UK key performance indicators and quality assurance standards for colonoscopy

Multicentre Study of 10,369 Symptomatic Patients Comparing the Diagnostic Accuracy of Colon Capsule Endoscopy, Colonoscopy and CT Colonography

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 pandemic, NHS England introduced colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) at scale to support the recovery of endoscopy. Symptomatic patients referred with suspected colorectal cancer (CRC) and a faecal immunochemical test (FIT) ≤ 100 μg Hb/g faeces were offered CCE.

AIMS

To evaluate the safety, diagnostic accuracy and utility of CCE in this setting.

METHODS

Consenting patients, referred on a suspected CRC pathway with FIT ≤ 100 μg Hb/g faeces, were offered CCE, colonoscopy or CT colonography. Each cohort was to be age-, sex-, symptom- and FIT-matched. We performed a paired comparison of findings in those who required colorectal endoscopy after CCE and recorded clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

We recruited 4878 patients for CCE, 5025 for colonoscopy and 466 for CT colonography patients. CCE was safely tolerated by 98.4% of patients. CCE identified a matched mass lesion in all patients with CRC when the examination was complete and adequately prepared. More polyps ≥ 10 mm and 6-9 mm were detected by CCE than by colonoscopy or CT colonography. Per-patient sensitivities for polyps ≥ 10 mm and 6-9 mm were 97% in those with a paired, complete and adequately prepared CCE than colonoscopy. Completion (74%) and bowel preparation adequacy rates (74%) were poorer than those of colonoscopy and CTC (both 88%). However, CCE usefully performed a filter function in 86% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

CCE is safe and accurate for the diagnosis of colorectal disease. In the suspected CRC pathway, its 'filter function' complements existing colorectal diagnostic services by creating additional capacity.

Prevalence of colonoscopy-related adverse events in older adults aged over 65 years: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This study aims to assess the occurrence of colonoscopy-related adverse events (AEs) in adults aged over 65 years, as there has been a significant increase in the prevalence of colonoscopies among the elderly compared to two decades ago.

METHODS

A comprehensive search was conducted on 3 June 2024, using the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases. Meta-analyses were performed using the generalized linear-mixed model, and the results were presented as pooled rates with relevant 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

We retrieved a total of 15 417 records and included 13 population-based studies. The overall rates of colonoscopy-related perforation and bleeding in the elderly population were 7.8 (95% CI 5.5-11.2; I2  = 94%) and 23.5 (95% CI 9.0-61.3; I2  = 100%) per 10 000 colonoscopies, respectively. The " > 80 years" group had a significantly higher risk of perforation (RR 2.55; 95% CI 1.15-5.66; I2  = 79%) and bleeding (RR 1.23; 95% CI 1.02-1.48; I2  = 0%) compared to the "65-80 years" group. For screening colonoscopies, the rates of perforation and bleeding were 8.5 (95% CI 7.1-10.2; I2  = 0%) and 27 (95% CI 9.0-81.0; I2  = 99%) per 10 000 colonoscopies, respectively. For diagnostic colonoscopies, the rates of perforation and bleeding were 18 (95% CI 16.2-20.0; I2  = 1%) and 16 (95% CI 8.1-31.3; I2  = 98%) per 10 000 colonoscopies, respectively. Compared to non-therapeutic colonoscopies, therapeutic procedures exhibited higher rates of both perforation (1.5 vs. 0.4 per 10 000 colonoscopies) and bleeding (7.1 vs. 0.5 per 10 000 colonoscopies). The prevalence of cardiopulmonary AEs in the elderly population is relatively high, although the definition used varies across different studies.

CONCLUSIONS

We conducted a comprehensive analysis on the prevalence of AEs related to colonoscopy in older adults. Overall, the AE rates remain low. However, we emphasize the importance of enhancing safety protocols to further minimize risks, ensuring that the benefits of colonoscopy continue to outweigh the risks, especially for patients over the age of 80.

The Future of Minimally Invasive GI and Capsule Diagnostics (REFLECT), October 2024

The fifth annual REFLECT (The futuRE oF MinimalLy InvasivE GI and Capsule diagnosTics) symposium, held in October 2024 in Nyborg, Denmark, focused on advancements in minimally invasive gastrointestinal (GI) diagnostics, particularly capsule endoscopy (CE) technologies. Key discussions included clinical updates, innovations in hardware and software, and the growing role of colon CE (CCE) in colorectal cancer screening. The event provided a platform for clinicians, engineers, industry representatives, and scientists to exchange knowledge and present the latest advancements in the field. Discussions covered clinical studies, future research protocols, and technological innovations, with also a notable focus on commercial solutions and expansion of the implementation of capsule endoscopy. The symposium also highlighted the significance of predictive models for patient selection and developments in panenteric CE. Innovative technologies presented included robotics for drug delivery and magnetic endoscopic guidance systems. AI advancements were discussed for their potential to reduce diagnostic fatigue and standardize image interpretation, but ethical concerns and the need for transparent algorithms remain. The importance of multidisciplinary collaboration was emphasized to bridge innovation and clinical practice. Home-based CCE delivery emerged as a promising model, despite mixed results from environmental impact assessments. Overall, REFLECT 2024 reinforced the clinical utility and challenges of capsule-based diagnostics, advocating for ongoing interdisciplinary research to support safe and effective integration into healthcare systems.

CT Colonography for Colorectal Cancer Prevention and Detection: Integration Into Clinical Practice, From the AJR Special Series on Screening

CT colonography (CTC) is a CT examination, performed with low dose and typically without IV contrast media, optimized to detect colorectal polyps and cancer. Despite extensive supporting data, CTC has had variable acceptance and use over the past two decades, particularly for a main indication of colorectal cancer screening. CTC is now at an inflection point after the approval in 2025 by CMS for reimbursement of CTC performed for colorectal cancer screening. Widespread use of CTC for CRC screening could help increase screening adherence rates and prevent cancer incidence. Nonetheless, radiologists must incorporate emerging knowledge regarding polyps' natural history and recognition of sessile serrated lesions, to leverage the screening efficiencies of CTC-based screening. The purposes of this article are to describe the current status of CRC in the United States and United Kingdom with consideration of historical reasons that have limited the test's use along with recent events that may portend a marked change in the test's acceptance; to highlight the challenges and potential solutions toward successful widespread CTC implementation; and to present new concepts in CTC and CRC screening relevant to radiologists.

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis: The Three-year Post-colonoscopy Colorectal Cancer Rate as per the World Endoscopy Organization Methodology

BACKGROUND & AIMS

In 2018, the World Endoscopy Organization (WEO) introduced standardized methods for calculating post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer-3yr rates (PCCRC-3yr). This systematic review aimed to calculate the global PCCRC-3yr according to the WEO methodology, its change over time, and to measure the association between risk factors and PCCRC occurrences.

METHODS

We searched 5 databases from inception until January 2024 for PCCRC-3yr studies that strictly adhered to the WEO methodology. The overall pooled PCCRC-3yr was calculated. For risk factors and time-trend analyses, the pooled PCCRC-3yr and odds ratios (ORs) of subgroups were compared.

RESULTS

Several studies failed to adhere to the WEO methodology. Eight studies from 4 Western European and 2 Northern American countries were included, totalling 220,106 detected-colorectal cancers (CRCs) and 18,148 PCCRCs between 2002 and 2017. The pooled Western World PCCRC-3yr was 7.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.4%-8.7%). The PCCRC-3yr significantly (P < .05) decreased from 7.9% (95% CI, 6.6%-9.4%) in 2006 to 6.7% (95% CI, 6.1%-7.3%) in 2012 (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.72-0.87). There were significantly higher rates for people with inflammatory bowel disease (PCCRC-3yr, 29.3%; OR, 6.17; 95% CI, 4.73-8.06), prior CRC (PCCRC-3yr, 29.8%; OR, 3.03; 95% CI, 1.34-4.72), proximal CRC (PCCRC-3yr, 8.6%; OR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.41-1.61), diverticular disease (PCCRC 3-yr, 11.6%; OR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.37-2.10), and female sex (PCCRC-3yr, 7.9%; OR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.11-1.20).

CONCLUSION

According to the WEO methodology, the Western World PCCRC-3yr was 7.5%. Reassuringly, this has decreased over time, but further work is required to identify the reasons for PCCRCs, especially in higher-risk groups. We devised a WEO methodology checklist to increase its adoption and standardise the categorization of patients in future PCCRC-3yr studies.

Sustained success in endoscopic performance demonstrated by the Irish National Endoscopy Quality Improvement Programme

Background and study aims

The National Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Quality Improvement (NEQI) Programme captures over 94% of endoscopic activity in the Republic of Ireland (ROI), accounting for > 120,000 colonoscopies per annum. The aim of this study was to assess temporal changes in colonoscopy Key Quality Indicators (KQIs) at a national level over a 5-year period among low-, intermediate-, and high-volume endoscopists.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of all NEQI colonoscopy episodes occurring between 2016 and 2022, collating colonoscopy KQIs (cecal intubation rate [CIR], comfort score [CS], polyp detection rate [PDR] and sedation use). Endoscopists with 5 consecutive years of activity were defined as low, intermediate, or high activity according to annual procedural volumes.

Results

Over 658,000 colonoscopies were completed by 1240 endoscopists. Workload is disproportionate, with 36% of endoscopists completing 66% of national colonoscopy volume. Low-, intermediate-, and high-activity endoscopists all demonstrated sustained improvements in KQI targets over the study period. Comparing experts (≥ 300 colonoscopies/year) vs non-experts, KQI plateaus were demonstrated for PDR at < 150 colonoscopies per year (34.2% vs 29.6%, P = 0.002), CS at < 200 procedures per year (97.5% vs 94.9%, P < 0.001), and CIR at < 250 colonoscopies per year (94.5% vs 93.4%, P = 0.048).

Conclusions

This study represents the first published endoscopist-level NEQI data demonstrating ongoing KQI improvements for endoscopists at all activity levels. Sustaining this improvement and continuing to capture national endoscopic performance will remain a core role of the Irish NEQI program. Workforce imbalances and minimum annual volumes continue to represent challenges for national endoscopy programs.

Adenoma Detection Rates by Physicians and Subsequent Colorectal Cancer Risk

Importance

Patients of physicians with higher adenoma detection rates (ADRs) during colonoscopy have lower colorectal cancer (CRC) risk after screening colonoscopy (ie, postcolonoscopy CRC). Among physicians with an ADR above the recommended threshold, it is unknown whether improving ADR is associated with a lower incidence of CRC in their patients.

Objective

To determine the association of improved ADR in physicians with a range of ADR values at baseline with CRC incidence among their patients.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A total of 789 physicians in the Polish Colonoscopy Screening Program were studied between 2000 and 2017, with final follow-up on December 31, 2022. Joinpoint regression analyses were used to identify trends between changes in ADR and postcolonoscopy CRC incidence. Rates of CRC after colonoscopy were compared between physicians whose ADR improved and those without improvement. ADR improvement was defined as either an improvement by at least 1 ADR sextile category or remaining in the highest category.

Exposure

Physician ADR.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Association of improved ADR with postcolonoscopy CRC incidence.

Results

Of 485 615 patients (mean [SD] age, 57 [5.41] years; 60% female), 1873 CRC diagnoses and 474 CRC-related deaths occurred during a median follow-up of 10.2 years. Among individual physicians at baseline, median (IQR) ADR was 21.8% (15.9%-28.2%) and maximum ADR was 63.0%. Joinpoint regression showed a change in CRC incidence trends at an ADR level of 26%, corresponding to a CRC incidence of 27.1 per 100 000 person-years. Patients of physicians whose ADR was less than 26% at baseline and improved during follow-up had a postcolonoscopy CRC incidence of 31.8 (95% CI, 29.5-34.3) per 100 000 person-years, compared with 40.7 (95% CI, 37.8-43.8) per 100 000 person-years for patients of physicians with an ADR of less than 26% at baseline who did not improve during follow-up (difference, 8.9/100 000 person-years [95% CI, 5.06-12.74]; P < .001). Patients of physicians whose ADR was above 26% at baseline and improved during follow-up had a postcolonoscopy CRC incidence of 23.4 (95% CI, 18.4-29.8) per 100 000 person-years, compared with 22.5 (95% CI, 18.3-27.6) for patients of physicians whose ADR was above 26% at baseline and did not improve during follow-up (difference, 0.9/100 000 person-years [95% CI, -6.46 to 8.26]; P = .80).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this observational study, improved ADR over time was statistically significantly associated with lower CRC risk in patients who underwent colonoscopy compared with absence of ADR improvement, but only among patients whose physician had a baseline ADR of less than 26%.

Efficiency of Real-time Computer-aided Polyp Detection during Surveillance Colonoscopy: A Pilot Study

Objectives

Studies have suggested that computer-aided polyp detection using artificial intelligence improves adenoma identification during colonoscopy. However, its real-world effectiveness remains unclear. Therefore, this study evaluated the usefulness of computer-aided detection during regular surveillance colonoscopy.

Methods

Consecutive patients who underwent surveillance colonoscopy with computer-aided detection between January and March 2023 and had undergone colonoscopy at least twice during the past 3 years were recruited. The clinicopathological findings of lesions identified using computer-aided detection were evaluated. The detection ability was sub-analyzed based on the expertise of the endoscopist and the presence of diminutive adenomas (size ≤5 mm).

Results

A total of 78 patients were included. Computer-aided detection identified 46 adenomas in 28 patients; however, no carcinomas were identified. The mean withdrawal time was 824 ± 353 s, and the mean tumor diameter was 3.3 mm (range, 2-8 mm). The most common gross type was 0-Is (70%), followed by 0-Isp (17%) and 0-IIa (13%). The most common tumor locations were the ascending colon and sigmoid colon (28%), followed by the transverse colon (26%), cecum (7%), descending colon (7%), and rectum (4%). Overall, 34.1% and 38.2% of patients with untreated diminutive adenomas and those with no adenomas, respectively, had newly detected adenomas. Endoscopist expertise did not affect the results.

Conclusions

Computer-aided detection may help identify adenomas during surveillance colonoscopy for patients with untreated diminutive adenomas and those with a history of endoscopic resection.

The Effects of Positioning During Colonoscopy on Efficacy and Post-procedure Comfort

Background/Aims

There are studies with different results on improving effectiveness and patient comfort by increasing lumen distention through positioning during colonoscopy. In our study, we aimed to compare colonoscopy outcomes and post-procedural patient comfort in the left-lateral and right-lateral positions.

Materials and Methods

A total of 231 patients who underwent screening colonoscopy were included. Patients were randomized to either the left-lateral or the right-lateral position. Patient age, sex, comorbidities, body mass index (BMI) values, times to reach the cecum, ileum intubation rates, total procedure times, and colonoscopy findings were compared. Pain and discomfort after the procedure were evaluated and compared with the visual analog scale (VAS) scores at 30 minutes, 6 hours, and 24 hours.

Results

Colonoscopy was performed in the left-lateral position in 129 patients and in the right-lateral position in 102. The distributions of age, sex, comorbidities, and BMI values were similar in both groups. The time to reach the cecum and the total procedure time were similar in both groups. There were no significant differences in the findings detected by colonoscopy. There was no significant difference in the post-procedural VAS scores.

Conclusion

Automatic Quality Control System and Adenoma Detection Rates During Routine Colonoscopy: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

High-quality colonoscopy reduces the risks of colorectal cancer by increasing the adenoma detection rate. Routine use of an automatic quality control system (AQCS) to assist in colorectal adenoma detection should be considered.

Objective

To evaluate the effect of an AQCS on the adenoma detection rate among colonoscopists who were moderate- and low-level detectors during routine colonoscopy.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This multicenter, single-blind, randomized clinical trial was conducted at 6 centers in China from August 1, 2021, to September 30, 2022. Data were analyzed from March 1 to June 30, 2023. Individuals aged 18 to 80 years were enrolled. Exclusion criteria were a history of inflammatory bowel disease, advanced colorectal cancer, and polyposis syndromes; known colorectal polyps without complete removal previously; a history of colorectal surgery; known stenosis or obstruction with contraindication for biopsy or prior failed colonoscopy; pregnancy or lactation; and refusal to participate. Intention-to-treat and per-protocol analysis was used.

Interventions

Standard colonoscopy or AQCS-assisted colonoscopy.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Adenoma detection rate.

Results

A total of 1254 participants (mean [SD] age, 51.21 [12.10] years; 674 [53.7%] male) were randomized (627 standard colonoscopy, 627 AQCS-assisted colonoscopy). Intention-to-treat analysis showed a significantly higher adenoma detection rate in the AQCS-assisted group vs standard colonoscopy group (32.7% vs 22.6%; relative risk [RR], 1.60; 95% CI, 1.23-2.09; P < .001). The adenoma detection rates were significantly higher in the AQCS group when considering pathology (nonadvanced adenomas, 30.1% vs 21.2%; RR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.16-1.99; P = .002), and morphology (flat or sessile, 29.3% vs 20.4%, RR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.16-2.00; P = .003). Use of AQCS significantly increased the adenoma detection rate of both the lower-level detectors (30.0% vs 20.0%; RR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.24-2.35; P = .001) and the medium-level detectors (38.1% vs 27.7%; RR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.07-2.43; P = .02). Similar increases were found for adenoma detection rates in the academic and nonacademic centers (academic: 29.3% vs 20.8%; RR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.10-2.29; P = .01; nonacademic: 36.1% vs 24.5%; RR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.23-2.46; P = .002). The number of adenomas per colonoscopy was significantly higher in the AQCS-assisted group (0.86 vs 0.48; RR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.17-1.91; P = .001). The mean withdrawal time without intervention was slightly increased with AQCS assistance (6.78 vs 6.46 minutes; RR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.26-1.52; P < .001). No serious adverse events were reported.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this randomized clinical trial, AQCS assistance during routine colonoscopy increased adenoma detection rates and several related polyp parameters compared with standard colonoscopy in the lower- and medium-level detectors in academic and nonacademic settings. Routine use of AQCS to assist in colorectal adenoma detection and quality improvement should be considered.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04901130.

Post-colonoscopy cancer rates in Scotland from 2012 to 2018: A population-based cohort study

AIM

The aim of this work was to quantify post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer (PCCRC) rates in National Health Service (NHS) Scotland using World Endoscopy Association guidelines, compare incidence between health boards and referral streams and explore comparisons in results with published data from other healthcare systems.

METHOD

This is a population-based cohort study using NHS Scotland data between 2012 and 2018. All people undergoing colonoscopy between 2012 and 2018 and subsequently diagnosed as having bowel cancer up to 3 years after their investigation were included. The main outcome measures are national trends in the PCCRC rate at 3 years (PCCRC-3yr). with comparison between bowel screening and non-screening referral routes, board of referral and analysis of factors associated with occurrence.

RESULTS

The overall unadjusted PCCRC-3yr was 7.9% (7.4%-8.3%). There was no change in the annual rate over the 7-year study period. The PCCRC rate was lower for the Scottish Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (6.7% vs. 8.3%), but compared unfavourably with rates reported by the NHS England Bowel Cancer Screening Programme from an earlier time period. There was wide variation in rates between health boards of similar population size. Rates were higher in women, with increasing age and in patients with a history of inflammatory bowel disease or diverticular disease.

CONCLUSION

Despite advances in technology, there has been no improvement in the PCCRC rate in Scotland between 2012 and 2018. Rates in bowel screening colonoscopy are better than in nonscreening colonoscopy but compare unfavourably with NHS England, possibly as a result of less robust endoscopist selection and training. Quality improvement is required in colonoscopy in order to improve patient outcomes nationally, and to allow equitable access to higher-quality colonoscopy in different regions of the country.

Colon capsule endoscopy polyp detection rate vs colonoscopy polyp detection rate: Systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) is a modern, non-invasive method for large bowel visualization, offering a less invasive alternative to traditional colonoscopy (TC). While TC remains the gold standard for comprehensive large bowel assessment, including the detection and treatment of various conditions, the effectiveness of CCE in detecting polyps is less established.

AIM

To systematically review and compare the polyp detection rates (PDR) of CCE and TC.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted using four scientific databases: CINAHL, MEDLINE via EBSCO, Cochrane Library, and MEDLINE/PubMed. A standardized search command was utilized to ensure consistency. Full papers were retrieved if they compared PDR between CCE and TC and involved patients over 18 years old. A meta-analysis was then conducted using the meta package in R software.

RESULTS

Initially, 339 articles were identified, with 128 duplicates and 15 non-English articles excluded, leaving 196 for screening. After further exclusions, 9 articles were included in the review. The meta-analysis revealed minimal differences in PDR between CCE and TC. The pooled PDR for TC was 0.61 (95%CI: 0.48–0.72), and for CCE, it was 0.61 (95%CI: 0.48–0.73). The overall comparison of the pooled PDR of both methods was 0.96 (95%CI: 0.90–1.02), indicating that CCE is non-inferior to TC.

CONCLUSION

CCE has emerged as a modern and safe diagnostic alternative to TC for polyp detection, demonstrating non-inferiority when compared to the conventional method.

Development and usability of an endoscopist report card assessing ERCP quality

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Audit and feedback (A&F) for ERCP is relatively understudied despite the demonstrated effectiveness of A&F for endoscopic procedures such as colonoscopy. Endoscopist "report cards" are one such A&F tool. We aimed to develop an ERCP report card and assess its appropriateness, acceptability, and feasibility through usability testing.

METHODS

A prototype report card was designed using a combination of published quality indicators and established predictors of adverse events (AEs). Exploratory analyses from a prospective multicenter registry were performed to further identify novel and/or understudied parameters for possible inclusion. Semistructured interviews with ERCP endoscopists were conducted and framework analysis performed. Validated postinterview usability instruments were administered. Feedback was incorporated to create a final report card.

RESULTS

The report card included domains of technical parameters, AE rates and prevention, and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs). Qualitative feedback was positive, with respondents agreeing with inclusion of relevant content in most domains. Postinterview instruments revealed adequate appropriateness and acceptability. PREMs were believed by respondents to be poorly actionable and were replaced with appropriateness of indication and fluoroscopy usage parameters in the final report card. Concerns were raised regarding the feasibility of implementation because of reliance on difficult-to-obtain granular intraprocedural data.

CONCLUSIONS

We designed and tested an ERCP report card that has the potential to be an effective A&F intervention for endoscopists in clinical practice. Although feasibility of data capture and implementation are currently limitations, advances in video recording and artificial intelligence technologies could accelerate widespread adoption of such a tool.

Association of Helicobacter pylori infection with colorectal polyps/adenomas: A single-center cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection may be associated with colorectal polyps/adenomas, but the current evidence remains controversial.

METHODS

We retrospectively screened the medical records of 655 participants who underwent both colonoscopy and H. pylori test from June 15, 2020 to April 30, 2023. The number, size, location, and pathological type of colorectal polyps/adenomas were compared between H. pylori positive and negative groups. Adjusting for age, gender, smoking, drinking, hypertension, diabetes, fatty liver, body mass index, and inflammatory and metabolic indicators, multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to evaluate the association of H. pylori infection with the number, size, location, and pathological type of colorectal polyps/adenomas, where no polyp/adenoma was used as reference.

RESULTS

Overall, 508 participants were included, of whom 154 and 354 were divided into H. pylori positive and negative groups, respectively. H. pylori positive group had significantly higher colorectal polyps/adenomas (74.7 % vs. 65.8 %, P=0.048), low-grade adenomas (55.7 % vs. 47.6 %, P=0.026), advanced adenomas (22.6 % vs. 13.3 %, P=0.008), and colorectal polyps/adenomas with sizes of ≥6 mm (61.7 % vs. 48.5 %, P=0.002) and ≥10 mm (25.2 % vs. 14.6 %, P=0.004) than H. pylori negative group. In multivariate logistic regression analyses, H. pylori infection was independently associated with low-grade adenomas (OR=2.677, 95 %CI=1.283-5.587, P=0.009), advanced adenomas (OR=3.017, 95 %CI=1.007-9.036, P=0.049), right-side colon polyps/adenomas (OR=5.553, 95 %CI=1.679-18.360, P=0.005), and colorectal polyps/adenomas with sizes of ≥10 mm (OR=4.436, 95 %CI=1.478-13.310, P=0.008), but not number of colorectal polyps/adenomas.

CONCLUSION

H. pylori infection is associated with increased risk of colorectal polyps/adenomas, especially low-grade adenomas, advanced adenomas, right-side colon polyps/adenomas, and large colorectal polyps/adenomas.

Subcapsular Splenic Hematoma After Diagnostic Colonoscopy: A Case Report

Colonoscopy is a widely performed diagnostic and therapeutic procedure essential for the screening, diagnosis, and management of various colorectal conditions. It is a routine and relatively safe procedure. Unfortunately, sometimes complications arise, one of the rarest being splenic injury. A splenic hematoma following colonoscopy can lead to significant morbidity and can be fatal if not promptly recognized and managed. We report a case of a 58-year-old female who initially refused imaging after presenting to the ED with abdominal pain following her procedure, but then presented again days later and was found to have a splenic hematoma and hemoperitoneum. She was ultimately managed medically and after an uneventful hospital course and was able to be discharged without requiring a splenectomy.

Nationally Automated Colonoscopy Performance Feedback Increases Polyp Detection: The NED APRIQOT Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer incidence and mortality rates are higher for endoscopists with low polyp detection rates. Using the UK's National Endoscopy Database (NED), which automatically captures real-time data, we assessed if providing feedback of case-mix-adjusted mean number of polyps (aMNP), as a key performance indicator, improved endoscopists' performance. Feedback was delivered via a theory-informed, evidence-based audit and feedback intervention.

METHODS

This multicenter, prospective, NED Automated Performance Reports to Improve Quality Outcomes Trial randomized National Health Service endoscopy centers to intervention or control. Intervention-arm endoscopists were e-mailed tailored monthly reports automatically generated within NED, informed by qualitative interviews and behavior change theory. The primary outcome was endoscopists' aMNP during the 9-month intervention.

RESULTS

From November 2020 to July 2021, 541 endoscopists across 36 centers (19 intervention; 17 control) performed 54,770 procedures during the intervention, and 15,960 procedures during the 3-month postintervention period. Comparing the intervention arm with the control arm, endoscopists during the intervention period: aMNP was nonsignificantly higher (7%; 95% CI, -1% to 14%; P = .08). The unadjusted MNP (10%; 95% CI, 1%-20%) and polyp detection rate (10%; 95% CI, 4%-16%) were significantly higher. Differences were not maintained in the postintervention period. In the intervention arm, endoscopists accessing NED Automated Performance Reports to Improve Quality Outcomes Trial webpages had a higher aMNP than those who did not (aMNP, 118 vs 102; P = .03).

CONCLUSIONS

Although our automated feedback intervention did not increase aMNP significantly in the intervention period, MNP and polyp detection rate did improve significantly. Engaged endoscopists benefited most and improvements were not maintained postintervention; future work should address engagement in feedback and consider the effectiveness of continuous feedback.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRY

 www.isrctn.org ISRCTN11126923 .

Faecal immunochemical tests can improve colonoscopy triage in patients with iron deficiency: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Use of the faecal immunochemical test (FIT) to triage patients with iron deficiency (ID) for colonoscopy due to suspected colorectal cancer (CRC) may improve distribution of colonoscopic resources. We reviewed the diagnostic performance of FIT for detecting advanced colorectal neoplasia, including CRC and advanced pre-cancerous neoplasia (APCN), in patients with ID, with or without anaemia.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of three databases for studies comprising of patients with ID, with or without anaemia, completing a quantitative FIT within six months prior to colonoscopy, where test performance was compared against the reference standard colonoscopy. Random effects meta-analyses determined the diagnostic performance of FIT for advanced colorectal neoplasia.

RESULTS

Nine studies were included on a total of n=1761 patients with ID, reporting FIT positivity thresholds between 4-150 µg haemoglobin/g faeces. Only one study included a non-anaemic ID (NAID) cohort. FIT detected CRC and APCN in ID patients with 90.7 % and 49.3 % sensitivity, and 81.0 % and 82.4 % specificity, respectively. FIT was 88.0 % sensitive and 83.4 % specific for CRC in patients with ID anaemia at a FIT positivity threshold of 10 µg haemoglobin/g faeces.

CONCLUSIONS

FIT shows high sensitivity for advanced colorectal neoplasia and may be used to triage those with ID anaemia where colonoscopic resources are limited, enabling those at higher risk of CRC to be prioritised for colonoscopy. There is a need for further research investigating the diagnostic performance of FIT in NAID patients.

Choosing Your Endoscopist: A Retrospective Single-Centre Cohort Study

Background Colorectal cancer is one of the most common internal malignancies affecting Australians, and colonoscopy is widely accepted as a part of comprehensive large bowel assessment. Different specialties perform colonoscopies, most commonly general surgeons and gastroenterologists. Analysing performance outcomes against benchmarks allows insight into inter-specialty differences and enables the improvement of overall service provision and quality. Methods We performed a retrospective single-centre cohort study on 2086 patients undergoing colonoscopies by seven surgeons (S) and nine gastroenterologists (G) between July 2021 and June 2023. Primary outcomes were comparative caecal intubation rates (CIR), photo documentation rates (PDR), documented withdrawal rates (DWR), withdrawal times (WT), and adenoma detection rates (ADR). Secondary outcomes characterised adenoma frequency, optimal WT, and indications for colonoscopies. Results We found significant differences in CIR (S: 94.9%, 990/1043; G: 99%, 1033/1043, P<0.01), PDR (S: 95.9%, 949/990; G: 99.1%, 1024/1033, P<0.01), DWR (S: 17.4%, 181/1043; G: 87.3%, 911/1043, P<0.01), WT >6 minutes (S: 82.3%, 149/181; G: 97.8%, 891/911, P<0.01), and ADR (S: 37.9%, 193/509; G: 59.7%, 421/705, P<0.01). Subgroup analysis revealed adenoma frequency peaked at 50-70 years old and optimal WT was ≥9 minutes. We demonstrated surgeons mainly perform colonoscopies for diverticulitis surveillance, abnormal imaging, post-cancer resections, and rectal bleeding, but gastroenterologists predominantly investigate bowel symptoms, polyp surveillance, positive faecal occult blood test, and anaemia. Conclusion Despite both specialties surpassing national standards in CIR and ADR, there were significant differences in performance indicators. We believe ADR differences could be explained by different indications specialties perform colonoscopies for. Increasing WT ≥9 minutes could improve ADR, and education on the usage of withdrawal timer on endoscopes will improve DWR.

Colonoscopy findings in patients with haematochezia in Benin (South-South Nigeria): A 9-year prospective study

Background

Colonoscopy is an important armamentarium in the investigation of haematochezia. Patients with haematochezia are very anxious about the presence of blood in their faeces. They are usually referred for diagnostic colonoscopy based on the presence of blood in stool or anaemia.

Aims/Objectives

To highlight the causes of haematochezia in patients over a 9-year prospective period in the Premier tertiary health centre in the South-South zone of Nigeria.

Materials and Methods

All Consecutive patients seen in our surgical services (June 1, 2009, to May 30, 2018) requiring colonoscopy for haematochezia were entered into a proforma. The demographics, findings at colonoscopy, and outcome of colonoscopy were analysed.

Results

Three hundred and sixty-five colonoscopies were done during the study period; of these, 44% (160 patients) had a colonoscopy for haematochezia. Mean age of patients was 54.7 years. Age range was 16-86 years. Cluster age group was fifth to seventh decade (62.5%). The male-to-female ratio was 2:1. Causes of haematochezia were Haemorrhoids 32.5%, large bowel cancer 23.8%, diverticular disease 10%, inflammatory disease of the bowel 6.3%, polyps 3.8%. About 15% of the patients had more than one colonic site of bleeding. The most common subsites for colon cancer were rectum and sigmoid colon (79.6%), in 11 patients (6.8%) was the tumour within reach of the examining finger. Repeat colonoscopy occurred in 3 patients (0.8%). The most common complication of colonoscopy was bleeding (0.8%). Two patients (0.5%) had colonic perforation.

Conclusion

Forty-four percent (44%) of colonoscopy in Benin, South-South Nigeria has haematochezia as its indication. The cluster age group is the fifth to seventh decade. One in four patients had colon cancer and in 6.8% the tumour was within reach of the examining finger. It is the authors' opinion that colonoscopy should be routinely done in patients with haematochezia in South-South Nigeria.

Cancer Biology or Ineffective Surveillance? A Multicentre Retrospective Analysis of Colitis-Associated Post-Colonoscopy Colorectal Cancers

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] is associated with high rates of post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer [PCCRC], but further in-depth qualitative analyses are required to determine whether they result from inadequate surveillance or aggressive IBD cancer evolution.

METHODS

All IBD patients who had a colorectal cancer [CRC] diagnosed between January 2015 and July 2019 and a recent [<4 years] surveillance colonoscopy at one of four English hospital trusts underwent root cause analyses as recommended by the World Endoscopy Organisation to identify plausible PCCRC causative factors.

RESULTS

In total, 61% [n = 22/36] of the included IBD CRCs were PCCRCs. They developed in patients with high cancer risk factors [77.8%; n = 28/36] requiring annual surveillance, yet 57.1% [n = 20/35] had inappropriately delayed surveillance. Most PCCRCs developed in situations where [i] an endoscopically unresectable lesion was detected [40.9%; n = 9/22], [ii] there was a deviation from the planned management pathway [40.9%; n = 9/22], such as service-, clinician- or patient-related delays in acting on a detected lesion, or [iii] lesions were potentially missed as they were typically located within areas of active inflammation or post-inflammatory change [36.4%; n = 8/22].

CONCLUSIONS

IBD PCCRC prevention will require more proactive strategies to reduce endoscopic inflammatory burden, and to improve lesion optical characterization, adherence to recommended surveillance intervals, and patient acceptance of prophylactic colectomy. However, the significant proportion appearing to originate from non-adenomatous-looking mucosa which fail to yield neoplasia on biopsy yet display aggressive cancer evolution highlights the limitations of current surveillance. Emerging molecular biomarkers may play a role in enhancing cancer risk stratification in future clinical practice.

Clinical and endoscopic characteristics of patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures in Egypt: a nationwide multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Egypt faces a significant public health burden due to chronic liver diseases (CLD) and peptic ulcer disease. CLD, primarily caused by Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, affects over 2.9% of the population nationwide, with regional variations. Steatotic liver disease is rapidly emerging as a significant contributor to CLD, especially in urban areas. Acid-related disorders are another widespread condition that can significantly impact the quality of life. These factors and others significantly influence the indications and findings of gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures performed in Egypt.

AIM

We aimed to evaluate the clinico-demographic data, indications, and endoscopic findings in Egyptian patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures in various regions of Egypt.

METHODS

This study employed a retrospective multicenter cross-sectional design. Data was collected from patients referred for gastrointestinal endoscopy across 15 tertiary gastrointestinal endoscopy units in various governorates throughout Egypt.

RESULTS

5910 patients aged 38-63 were enrolled in the study; 75% underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), while 25% underwent a colonoscopy. In all studied patients, the most frequent indications for EGD were dyspepsia (19.5%), followed by hematemesis (19.06%), and melena (17.07%). The final EGD diagnoses for the recruited patients were portal hypertension-related sequelae (60.3%), followed by acid-related diseases (55%), while 10.44% of patients had a normally apparent endoscopy. Male gender, old age, and the presence of chronic liver diseases were more common in patients from upper than lower Egypt governorates. Hematochezia (38.11%) was the most reported indication for colonoscopy, followed by anemia of unknown origin (25.11%). IBD and hemorrhoids (22.34% and 21.86%, respectively) were the most prevalent diagnoses among studied patients, while normal colonoscopy findings were encountered in 18.21% of them.

CONCLUSION

This is the largest study describing the situation of endoscopic procedures in Egypt. our study highlights the significant impact of regional variations in disease burden on the utilization and outcomes of GI endoscopy in Egypt. The high prevalence of chronic liver disease is reflected in the EGD findings, while the colonoscopy results suggest a potential need for increased awareness of colorectal diseases.

Initiatives to increase colonoscopy capacity - is there an impact on polyp detection? A UK National Endoscopy Database analysis

BACKGROUND

 To address mismatch between routine endoscopy capacity and demand, centers often implement initiatives to increase capacity, such as weekend working or using locums/agency staff (insourcing). However, there are concerns that such initiatives may negatively impact quality. We investigated polyp detection for weekend vs. weekday and insourced vs. standard procedures using data from the UK National Endoscopy Database.

METHODS

 We conducted a national, retrospective, cross-sectional study of diagnostic colonoscopies performed during 01/01-04/04/2019. The primary outcome was mean number of polyps (MNP) and the secondary outcome was polyp detection rate (PDR). Multi-level mixed-effect regression, fitting endoscopist as a random effect, was used to examine associations between procedure day (weekend/weekday) and type (insourced/standard) and these outcomes, adjusting for patient age, sex, and indication.

RESULTS

 92 879 colonoscopies (weekends: 19 977 [21.5 %]; insourced: 9909 [10.7 %]) were performed by 2496 endoscopists. For weekend colonoscopies, patients were less often male or undergoing screening-related procedures; for insourced colonoscopies, patients were younger and less often undergoing screening-related procedures (all P < 0.05). Fully adjusted MNP was significantly lower for weekend vs. weekday (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 0.86 [95 %CI 0.83-0.89]) and for insourced vs. standard procedures (IRR 0.91 [95 %CI 0.87-0.95]). MNP was highest for weekday standard procedures and lowest for weekend insourced procedures; there was no interaction between procedure day and type. Similar associations were found for PDR.

CONCLUSIONS

 Strategies to increase colonoscopy capacity may negatively impact polyp detection and should be monitored for quality. Reasons for this unwarranted variation require investigation.

Excellent Bowel Preparation Quality Is Not Superior to Good Bowel Preparation Quality for Improving Adenoma/Polyp Detection Rate

Background

Adequate bowel preparation quality is essential for high-quality colonoscopy according to the current guidelines. However, the excellent effect of bowel preparation on adenoma/polyp detection rate (ADR/PDR) remained controversial.

Methods

During the period from December 2020 to August 2022, a total of 1566 consecutive patients underwent colonoscopy by an endoscopist. Their medical records were reviewed. According to the Boston bowel preparation scale, patients were divided into excellent, good, and poor bowel preparation quality groups. ADR/PDR, diminutive ADR/PDR, small ADR/PDR, intermediate ADR/PDR, large ADR/PDR, and number of adenomas/polyps were compared among them. Logistic regression analyses were performed to identify the factors that were significantly associated with ADR/PDR.

Results

Overall, 1232 patients were included, of whom 463, 636, and 133 were assigned to the excellent, good, and poor groups, respectively. The good group had a significantly higher ADR/PDR (63% vs 55%, P = .015) and a larger number of adenomas/polyps (2.5 ± 3.2 vs 2.0 ± 2.8, P = .030) than the poor group. Both ADR/PDR (63% vs 55%, P = .097) and number of adenomas/polyps (2.2 ± 2.8 vs 2.0 ± 2.8, P = .219) were not significantly different between excellent and poor groups. The excellent (9% vs 4%, P = .045) and good (9% vs 4%, P = .040) groups had a significantly higher intermediate ADR/PDR than the poor group. Logistic regression analyses showed that either good (odds ratio [OR] = 1.786, 95% CI = 1.046-3.047, P = .034) or excellent (OR = 2.179, 95% CI = 1.241-3.826, P = .007) bowel preparation quality was independently associated with a higher ADR/PDR compared with poor bowel preparation quality. Excellent (OR = 1.202, 95% CI = 0.848-1.704, P = .302) bowel preparation quality was not independently associated with a higher ADR/PDR compared with good bowel preparation quality.

Conclusions

The pursuit of excellence in bowel preparation does not show an association with increased ADR/PDR and number of adenomas/polyps compared with a good level. In addition, our study further contributes to the existing evidence that poor bowel preparation compromises ADR/PDR and number of adenomas/polyps.

Training in basic gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures: a European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and European Society of Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Nurses and Associates (ESGENA) Position Statement

This ESGE Position Statement provides structured and evidence-based guidance on the essential requirements and processes involved in training in basic gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopic procedures. The document outlines definitions; competencies required, and means to their assessment and maintenance; the structure and requirements of training programs; patient safety and medicolegal issues. 1:  ESGE and ESGENA define basic endoscopic procedures as those procedures that are commonly indicated, generally accessible, and expected to be mastered (technically and cognitively) by the end of any core training program in gastrointestinal endoscopy. 2:  ESGE and ESGENA consider the following as basic endoscopic procedures: diagnostic upper and lower GI endoscopy, as well as a limited range of interventions such as: tissue acquisition via cold biopsy forceps, polypectomy for lesions ≤ 10 mm, hemostasis techniques, enteral feeding tube placement, foreign body retrieval, dilation of simple esophageal strictures, and India ink tattooing of lesion location. 3:  ESGE and ESGENA recommend that training in GI endoscopy should be subject to stringent formal requirements that ensure all ESGE key performance indicators (KPIs) are met. 4:  Training in basic endoscopic procedures is a complex process and includes the development and acquisition of cognitive, technical/motor, and integrative skills. Therefore, ESGE and ESGENA recommend the use of validated tools to track the development of skills and assess competence. 5:  ESGE and ESGENA recommend incorporating a multimodal approach to evaluating competence in basic GI endoscopic procedures, including procedural thresholds and the measurement and documentation of established ESGE KPIs. 7:  ESGE and ESGENA recommend the continuous monitoring of ESGE KPIs during GI endoscopy training to ensure the trainee's maintenance of competence. 9:  ESGE and ESGENA recommend that GI endoscopy training units fulfil the ESGE KPIs for endoscopy units and, furthermore, be capable of providing the dedicated personnel, infrastructure, and sufficient case volume required for successful training within a structured training program. 10:  ESGE and ESGENA recommend that trainers in basic GI endoscopic procedures should be endoscopists with formal educational training in the teaching of endoscopy, which allows them to successfully and safely teach trainees.

The impact of endoscopist performance and patient factors on distal adenoma detection and colorectal cancer incidence

BACKGROUND

High quality endoscopy is key for detecting and removing precursor lesions to colorectal cancer (CRC). Adenoma detection rates (ADRs) measure endoscopist performance. Improving other components of examinations could increase adenoma detection.

AIMS

To investigate how endoscopist performance at flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) affects adenoma detection and CRC incidence.

METHODS

Among 34,139 participants receiving FS screening by the main endoscopist at one of 13 centres in the UK FS Screening Trial, median follow-up was 17 years. Factors examined included family history of CRC, bowel preparation quality, insertion and withdrawal time, bowel segment reached, patient pain and ADR. Odds ratios (OR) for distal adenoma detection were estimated by logistic regression. Hazard ratios (HR) for distal CRC incidence were estimated by Cox regression.

RESULTS

At screening, 4,104 participants had distal adenomas detected and 168 participants developed distal CRC during follow-up. In multivariable models, a family history of CRC (yes vs. no: OR 1.40, 95%CI 1.21-1.62), good or adequate bowel preparation quality (vs. excellent: OR 0.84, 95%CI 0.74-0.95; OR 0.56, 95%CI 0.49-0.65, respectively) and longer insertion and withdrawal times (≥ 4.00 vs. < 2.00 min: OR 1.96, 95%CI 1.68-2.29; OR 32.79, 95%CI 28.22-38.11, respectively) were associated with adenoma detection. Being screened by endoscopists with low or intermediate ADRs, compared to high ADRs, was positively associated with CRC incidence (multivariable: HR 4.71, 95%CI 2.65-8.38; HR 2.16, 95%CI 1.22-3.81, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Bowel preparation quality and longer insertion and withdrawal time are key for improving distal adenoma detection. Higher ADRs were associated with a lower risk of distal CRC.

[Risk factors for delayed bleeding after intestinal polypectomy in children]

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the clinical characteristics and risk factors of delayed bleeding after intestinal polypectomy in children, and to provide a theoretical basis for clinical surgical intervention of intestinal polyps.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinical data of 2 456 children with intestinal polyps who underwent endoscopic high-frequency electrocoagulation loop resection in the Endoscopy Center of Children's Hospital Affiliated to Zhengzhou University from January 2014 to December 2021. According to the presence or absence of delayed bleeding after surgery, they were divided into bleeding group with 79 children and non-bleeding group with 2 377 children. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to investigate the risk factors for delayed bleeding. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to investigate the value of various indicators in predicting delayed bleeding.

RESULTS

Of all 2 456 children, 79 (3.22%) experienced delayed bleeding, among whom 5 children with severe delayed bleeding underwent emergency colonoscopy for hemostasis and 74 received conservative treatment, and successful hemostasis was achieved for all children. There were significant differences between the bleeding and non-bleeding groups in age, body mass index, constipation rate, location of lesion, time of endoscopic procedure, resection method (P<0.05). Children with a diameter of polyps of 6-10 mm and >20 mm were more likely to develop delayed bleeding after resection (P<0.05). The multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that endoscopic operation time, polyp diameter, and resection method were significantly associated with delayed bleeding (P<0.05). The ROC curve analysis showed that the endoscopic operation time, polyp diameter, and resection method had a good value in predicting delayed bleeding after intestinal polypectomy, with an area under the ROC curve of 0.706, 0.688, and 0.627, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic high-frequency electrocoagulation loop resection has a lower incidence of delayed bleeding in children with intestinal polyps, and the endoscopic operation time, polyp diameter, and resection method are closely associated with the occurrence of postoperative delayed bleeding.

Density clustering-based automatic anatomical section recognition in colonoscopy video using deep learning

Recognizing anatomical sections during colonoscopy is crucial for diagnosing colonic diseases and generating accurate reports. While recent studies have endeavored to identify anatomical regions of the colon using deep learning, the deformable anatomical characteristics of the colon pose challenges for establishing a reliable localization system. This study presents a system utilizing 100 colonoscopy videos, combining density clustering and deep learning. Cascaded CNN models are employed to estimate the appendix orifice (AO), flexures, and "outside of the body," sequentially. Subsequently, DBSCAN algorithm is applied to identify anatomical sections. Clustering-based analysis integrates clinical knowledge and context based on the anatomical section within the model. We address challenges posed by colonoscopy images through non-informative removal preprocessing. The image data is labeled by clinicians, and the system deduces section correspondence stochastically. The model categorizes the colon into three sections: right (cecum and ascending colon), middle (transverse colon), and left (descending colon, sigmoid colon, rectum). We estimated the appearance time of anatomical boundaries with an average error of 6.31 s for AO, 9.79 s for HF, 27.69 s for SF, and 3.26 s for outside of the body. The proposed method can facilitate future advancements towards AI-based automatic reporting, offering time-saving efficacy and standardization.

British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines on sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopy

Over 2.5 million gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures are carried out in the United Kingdom (UK) every year. Procedures are carried out with local anaesthetic r with sedation. Sedation is commonly used for gastrointestinal endoscopy, but the type and amount of sedation administered is influenced by the complexity and nature of the procedure and patient factors. The elective and emergency nature of endoscopy procedures and local resources also have a significant impact on the delivery of sedation. In the UK, the vast majority of sedated procedures are carried out using benzodiazepines, with or without opiates, whereas deeper sedation using propofol or general anaesthetic requires the involvement of an anaesthetic team. Patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy need to have good understanding of the options for sedation, including the option for no sedation and alternatives, balancing the intended aims of the procedure and reducing the risk of complications. These guidelines were commissioned by the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) Endoscopy Committee with input from major stakeholders, to provide a detailed update, incorporating recent advances in sedation for gastrointestinal endoscopy.This guideline covers aspects from pre-assessment of the elective 'well' patient to patients with significant comorbidity requiring emergency procedures. Types of sedation are discussed, procedure and room requirements and the recovery period, providing guidance to enhance safety and minimise complications. These guidelines are intended to inform practising clinicians and all staff involved in the delivery of gastrointestinal endoscopy with an expectation that this guideline will be revised in 5-years' time.

Causes of intraprocedural discomfort in colonoscopy: a review and practical tips

Colonoscopy is a commonly performed procedure in the United Kingdom and the gold standard for diagnosis and therapy in the gastrointestinal tract. Increased levels of pain during colonoscopy have been associated with reduced completion rates and difficulties in maintaining attendance for repeat procedures. Multiple factors play a role in causing discomfort intra-procedurally: patient factors, such as gender, anatomy and pre-procedure anxiety; operator factors, such as patient position and level of experience and other factors, such as bowel preparation and total procedure time. A literature search was performed to identify papers that explained how patient, operator and endoscopy factors influenced pain and discomfort in endoscopy. A further search then also identified papers describing solutions to pain and discomfort that have been explored. After review of the literature, key methods are selected and discussed in this paper. Solutions and aids that can resolve and improve pain and discomfort include endoscopic methods such as variable stiffness and ultrathin scopes. Operator improvements in techniques and ergonomics alongside the use of newer technologies such as propelled endoscopy, computer-assisted endoscopy and task distraction. To improve patient experience and outcomes, the investigation and research into improving techniques to reduce pain is crucial. This review aims to identify the modifiable and non-modifiable factors associated with intra-procedural discomfort during colonoscopy. We discuss established methods of improving pain during colonoscopy, in addition to newer technologies to mitigate associated discomfort.

Optimization of colonoscopy quality: Comprehensive review of the literature and future perspectives

Colonoscopy is crucial in preventing colorectal cancer (CRC) and reducing associated mortality. This comprehensive review examines the importance of high-quality colonoscopy and associated quality indicators, including bowel preparation, cecal intubation rate, withdrawal time, adenoma detection rate (ADR), complete resection, specimen retrieval, complication rates, and patient satisfaction, while also discussing other ADR-related metrics. Additionally, the review draws attention to often overlooked quality aspects, such as nonpolypoid lesion detection, as well as insertion and withdrawal skills. Moreover, it explores the potential of artificial intelligence in enhancing colonoscopy quality and highlights specific considerations for organized screening programs. The review also emphasizes the implications of organized screening programs and the need for continuous quality improvement. A high-quality colonoscopy is crucial for preventing postcolonoscopy CRC- and CRC-related deaths. Health-care professionals must develop a thorough understanding of colonoscopy quality components, including technical quality, patient safety, and patient experience. By prioritizing ongoing evaluation and refinement of these quality indicators, health-care providers can contribute to improved patient outcomes and develop more effective CRC screening programs.

Propofol-remifentanil patient-controlled sedation for endoscopic procedures: a prospective service audit

PURPOSE

Following demand, we established a patient-controlled propofol-remifentanil sedation service for endoscopy overseen by an anesthesiologist. To assess the effectiveness of the intervention of this service and any complications, we prospectively audited the service. Our primary outcomes of interest were adequacy of sedation and patient satisfaction. Secondary outcomes included any adverse events associated with the sedation.

METHODS

Patients were referred for failure of procedure under endoscopist-administered sedation, refusal of procedure without general anesthesia (GA), or planned complex procedure. We included all 670 procedures performed between 2017 and 2021. We used a mixture of 8.9 mg·mL-1 propofol and 5.4 µg·mL-1 remifentanil with a 1-mL bolus and 20-sec lockout. We assessed the adequacy of sedation using the Modified Gloucester Scale and categorized adverse events according to the Tracking and Reporting Outcomes of Procedural Sedation.

RESULTS

All 670 procedures were accomplished with adequate sedation without the need for ventilation or GA, and all patients were satisfied with the sedation. The complication rate was low, with no sentinel airway or respiratory events. Nineteen out of 670 patients (2.8%) had an incidence of airway obstruction (requiring a simple airway maneuver). The body mass index (BMI) was documented in 18/19 of these patients and the average BMI in this group was 35 kg·m-2. Seven of the 670 patients (1%) had self-terminating apnea, 3/670 patients (0.4%) vomited, no patients aspirated, and 17/665 patients (2.6%) required a vasopressor to maintain blood pressure within 20% of preprocedure values.

CONCLUSION

The results from our prospective service audit indicate that propofol-remifentanil patient-controlled sedation is a safe and reliable technique in patients undergoing endoscopic procedures.

The performance of FIT-based and other risk prediction models for colorectal neoplasia in symptomatic patients: a systematic review

Background

Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality are increasing internationally. Endoscopy services are under significant pressure with many overwhelmed. Faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) has been advocated to identify a high-risk population of symptomatic patients requiring definitive investigation by colonoscopy. Combining FIT with other factors in a risk prediction model could further improve performance in identifying those requiring investigation most urgently. We systematically reviewed performance of models predicting risk of CRC and/or advanced colorectal polyps (ACP) in symptomatic patients, with a particular focus on those models including FIT.

Methods

The review protocol was published on PROSPERO (CRD42022314710). Searches were conducted from database inception to April 2023 in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane libraries, SCOPUS and CINAHL. Risk of bias of each study was assessed using The Prediction study Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool. A narrative synthesis based on the guidelines for Synthesis Without Meta-Analysis was performed due to study heterogeneity.

Findings

We included 62 studies; 23 included FIT (n = 22) or guaiac Faecal Occult Blood Testing (n = 1) combined with one or more other variables. Twenty-one studies were conducted solely in primary care. Generally, prediction models including FIT consistently had good discriminatory ability for CRC/ACP (i.e. AUC >0.8) and performed better than models without FIT although some models without FIT also performed well. However, many studies did not present calibration and internal and external validation were limited. Two studies were rated as low risk of bias; neither model included FIT.

Interpretation

Risk prediction models, including and not including FIT, show promise for identifying those most at risk of colorectal neoplasia. Substantial limitations in evidence remain, including heterogeneity, high risk of bias, and lack of external validation. Further evaluation in studies adhering to gold standard methodology, in appropriate populations, is required before widespread adoption in clinical practice.

Funding

National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) [Health Technology Assessment Programme (HTA) Programme (Project number 133852).

High quality colonoscopy: using textbook process as a composite quality measure

BACKGROUND : High quality colonoscopy is fundamental to good patient outcomes. "Textbook outcome" has proven to be a feasible multidimensional measure for quality assurance between surgical centers. In this study, we sought to establish the "textbook process" (TP) as a new composite measure for the optimal colonoscopy process and assessed how frequently TP was attained in clinical practice and the variation in TP between endoscopists. METHODS : To reach consensus on the definition of TP, international expert endoscopists completed a modified Delphi consensus process. The achievement of TP was then applied to clinical practice. Prospectively collected data in two endoscopy services were retrospectively evaluated. Data on colonoscopies performed for symptoms or surveillance between 1 January 2018 and 1 August 2021 were analyzed. RESULTS : The Delphi consensus process was completed by 20 of 27 invited experts (74.1 %). TP was defined as a colonoscopy fulfilling the following items: explicit colonoscopy indication; successful cecal intubation; adequate bowel preparation; adequate withdrawal time; acceptable patient comfort score; provision of post-polypectomy surveillance recommendations in line with guidelines; and the absence of the use of reversal agents, early adverse events, readmission, and mortality. In the two endoscopy services studied, TP was achieved in 5962/8227 colonoscopies (72.5 %). Of 48 endoscopists performing colonoscopy, attainment of TP varied significantly, ranging per endoscopist from 41.0 % to 89.1 %. CONCLUSION : This study proposes a new composite measure for colonoscopy, namely "textbook process." TP gives a comprehensive summary of performance and demonstrates significant variation between endoscopists, illustrating the potential benefit of TP as a measure in future quality assessment programs.

Development and validation of a simulation-based assessment tool in colonoscopy

BACKGROUND

Colonoscopy is difficult to learn. Virtual reality simulation training is helpful, but how and when novices should progress to patient-based training has yet to be established. To date, there is no assessment tool for credentialing novice endoscopists prior to clinical practice. The aim of this study was to develop such an assessment tool based on metrics provided by the simulator. The metrics used for the assessment tool should be able to discriminate between novices, intermediates, and experts and include essential checklist items for patient safety.

METHODS

The validation process was conducted based on the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing. An expert panel decided upon three essential checklist items for patient safety based on Lawshe's method: perforation, hazardous tension to the bowel wall, and cecal intubation. A power calculation was performed. In this study, the Simbionix GI Mentor II simulator was used. Metrics with discriminatory ability were identified with variance analysis and combined to form an aggregate score. Based on this score and the essential items, pass/fail standards were set and reliability was tested.

RESULTS

Twenty-four participants (eight novices, eight intermediates, and eight expert endoscopists) performed two simulated colonoscopies. Four metrics with discriminatory ability were identified. The aggregate score ranged from 4.2 to 51.2 points. Novices had a mean score of 10.00 (SD 5.13), intermediates 24.63 (SD 7.91), and experts 30.72 (SD 11.98). The difference in score between novices and the other two groups was statistically significant (p<0.01). Although expert endoscopists had a higher score, the difference was not statistically significant (p=0.40). Reliability was good (Cronbach's alpha=0.86). A pass/fail score was defined at 17.1 points with correct completion of three essential checklist items, resulting in three experts and three intermediates failing and one novice passing the assessment.

CONCLUSION

We established a valid and reliable assessment tool with a pass/fail standard on the simulator. We suggest using the assessment after simulation-based training before commencing work-based learning.

Recommendations for Optimal Endoscopic Localization of Colorectal Neoplasms: A Delphi Consensus of National Experts

BACKGROUND

Colonoscopy is the standard of care for diagnosis and evaluation of colorectal cancers before surgery. However, varied practices and heterogenous documentation affects communication between endoscopists and operating surgeons, hampering surgical planning.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to develop recommendations for the use of standardized localization and reporting practices for colorectal lesions identified during lower GI endoscopy.

DESIGN

A systematic review of existing endoscopy guidelines and thorough narrative review of the overall endoscopy literature were performed to identify existing practices recommended globally.

SETTING

An online Delphi process was used to establish consensus recommendations based on a literature review.

PATIENTS

Colorectal surgeons and gastroenterologists from across Canada who had previously demonstrated leadership in endoscopy, managed large endoscopy programs, produced high-impact publications in the field of endoscopy, or participated in the development of endoscopy guidelines were selected to participate.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes measured were colorectal lesion localization and documentation practice recommendations important to planning surgical or advanced endoscopic excisions.

RESULTS

A total of 129 of 197 statements achieved consensus after 3 rounds of voting by 23 experts from across Canada. There was more than 90% participation in each round. Recommendations varied according to lesion location in the cecum, colon, or rectum and whether the referral was planned for surgical or advanced endoscopic resection. Recommendations were provided for appropriate documentation, indications, location, and method of tattoo placement, in addition to photograph and real-time 3-dimensional scope configuration device use.

LIMITATIONS

Because of a paucity of evidence, recommendations are based primarily on expert opinion. There may be bias, as all representatives were based in Canada.

CONCLUSIONS

Best practices to optimize endoscopic lesion localization and communication are not addressed in previous guidelines. This consensus involving national experts in colorectal surgery and gastroenterology provides a framework for efficient and effective colorectal lesion localization. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/C71 .

RECOMENDACIONES PARA LA LOCALIZACIN ENDOSCPICA PTIMA DE LAS NEOPLASIAS COLORRECTALES UN CONSENSO DELPHI DE EXPERTOS NACIONALES

ANTECEDENTES:La colonoscopia es el estándar de atención para el diagnóstico y la evaluación de los cánceres colorrectales antes de la cirugía. Sin embargo, las prácticas variadas y la documentación heterogénea afectan la comunicación entre los endoscopistas y los cirujanos operadores, lo que dificulta la planificación quirúrgica.OBJETIVO:Este estudio tuvo como objetivo desarrollar recomendaciones para el uso de prácticas estandarizadas de localización y notificación de lesiones colorrectales identificadas en la endoscopia gastrointestinal inferior.DISEÑO:Se realizó una revisión sistemática de las pautas de endoscopia existentes y una revisión narrativa exhaustiva de la literatura general sobre endoscopia para identificar las prácticas existentes recomendadas a nivel mundial. Se utilizó un proceso Delphi en línea para establecer recomendaciones de consenso basadas en la revisión de la literatura.PARTICIPANTES:Se seleccionaron para participar cirujanos colorrectales y gastroenterólogos de todo Canadá que previamente habían demostrado liderazgo en endoscopia, manejado grandes programas de endoscopia, producido publicaciones de alto impacto en el campo de la endoscopia o que habían participado en el desarrollo de pautas de endoscopia.RESULTADOS:Localización de lesiones colorrectales y recomendaciones prácticas de documentación importantes para planificar escisiones quirúrgicas o endoscópicas avanzadas.RESULTADOS:129 de 197 declaraciones lograron consenso después de tres rondas de votación de 23 expertos de todo Canadá. Hubo >90% de participación en cada ronda. Las recomendaciones variaron según la ubicación de la lesión en el ciego, colon o recto, y si se planificó la derivación para resección quirúrgica o endoscópica avanzada. Se proporcionaron recomendaciones para la documentación adecuada, las indicaciones, la ubicación y el método de colocación del tatuaje, además de la fotografía y el uso del dispositivo de configuración del alcance 3D en tiempo real.LIMITACIONES:Debido a la escasez de evidencia, las recomendaciones se basan principalmente en la opinión de expertos. Puede haber sesgo, ya que los representantes tenían su sede en Canadá.CONCLUSIONES:Las mejores prácticas para optimizar la localización y comunicación de lesiones endoscópicas no se abordan en las guías anteriores. Este consenso que involucra a expertos nacionales en cirugía colorrectal y gastroenterología proporciona un marco para la localización eficiente y efectiva de lesiones colorrectales. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/C71 . (Traducción-Dr. Mauricio Santamaria ).

Colorectal cancer and advanced adenoma incidence during post-polypectomy surveillance: a national cohort study in the English Bowel Cancer Screening Programme

BACKGROUND

Improved colonoscopy quality has led to debate about whether all post-polypectomy surveillance is justified. We evaluated surveillance within the English Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP) to determine the yield of surveillance and identify predictive factors for surveillance outcome.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of individuals undergoing post-polypectomy surveillance between July 2006 and January 2017. BCSP records were linked to the National Cancer Registration Database to identify interval-type post-colonoscopy colorectal cancers (CRCs). Advanced adenoma and CRC at surveillance were documented. CRC incidence was compared with the general population using standardized incidence ratios (SIRs). Predictors of advanced adenomas at first surveillance (S1), and CRC during follow-up, were identified.

RESULTS

44 151 individuals (23 078 intermediate risk; 21 073 high risk) underwent 64 544 surveillance episodes. Advanced adenoma and CRC yields were, respectively, 10.0 % and 0.5 % at S1, 8.5 % and 0.4 % at S2, and 10.8 % and 0.4 % at S3. S1 yield was lowest in those with one index adenoma ≥ 10 mm (advanced adenoma 6.1 %; CRC 0.3 %). The SIR was 0.76 (95 %CI 0.66-0.88), accounted for by the intermediate risk group (intermediate risk SIR 0.61, 95 %CI 0.49-0.75; high risk SIR 0.95, 95 %CI 0.79-1.15). Adenoma multiplicity, presence of a large nonpedunculated adenoma, and greater villous component were associated with advanced adenoma at S1. Older age and multiplicity were significantly associated with CRC risk.

CONCLUSION

This large, national analysis found low levels of CRC in those undergoing surveillance and low advanced adenoma yield in most subgroups. Less intensive surveillance in some subgroups is warranted, and surveillance may be avoided in those with a single large adenoma.

Evaluation of the quality of colonoscopies performed by Alberta North Zone surgeons, family physicians and internists: a quality improvement initiative

BACKGROUND

In Canada, endoscopy is primarily performed by gastroenterologists and surgeons, and some studies report that colonoscopies performed by nongastroenterologists have more complications and higher rates of future colorectal cancer. Our objective was to determine whether rural-based nongastroenterologist endoscopists are achieving quality benchmarks in colonoscopy.

METHODS

This quality improvement initiative prospectively evaluated 6 key performance indicators (KPIs) (cecal intubations, polyp detection [males and females; for first-time colonoscopies on patients aged ≥ 50 yr], bowel preparations, patient comfort and withdrawal times) on consecutive colonoscopies performed by participating Alberta North Zone endoscopists. The study period was June 2018 to March 2020. Overall and individual endoscopist's KPIs were compared with standard benchmarks. Additional performance indicators included mean number of polyps per colonoscopy and an exploration of study-defined sedation-related level of consciousness.

RESULTS

Data were collected on 6212 colonoscopies performed by 16 endoscopists (9 surgeons, 5 family physicians and 2 internists) in 6 hospitals. All 6 KPI benchmarks were achieved when results were pooled over all endoscopists in the study. Overall, cecal intubation occurred in 6006 of 6209 (96.7%, 95% confidence interval 94.5%-99.0%) cases. Polyp detection was 65.9% (592/898) and 49.8% (348/699) for male and female patients, respectively, aged 50 years or older. Variability in individual endoscopist results existed, especially for the mean number of polyps per 100 colonoscopies and sedation-related level of consciousness.

INTERPRETATION

Overall, Alberta North Zone endoscopists are performing high-quality colonoscopies, collectively achieving all 6 KPIs. To understand endoscopic performance and encourage individual and group reflection on endoscopic practices, Canadian endoscopists are encouraged to participate in similar colonoscopy quality initiative studies.

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.

Curriculum for training in endoscopic mucosal resection in the colon: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Position Statement

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is the standard of care for the complete removal of large (≥ 10 mm) nonpedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs). Increased detection of LNPCPs owing to screening colonoscopy, plus high observed rates of incomplete resection and need for surgery call for a standardized approach to training in EMR. 1 : Trainees in EMR should have achieved basic competence in diagnostic colonoscopy, < 10-mm polypectomy, pedunculated polypectomy, and common methods of gastrointestinal endoscopic hemostasis. The role of formal training courses is emphasized. Training may then commence in vivo under the direct supervision of a trainer. 2 : Endoscopy units training endoscopists in EMR should have specific processes in place to support and facilitate training. 3: A trained EMR practitioner should have mastered theoretical knowledge including how to assess an LNPCP for risk of submucosal invasion, how to interpret the potential difficulty of a particular EMR procedure, how to decide whether to remove a particular LNPCP en bloc or piecemeal, whether the risks of electrosurgical energy can be avoided for a particular LNPCP, the different devices required for EMR, management of adverse events, and interpretation of reports provided by histopathologists. 4: Trained EMR practitioners should be familiar with the patient consent process for EMR. 5: The development of endoscopic non-technical skills (ENTS) and team interaction are important for trainees in EMR. 6: Differences in recommended technique exist between EMR performed with and without electrosurgical energy. Common to both is a standardized technique based upon dynamic injection, controlled and precise snare placement, safety checks prior to the application of tissue transection (cold snare) or electrosurgical energy (hot snare), and interpretation of the post-EMR resection defect. 7: A trained EMR practitioner must be able to manage adverse events associated with EMR including intraprocedural bleeding and perforation, and post-procedural bleeding. Delayed perforation should be avoided by correct interpretation of the post-EMR defect and treatment of deep mural injury. 8: A trained EMR practitioner must be able to communicate EMR procedural findings to patients and provide them with a plan in case of adverse events after discharge and a follow-up plan. 9: A trained EMR practitioner must be able to detect and interrogate a post-endoscopic resection scar for residual or recurrent adenoma and apply treatment if necessary. 10: Prior to independent practice, a minimum of 30 EMR procedures should be performed, culminating in a trainer-guided assessment of competency using a validated assessment tool, taking account of procedural difficulty (e. g. using the SMSA polyp score). 11: Trained practitioners should log their key performance indicators (KPIs) of polypectomy during independent practice. A guide for target KPIs is provided in this document.

Identification and Reporting of Anal Pathology during Routine Colonoscopies

The gold-standard procedure for anal canal examination is anoscopy. Nonetheless, patients are referred for a colonoscopy for many reasons, and a routine exam might provide an opportunity to diagnose anal pathologies, such as hemorrhoids, anal fissures, anal polyps, condylomas, and anal squamous cell carcinoma. It is important to know the main features of these conditions and relevant information to report in order to help guide patient treatment and follow-up.

Automated colonoscopy withdrawal phase duration estimation using cecum detection and surgical tasks classification

Colorectal cancer is the third most common type of cancer with almost two million new cases worldwide. They develop from neoplastic polyps, most commonly adenomas, which can be removed during colonoscopy to prevent colorectal cancer from occurring. Unfortunately, up to a quarter of polyps are missed during colonoscopies. Studies have shown that polyp detection during a procedure correlates with the time spent searching for polyps, called the withdrawal time. The different phases of the procedure (cleaning, therapeutic, and exploration phases) make it difficult to precisely measure the withdrawal time, which should only include the exploration phase. Separating this from the other phases requires manual time measurement during the procedure which is rarely performed. In this study, we propose a method to automatically detect the cecum, which is the start of the withdrawal phase, and to classify the different phases of the colonoscopy, which allows precise estimation of the final withdrawal time. This is achieved using a Resnet for both detection and classification trained with two public datasets and a private dataset composed of 96 full procedures. Out of 19 testing procedures, 18 have their withdrawal time correctly estimated, with a mean error of 5.52 seconds per minute per procedure.

Quality in colonoscopy: time to ensure national standards are implemented?

Background

High-quality colonoscopy is crucial to ensure complete mucosal visualisation and to maximise detection of pathology. Previous audits showing variable quality have prompted national and international colonoscopy improvement programmes, including the development of quality assurance standards and key performance indicators (KPIs). The most widely used marker of mucosal visualisation is the adenoma detection rate (ADR), however, histological confirmation is required to calculate this. We explored the relationship between core colonoscopy KPIs.

Methods

Data were collected from colonoscopists in eight hospitals in North East England over a 6-month period, as part of a quality improvement study. Procedural information was collected including number of colonoscopies, caecal intubation rate (CIR), ADR and polyp detection rate (PDR). Associations between KPIs and colonoscopy performance were analysed.

Results

9265 colonoscopies performed by 118 endoscopists were included. Mean ADR and PDR per endoscopist were 16.6% (range 0-36.3, SD 7.4) and 27.2% (range 0-57.5, SD 9.3), respectively. Mean number of colonoscopies conducted in 6 months was 78.5 (range 4-334, SD 61). Mean CIR was 91.2% (range 55.5-100, SD 6.6). Total number of colonoscopies and ADR>15% were significantly associated (p=0.04). Undertaking fewer colonoscopies and using hyoscine butylbromide less frequently was significantly associated with ADR<15%. CIR, endoscopist grade, % male patients, mean patient age and CIR were not significantly related to ADR<15%. In adjusted analyses, factors which affected ADR were PDR and mean patient age.

Conclusion

Colonoscopists who perform fewer than the nationally stipulated minimum of 100 procedures per year had significantly lower ADRs. This study demonstrates that PDR can be used as a marker of ADR; providing age is also considered.

Improving polyp detection at colonoscopy: Non-technological techniques

Colonoscopy and polypectomy remain the gold standard investigation for the detection and prevention of colorectal cancer. Halting the progression of colonic adenoma through adequate detection of pre-cancerous lesions interrupts the progression to carcinoma. The adenoma detection rate is a key performance indicator. Increasing adenoma detection rates are associated with reducing rates of interval colorectal cancer. Endoscopists with high baseline adenoma detection rate have a meticulous technique during colonoscopy withdrawal that improves their adenoma detection. This minireview article summarizes the evidence on the following simple operator techniques and their effects on the adenoma detection rate; minimum withdrawal times, dynamic patient position change and proximal colon retroflexion.

Unlocking quality in endoscopic mucosal resection

A review of the development of the key performance metrics of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), learning from the experience of the establishment of widespread colonoscopy quality measurements. Potential future performance markers for both colonoscopy and EMR are also evaluated to ensure continued high quality performance is maintained with a focus service framework and predictors of patient outcome.

Efficacy of image-enhanced endoscopy for colorectal adenoma detection: A multicenter, randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Improved adenoma detection at colonoscopy has decreased the risk of developing colorectal cancer. However, whether image-enhanced endoscopy (IEE) further improves the adenoma detection rate (ADR) is controversial.

AIM

To compare IEE with white-light imaging (WLI) endoscopy for the detection and identification of colorectal adenoma.

METHODS

This was a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial. Participants were enrolled between September 2019 to April 2021 from 4 hospital in China. Patients were randomly assigned to an IEE group with WLI on entry and IEE on withdrawal (n = 2113) or a WLI group with WLI on both entry and withdrawal (n = 2098). The primary outcome was the ADR. The secondary endpoints were the polyp detection rate (PDR), adenomas per colonoscopy, adenomas per positive colonoscopy, and factors related to adenoma detection.

RESULTS

A total of 4211 patients (966 adenomas) were included in the analysis (mean age, 56.7 years, 47.1% male). There were 2113 patients (508 adenomas) in the IEE group and 2098 patients (458 adenomas) in the WLI group. The ADR in two group were not significantly different [24.0% vs 21.8%, 1.10, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.99-1.23, P = 0.09]. The PDR was higher with IEE group (41.7%) than with WLI group (36.1%, 1.16, 95%CI: 1.07-1.25, P = 0.01). Differences in mean withdrawal time (7.90 ± 3.42 min vs 7.85 ± 3.47 min, P = 0.30) and adenomas per colonoscopy (0.33 ± 0.68 vs 0.28 ± 0.62, P = 0.06) were not significant. Subgroup analysis found that with narrow-band imaging (NBI), between-group differences in the ADR, were not significant (23.7% vs 21.8%, 1.09, 95%CI: 0.97-1.22, P = 0.15), but were greater with linked color imaging (30.9% vs 21.8%, 1.42, 95%CI: 1.04-1.93, P = 0.04). the second-generation NBI (2G-NBI) had an advantage of ADR than both WLI and the first-generation NBI (27.0% vs 21.8%, P = 0.01; 27.0% vs 21.2.0%, P = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

This prospective study confirmed that, among Chinese, IEE didn't increase the ADR compared with WLI, but 2G-NBI increase the ADR.