. Early repeat colonoscopy was more common if the index examination was performed by a family physician (odds ratio 1.39, 95% confidence interval 1.23-1.56), general surgeon (odds ratio 1.18, 95% confidence interval 1.10-1.27) or internist (odds ratio 1.12, 95% confidence interval 1.02-1.23) compared with a gastroenterologist, or after colonoscopies by an endoscopist in the lower quartiles of colonoscopy volume compared with endoscopists in the highest quartile. Increasing patient age and comorbidity, polyp detection, biopsy, polyp removal, incomplete index examination, and site of service were also significantly associated with early repeat colonoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

Early repeat colonoscopy is not unusual. The association of specialty and colonoscopy volume with early repeat colonoscopy suggests that there are modifiable processes of care or training that may prevent some of these repeat procedures.