FIT negative clinic as a safety net for low-risk patients with colorectal cancer: impact on endoscopy and radiology utilisation-a retrospective cohort study

Background

Faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) is recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence to triage symptomatic primary care patients who have unexplained symptoms but do not meet the criteria for a suspected lower gastrointestinal cancer pathway. During the COVID-19 pandemic, FIT was used to triage patients referred with urgent 2-week wait (2ww) cancer referrals instead of a direct-to-test strategy. FIT-negative patients were assessed and safety netted in a FIT negative clinic.

Methods

We reviewed case notes for 622 patients referred on a 2ww pathway and seen in a FIT negative clinic between June 2020 and April 2021 in a tertiary care hospital. We collected information on demographics, indication for referral, dates for referral, clinic visit, investigations and long-term outcomes.

Results

The average age of the patients was 71.5 years with 54% female, and a median follow-up of 2.5 years. Indications for referrals included: anaemia (11%), iron deficiency (24%), weight loss (9%), bleeding per rectum (5%) and change in bowel habits (61%). Of the cases, 28% (95% CI 24% to 31%) had endoscopic (15%, 95% CI 12% to 18%) and/or radiological (20%, 95% CI 17% to 23%) investigations requested after clinic review, and among those investigated, malignancy rate was 1.7%, with rectosigmoid neuroendocrine tumour, oesophageal cancer and lung adenocarcinoma.

Conclusion

A FIT negative clinic provides a safety net for patients with unexplained symptoms but low risk of colorectal cancer. These real-world data demonstrate significantly reduced demand on endoscopy and radiology services for FIT-negative patients referred via the 2ww pathway.

Blood-based colorectal cancer screening in an integrated health system: a randomised trial of patient adherence

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated whether people who had not completed a faecal immunochemical test (FIT) for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening would complete a blood-based testing option if offered one during health encounters. Blood-based screening tests for CRC could add to the total number of people screened for CRC by providing another testing alternative.

DESIGN

Study participants were patients aged 45-75 years at a large, integrated health system who were offered but did not complete an FIT in the prior 3-9 months and were scheduled for a clinical encounter. Individuals were randomised (1:1) to be offered a commercially available CRC blood test (Shield, Guardant Health) versus usual care. We compared 3-month CRC screening proportions in the two groups.

RESULTS

We randomised 2026 patients; 2004 remained eligible following postrandomisation exclusions (1003 to usual care and 1001 to blood draw offer; mean age: 60, 62% female, 80% non-Hispanic white). Of the 1001 allocated to the blood test group, 924 were recruited following chart-review exclusions; 548 (59.3%) were reached via phone, of which 280 (51.1%) scheduled an appointment with the research team. CRC screening proportions were 17.5 percentage points higher in the blood test group versus usual care (30.5% vs 13.0%; OR 2.94, 95% CI 2.34 to 3.70; p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Among adults who had declined prior CRC screening, the offer of a blood-based screening test boosted CRC screening by 17.5 percentage points over usual care. Further research is needed on how to balance the favourable adherence with lower advanced adenoma detection compared with other available tests.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05987709.

Impact of AI-aided colonoscopy in clinical practice: a prospective randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

Colorectal cancer (CRC) has a significant role in cancer-related mortality. Colonoscopy, combined with adenoma removal, has proven effective in reducing CRC incidence. However, suboptimal colonoscopy quality often leads to missed polyps. The impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on adenoma and polyp detection rate (ADR, PDR) is yet to be established.

DESIGN

We conducted a randomised controlled trial at Sahlgrenska University Hospital in Sweden. Patients underwent colonoscopy with or without the assistance of AI (AI-C or conventional colonoscopy (CC)). Examinations were performed with two different AI systems, that is, Fujifilm CADEye and Medtronic GI Genius. The primary outcome was ADR.

RESULTS

Among 286 patients, 240 underwent analysis (average age: 66 years). The ADR was 42% for all patients, and no significant difference emerged between AI-C and CC groups (41% vs 43%). The overall PDR was 61%, with a trend towards higher PDR in the AI-C group. Subgroup analysis revealed higher detection rates for sessile serrated lesions (SSL) with AI assistance (AI-C 22%, CC 11%, p=0.004). No difference was noticed in the detection of polyps or adenomas per colonoscopy. Examinations were most often performed by experienced endoscopists, 78% (n=86 AI-C, 100 CC).

CONCLUSION

Amidst the ongoing AI integration, ADR did not improve with AI. Particularly noteworthy is the enhanced detection rates for SSL by AI assistance, especially since they pose a risk for postcolonoscopy CRC. The integration of AI into standard colonoscopy practice warrants further investigation and the development of improved software might be necessary before enforcing its mandatory implementation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05178095.

Role of artificial intelligence in imaging and endoscopy for the diagnosis, monitoring and prognostication of inflammatory bowel disease: a scoping review protocol

INTRODUCTION

Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) are immune-mediated conditions that are increasing in incidence and prevalence worldwide. Their assessment and monitoring are becoming increasingly important, though complex. The best disease control is achieved through tight monitoring of objective inflammatory parameters (such as serum and stool inflammatory markers), cross-sectional imaging and endoscopic assessment. Considering the complexity of the information obtained throughout a patient's journey, artificial intelligence (AI) provides an ideal adjunct to existing tools to help diagnose, monitor and predict the course of disease of patients with IBD. Therefore, we propose a scoping review assessing AI's role in diagnosis, monitoring and prognostication tools in patients with IBD. We aim to detect gaps in the literature and address them in future research endeavours.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will search electronic databases, including Medline, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL Complete, Web of Science and IEEE Xplore. Two reviewers will independently screen the abstracts and titles first and then perform the full-text review. A third reviewer will resolve any conflict. We will include both observational studies and clinical trials. Study characteristics will be extracted using a data extraction form. The extracted data will be summarised in a tabular format, following the imaging modality theme and the study outcome assessed. The results will have an accompanying narrative review.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Considering the nature of the project, ethical review by an institutional review board is not required. The data will be presented at academic conferences, and the final product will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.

Treatment of adenoma recurrence after endoscopic mucosal resection

OBJECTIVE

Residual or recurrent adenoma (RRA) after endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs) of ≥20 mm is a major limitation. Data on outcomes of the endoscopic treatment of recurrence are scarce, and no evidence-based standard exists. We investigated the efficacy of endoscopic retreatment over time in a large prospective cohort.

DESIGN

Over 139 months, detailed morphological and histological data on consecutive RRA detected after EMR for single LNPCPs at one tertiary endoscopy centre were prospectively recorded during structured surveillance colonoscopy. Endoscopic retreatment was performed on cases with evidence of RRA and was performed predominantly using hot snare resection, cold avulsion forceps with adjuvant snare tip soft coagulation or a combination of the two.

RESULTS

213 (14.6%) patients had RRA (168 (78.9%) at first surveillance and 45 (21.1%) thereafter). RRA was commonly 2.5-5.0 mm (48.0%) and unifocal (78.7%). Of 202 (94.8%) cases which had macroscopic evidence of RRA, 194 (96.0%) underwent successful endoscopic therapy and 161 (83.4%) had a subsequent follow-up colonoscopy. Of the latter, endoscopic therapy of recurrence was successful in 149 (92.5%) of 161 in the per-protocol analysis, and 149 (73.8%) of 202 in the intention-to-treat analysis, with a mean of 1.15 (SD 0.36) retreatment sessions. No adverse events were directly attributable to endoscopic therapy. Further RRA after endoscopic therapy was endoscopically treatable in most cases. Overall, only 9 (4.2%, 95% CI 2.2% to 7.8%) of 213 patients with RRA required surgery.Thus 159 (98.8%, 95% CI 95.1% to 99.8%) of 161 cases with initially successful endoscopic treatment of RRA and follow-up remained surgery-free for a median of 13 months (IQR 25.0) of follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

RRA after EMR of LNPCPs can be effectively treated using simple endoscopic techniques with long-term adenoma remission of >90%; only 16% required retreatment. Therefore, more technically complex, morbid and resource-intensive endoscopic or surgical techniques are required only in selected cases.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS

NCT01368289 and NCT02000141.

Randomised controlled trials of non-pharmacological interventions to improve patient-reported outcomes of colonoscopy: a scoping review

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Non-pharmacological interventions to improve patient-reported outcomes of colonoscopy may be effective at mitigating negative experiences and perceptions of the procedure, but research to characterise the extent and features of studies of these interventions is limited.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review searching multiple databases for peer-reviewed publications of randomised controlled trials conducted in adults investigating a non-pharmacological intervention to improve patient-reported outcomes of colonoscopy. Study characteristics were tabulated and summarised narratively and graphically.

RESULTS

We screened 5939 citations and 962 full texts, and included 245 publications from 39 countries published between 1992 and 2022. Of these, 80.8% were full publications and 19.2% were abstracts. Of the 41.9% of studies reporting funding sources, 11.4% were unfunded. The most common interventions were carbon dioxide and/or water insufflation methods (33.9%), complementary and alternative medicines (eg, acupuncture) (20.0%), and colonoscope technology (eg, magnetic scope guide) (21.6%). Pain was as an outcome across 82.0% of studies. Studies most often used a patient-reported outcome examining patient experience during the procedure (60.0%), but 42.9% of studies included an outcome without specifying the time that the patient experienced the outcome. Most intraprocedural patient-reported outcomes were measured retrospectively rather than contemporaneously, although studies varied in terms of when outcomes were assessed.

CONCLUSION

Research on non-pharmacological interventions to improve patient-reported outcomes of colonoscopy is unevenly distributed across types of intervention and features high variation in study design and reporting, in particular around outcomes. Future research efforts into non-pharmacological interventions to improve patient-reported outcomes of colonoscopy should be directed at underinvestigated interventions and developing consensus-based guidelines for study design, with particular attention to how and when outcomes are experienced and measured.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

42020173906.

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 documentation of anticoagulation and antiplatelet recommendations after outpatientendoscopy

Clear documentation of instructions for resuming anticoagulant and antiplatelet (AC/AP) medications after gastrointestinal endoscopy is essential for high-quality postprocedure care. Yet, these recommendations are frequently absent, which may impact patient safety. We aimed to improve documentation of postprocedural AC/AP instructions through targeted interventions during outpatient endoscopy at a Veterans Affairs Medical Center using validated Quality Improvement methodology. We identified patients on AC/AP agents presenting for outpatient oesophagogastroduodenoscopy or colonoscopy and found restart recommendations were documented in only 59.4% of procedures at baseline. After two intervention cycles, which included provider education, nursing prompts and alterations to endoscopic documentation software, postprocedure documentation increased by 26.7%-86.1% when compared with baseline (p<0.001). These interventions, which require low-resource utilisation, could be part of standardised processes readily implemented at other institutions to help potentially reduce postprocedure patient confusion, medication errors and complications.

Rationalising the use of specimen pots following colorectal polypectomy: a small step towards greener endoscopy

Aims

In this study, we aim to determine whether combining multiple small colorectal polyps within a single specimen pot can reduce carbon footprint, without an associated deleterious clinical impact.

Methods

This was a retrospective observational study of colorectal polyps resected during 2019, within the Imperial College Healthcare Trust. The numbers of pots for polypectomy specimens were calculated and corresponding histology results were extracted. We modelled the potential reduction in carbon footprint if all less than 10 mm polyps were sent together and the number of advanced lesions we would not be able to locate if we adopted this strategy. Carbon footprint was estimated based on previous study using a life-cycle assessment, at 0.28 kgCO2e per pot.

Results

A total of 11 781 lower gastrointestinal endoscopies were performed. There were 5125 polyps removed and 4192 pots used, equating to a carbon footprint of 1174 kgCO2e. There were 4563 (89%) polyps measuring 0-10 mm. 6 (0.1%) of these polyps were cancers, while 12 (0.2%) demonstrated high-grade dysplasia. If we combined all small polyps in a single pot, total pot usage could be reduced by one-third (n=2779).

Conclusion

A change in practice by placing small polyps collectively in one pot would have resulted in reduction in carbon footprint equivalent to 396 kgCO2e (emissions from 982 miles driven by an average passenger car). The reduction in carbon footprint from judicious use of specimen pots would be amplified with a change in practice on a national level.

Rates of repeated colonoscopies to clean the colon from low-risk and high-risk adenomas: results from the EPoS trials

OBJECTIVE

High-quality colonoscopy (adequate bowel preparation, whole-colon visualisation and removal of all neoplastic polyps) is a prerequisite to start polyp surveillance, and is ideally achieved in one colonoscopy. In a large multinational polyp surveillance trial, we aimed to investigate clinical practice variation in number of colonoscopies needed to enrol patients with low-risk and high-risk adenomas in polyp surveillance.

DESIGN

We retrieved data of all patients with low-risk adenomas (one or two tubular adenomas <10 mm with low-grade dysplasia) and high-risk adenomas (3-10 adenomas, ≥1 adenoma ≥10 mm, high-grade dysplasia or villous components) in the European Polyp Surveillance trials fulfilling certain logistic and methodologic criteria. We analysed variations in number of colonoscopies needed to achieve high-quality colonoscopy and enter polyp surveillance by endoscopy centre, and by endoscopists who enrolled ≥30 patients.

RESULTS

The study comprised 15 581 patients from 38 endoscopy centres in five European countries; 6794 patients had low-risk and 8787 had high-risk adenomas. 961 patients (6.2%, 95% CI 5.8% to 6.6%) underwent two or more colonoscopies before surveillance began; 101 (1.5%, 95% CI 1.2% to 1.8%) in the low-risk group and 860 (9.8%, 95% CI 9.2% to 10.4%) in the high-risk group. Main reasons were poor bowel preparation (21.3%) or incomplete colonoscopy/polypectomy (14.4%) or planned second procedure (27.8%). Need of repeat colonoscopy varied between study centres ranging from 0% to 11.8% in low-risk adenoma patients and from 0% to 63.9% in high-risk adenoma patients. On the second colonoscopy, the two most common reasons for a repeat (third) colonoscopy were piecemeal resection (26.5%) and unspecified reason (23.9%).

CONCLUSION

There is considerable practice variation in the number of colonoscopies performed to achieve complete polyp removal, indicating need for targeted quality improvement to reduce patient burden.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02319928.

Faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) in patients with signs or symptoms of suspected colorectal cancer (CRC): a joint guideline from the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI) and the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG)

Faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) has a high sensitivity for the detection of colorectal cancer (CRC). In a symptomatic population FIT may identify those patients who require colorectal investigation with the highest priority. FIT offers considerable advantages over the use of symptoms alone, as an objective measure of risk with a vastly superior positive predictive value for CRC, while conversely identifying a truly low risk cohort of patients. The aim of this guideline was to provide a clear strategy for the use of FIT in the diagnostic pathway of people with signs or symptoms of a suspected diagnosis of CRC. The guideline was jointly developed by the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland/British Society of Gastroenterology, specifically by a 21-member multidisciplinary guideline development group (GDG). A systematic review of 13 535 publications was undertaken to develop 23 evidence and expert opinion-based recommendations for the triage of people with symptoms of a suspected CRC diagnosis in primary care. In order to achieve consensus among a broad group of key stakeholders, we completed an extended Delphi of the GDG, and also 61 other individuals across the UK and Ireland, including by members of the public, charities and primary and secondary care. Seventeen research recommendations were also prioritised to inform clinical management.

Iron deficiency and symptoms in women aged 20-49 years and relation to upper gastrointestinal and colon cancers

Objective

Iron deficiency anaemia (IDA) in women aged 20–49 years may be caused by menses or gastrointestinal cancer. Data are sparse on the yield of endoscopy/colonoscopy in this population. Our aim was to determine the association of IDA and symptoms with cancers.

Design

Retrospective cohort study within Kaiser Permanente Northern California. Participants were women aged 20–49 years tested for iron stores and anaemia during 1998, 2004 and 2010 and followed for 5 years for outcomes of oesophageal, gastric and colon cancers. Symptoms from the three prior years were grouped into dysphagia, upper gastrointestinal (UGI), lower gastrointestinal (LGI), rectal bleeding and weight loss.

Results

Among 9783 anaemic women aged 20–49 years, there were no oesophageal, 6 gastric and 26 colon cancers. Incidences per 1000 for gastric cancer with and without iron deficiency (ID) were 0.60 (95% CI 0.23 to 1.55) and 0.63 (95% CI 0.17 to 2.31), and for colon cancer, 2.72 (95% CI 1.72 to 4.29) and 2.53 (95% CI 1.29 to 4.99). Endoscopies for UGI or dysphagia symptoms rather than bidirectional endoscopy for ID yielded more gastric cancers (n=5 and n=4, respectively) with fewer procedures (3793 instead of 6627). Colonoscopies for LGI or rectal bleed instead of for ID would detect more colon cancers (n=19 and n=18) with about 40% of the procedures (=2793/6627).

Conclusions

UGI and colon cancers were rare in women of menstruating age and when controlled for anaemia were as common without as with ID. Using symptoms rather than IDA as an indication for endoscopy found equal numbers of cancers with fewer procedures.

Endoscopy training through the COVID-19 pandemic: maintaining procedural volumes and key performance standards

OBJECTIVE

Endoscopy departments have experienced considerable challenges in the provision of endoscopy services since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. Several studies have reported a reduction of procedures performed by trainee endoscopists during the pandemic. The aim of this study was to assess the impact on colonoscopy training and quality in an academic centre throughout successive waves of the pandemic.

METHODS

This was a single-centre, retrospective, observational study comparing colonoscopies performed at a tertiary endoscopy centre in Ireland at different stages of the pandemic with those performed during a similar time frame prepandemic. Data were collected using electronic patient records. Primary outcomes were procedure volumes, adenoma detection rate and mean adenoma per procedure.

RESULTS

In the prepandemic period, 798 colonoscopies were performed. During the same period in 2020, 172 colonoscopies were performed. In 2021, during the third wave of the pandemic, 538 colonoscopies were performed. Percentages of colonoscopies performed by trainees were 46.0% (n=367) in 2019, 25.6% (n=44) in 2020 and 45.2% (n=243) in 2021. Adenoma detection rate was 21.3% in 2019, 38.6% in 2020 and 23.9% in 2021. Mean adenoma per procedure was 0.45 in 2019, 0.86 in 2020 and 0.49 in 2021. Caecal intubation rate was 90.74% in 2019, 90.9% in 2020 and 95.88% in 2021.

CONCLUSION

The COVID-19 pandemic initially had a negative impact on overall colonoscopy volumes and training. Despite a reduction in procedural volume, key performance standards were maintained by trainees. Maintenance of hands-on training is essential to allow trainees achieve and retain competency in endoscopy.

High burden of polyp mischaracterisation in tertiary centre referrals for endoscopic resection may be alleviated by telestration

OBJECTIVE

Endoscopic resection (ER) often involves referral to tertiary centres with high volume practices. Lesions can be subject to prior manipulation and mischaracterisation of features required for accurate planning, leading to prolonged or cancelled procedures. As potential solutions, repeating diagnostic procedures is burdensome for services and patients, while even enriched written reports and still images provide insufficient information to plan ER. This project sought to determine the frequency and implications of polyp mischaracterisation and whether the use of telestration might prevent it.

DESIGN/METHOD

A retrospective data analysis of ER referrals to four tertiary centres was conducted for the period July-December 2019. Prospective telestration with a novel digital platform was then performed between centres to achieve consensus on polyp features and ER planning.

RESULTS

163 lesions (163 patients; mean age 67.9±12.2 y; F=62) referred from regional hospitals, were included. Lesion site was mismatched in 11 (6.7%). Size was not mentioned in the referral in 27/163 (16.6%) and incorrect in 81/136 (51.5%), more commonly underestimated by the referring centre (<0.0001), by a mean factor of 1.85±0.79. Incurred procedure time (in units of 20 min) was significantly greater than that allocated (p=0.0085). For 10 cases discussed prospectively, rapid consensus on lesion features was achieved, with agreement between experts on time required for ER.

CONCLUSIONS

Polyp mischaracterisation is a frequent feature of ER referrals, but could be corrected by the use of telestration between centres. Our study involved expert-to-expert consensus, so extending to 'real-world' referring centres would offer additional learning for a digital pathway.

Diagnosis and management of Lynch syndrome

Lynch syndrome (LS) is a dominantly inherited cancer susceptibility syndrome defined by presence of pathogenic variants in DNA mismatch repair genes MLH1, MSH2, MSH6 and PMS2, or in deletions of the EPCAM gene. Although LS is present in about 1 in 400 people in the UK, it estimated that only 5% of people with this condition are aware of the diagnosis. Therefore, testing for LS in all new diagnoses of colorectal or endometrial cancers is now recommended in the UK, and gastroenterologists can offer 'mainstreamed' genetic testing for LS to patients with cancer. Because LS results in a high lifetime risk of colorectal, endometrial, gastric, ovarian, hepatobiliary, brain and other cancers, the lifelong care of affected individuals and their families requires a coordinated multidisciplinary approach. Interventions such as high-quality 2-yearly colonoscopy, prophylactic gynaecological surgery, and aspirin are proven to prevent and facilitate early diagnosis and prevention of cancers in this population, and improve patient outcomes. Recently, an appreciation of the mechanism of carcinogenesis in LS-associated cancers has contributed to the development of novel therapeutic and diagnostic approaches, with a gene-specific approach to disease management, with potential cancer-preventing vaccines in development. An adaptive approach to surgical or oncological management of LS-related cancers may be considered, including an important role for novel checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapy in locally advanced or metastatic disease. Therefore, a personalised approach to lifelong gene-specific management for people with LS provides many opportunities for cancer prevention and treatment which we outline in this review.

Regional variations and associations between colonoscopy resource availability and colonoscopy utilisation: a population-based descriptive study in Ontario, Canada

Objective

There is substantial variation in colonoscopy use and evidence of long wait times for the procedure. Understanding the role of system-level resources in colonoscopy utilisation may point to a potential intervention target to improve colonoscopy use. This study characterises colonoscopy resource availability in Ontario, Canada and evaluates its relationship with colonoscopy utilisation.

Design

We conducted a population-based study using administrative health data to describe regional variation in colonoscopy availability for Ontario residents (age 18–99) in 2013. We identified 43 colonoscopy networks in the province in which we described variations across three colonoscopy availability measures: colonoscopist density, private clinic access and distance to colonoscopy. We evaluated associations between colonoscopy resource availability and colonoscopy utilisation rates using Pearson correlation and log binomial regression, adjusting for age and sex.

Results

There were 9.4 full-time equivalent colonoscopists per 100 000 Ontario residents (range across 43 networks 0.0 to 21.8); 29.5% of colonoscopies performed in the province were done in private clinics (range 1.2%–55.9%). The median distance to colonoscopy was 3.7 km, with 5.9% travelling at least 50 km. Lower colonoscopist density was correlated with lower colonoscopy utilisation rates (r=0.53, p<0.001). Colonoscopy utilisation rates were 4% lower in individuals travelling 50 to <200 km and 11% lower in individuals travelling ≥200 km to colonoscopy, compared to <10 km. There was no association between private clinic access and colonoscopy utilisation.

Conclusion

The substantial variations in colonoscopy resource availability and the relationship demonstrated between colonoscopy resource availability and use provides impetus for health service planners and decision-makers to address these potential inequalities in access in order to support the use of this medically necessary procedure.

Colonoscopy surveillance following adenoma removal to reduce the risk of colorectal cancer: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Colonoscopy surveillance is recommended for some patients post polypectomy. The 2002 UK surveillance guidelines classify post-polypectomy patients into low, intermediate and high risk, and recommend different strategies for each classification. Limited evidence supports these guidelines.

OBJECTIVES

To examine, for each risk group, long-term colorectal cancer incidence by baseline characteristics and the number of surveillance visits; the effects of interval length on detection rates of advanced adenomas and colorectal cancer at first surveillance; and the cost-effectiveness of surveillance compared with no surveillance.

DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study and economic evaluation.

SETTING

Seventeen NHS hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with a colonoscopy and at least one adenoma at baseline.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Long-term colorectal cancer incidence after baseline and detection rates of advanced adenomas and colorectal cancer at first surveillance.

DATA SOURCES

Hospital databases, NHS Digital, the Office for National Statistics, National Services Scotland and Public Health England.

METHODS

Cox regression was used to compare colorectal cancer incidence in the presence and absence of surveillance and to identify colorectal cancer risk factors. Risk factors were used to stratify risk groups into higher- and lower-risk subgroups. We examined detection rates of advanced adenomas and colorectal cancer at first surveillance by interval length. Cost-effectiveness of surveillance compared with no surveillance was evaluated in terms of incremental costs per colorectal cancer prevented and per quality-adjusted life-year gained.

RESULTS

Our study included 28,972 patients, of whom 14,401 (50%), 11,852 (41%) and 2719 (9%) were classed as low, intermediate and high risk, respectively. The median follow-up time was 9.3 years. Colorectal cancer incidence was 140, 221 and 366 per 100,000 person-years among low-, intermediate- and high-risk patients, respectively. Attendance at one surveillance visit was associated with reduced colorectal cancer incidence among low-, intermediate- and high-risk patients [hazard ratios were 0.56 (95% confidence interval 0.39 to 0.80), 0.59 (95% confidence interval 0.43 to 0.81) and 0.49 (95% confidence interval 0.29 to 0.82), respectively]. Compared with the general population, colorectal cancer incidence without surveillance was similar among low-risk patients and higher among high-risk patients [standardised incidence ratios were 0.86 (95% confidence interval 0.73 to 1.02) and 1.91 (95% confidence interval 1.39 to 2.56), respectively]. For intermediate-risk patients, standardised incidence ratios differed for the lower- (0.70, 95% confidence interval 0.48 to 0.99) and higher-risk (1.46, 95% confidence interval 1.19 to 1.78) subgroups. In each risk group, incremental costs per colorectal cancer prevented and per quality-adjusted life-year gained with surveillance were lower for the higher-risk subgroup than for the lower-risk subgroup. Incremental costs per quality-adjusted life-year gained were lowest for the higher-risk subgroup of high-risk patients at £7821.

LIMITATIONS

The observational design means that we cannot assume that surveillance caused the reductions in cancer incidence. The fact that some cancer staging data were missing places uncertainty on our cost-effectiveness estimates.

CONCLUSIONS

Surveillance was associated with reduced colorectal cancer incidence in all risk groups. However, in low-risk patients and the lower-risk subgroup of intermediate-risk patients, colorectal cancer incidence was no higher than in the general population without surveillance, indicating that surveillance might not be necessary. Surveillance was most cost-effective for the higher-risk subgroup of high-risk patients.

FUTURE WORK

Studies should examine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of post-polypectomy surveillance without prior classification of patients into risk groups.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial is registered as ISRCTN15213649.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 26. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Cancer diagnostic tools to aid decision-making in primary care: mixed-methods systematic reviews and cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND

Tools based on diagnostic prediction models are available to help general practitioners diagnose cancer. It is unclear whether or not tools expedite diagnosis or affect patient quality of life and/or survival.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives were to evaluate the evidence on the validation, clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and availability and use of cancer diagnostic tools in primary care.

METHODS

Two systematic reviews were conducted to examine the clinical effectiveness (review 1) and the development, validation and accuracy (review 2) of diagnostic prediction models for aiding general practitioners in cancer diagnosis. Bibliographic searches were conducted on MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Web of Science) in May 2017, with updated searches conducted in November 2018. A decision-analytic model explored the tools' clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness in colorectal cancer. The model compared patient outcomes and costs between strategies that included the use of the tools and those that did not, using the NHS perspective. We surveyed 4600 general practitioners in randomly selected UK practices to determine the proportions of general practices and general practitioners with access to, and using, cancer decision support tools. Association between access to these tools and practice-level cancer diagnostic indicators was explored.

RESULTS

Systematic review 1 - five studies, of different design and quality, reporting on three diagnostic tools, were included. We found no evidence that using the tools was associated with better outcomes. Systematic review 2 - 43 studies were included, reporting on prediction models, in various stages of development, for 14 cancer sites (including multiple cancers). Most studies relate to QCancer^® (ClinRisk Ltd, Leeds, UK) and risk assessment tools.

DECISION MODEL

In the absence of studies reporting their clinical outcomes, QCancer and risk assessment tools were evaluated against faecal immunochemical testing. A linked data approach was used, which translates diagnostic accuracy into time to diagnosis and treatment, and stage at diagnosis. Given the current lack of evidence, the model showed that the cost-effectiveness of diagnostic tools in colorectal cancer relies on demonstrating patient survival benefits. Sensitivity of faecal immunochemical testing and specificity of QCancer and risk assessment tools in a low-risk population were the key uncertain parameters.

SURVEY

Practitioner- and practice-level response rates were 10.3% (476/4600) and 23.3% (227/975), respectively. Cancer decision support tools were available in 83 out of 227 practices (36.6%, 95% confidence interval 30.3% to 43.1%), and were likely to be used in 38 out of 227 practices (16.7%, 95% confidence interval 12.1% to 22.2%). The mean 2-week-wait referral rate did not differ between practices that do and practices that do not have access to QCancer or risk assessment tools (mean difference of 1.8 referrals per 100,000 referrals, 95% confidence interval -6.7 to 10.3 referrals per 100,000 referrals).

LIMITATIONS

There is little good-quality evidence on the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of diagnostic tools. Many diagnostic prediction models are limited by a lack of external validation. There are limited data on current UK practice and clinical outcomes of diagnostic strategies, and there is no evidence on the quality-of-life outcomes of diagnostic results. The survey was limited by low response rates.

CONCLUSION

The evidence base on the tools is limited. Research on how general practitioners interact with the tools may help to identify barriers to implementation and uptake, and the potential for clinical effectiveness.

FUTURE WORK

Continued model validation is recommended, especially for risk assessment tools. Assessment of the tools' impact on time to diagnosis and treatment, stage at diagnosis, and health outcomes is also recommended, as is further work to understand how tools are used in general practitioner consultations.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42017068373 and CRD42017068375.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 66. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Non-technical skills and gastrointestinal endoscopy: a review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Non-technical skills (NTS) have gained increasing recognition in recent years for their role in safe, effective team performance in healthcare. Gastrointestinal endoscopy is a procedure-based specialty with rapidly advancing technology, significant operational pressures and rapidly changing 'teams of experts'. However, to date there has been little focus on the effect of NTS in this field.

OBJECTIVES

This review aims to examine the existing literature on NTS in gastrointestinal endoscopy and identify areas for further research.

METHOD

A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, PsychINFO, CINAHL Plus and PubMed databases was performed using search terms Non-Technical Skills, Team Performance or Team Skills, and Endoscopy, Colonoscopy, OGD, Gastroscopy, Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangio-Pancreatography or Endoscopic Ultrasound.

RESULTS

Eighteen relevant publications were found. NTS are deemed an essential component of practice, but so far there is little evidence of their integration into training or competency assessment. Those studies examining the effects of NTS and team training in endoscopy are small and have variable outcome measures with limited evidence of improvement in skills or clinical outcomes. NTS assessment in endoscopy is in its early phases with a few tools in development.

CONCLUSIONS

The current literature on NTS in gastrointestinal endoscopy is limited. NTS, however, are deemed an essential component of practice, with potential positive effects on team performance and clinical outcomes. A validated reliable tool would enable evaluation of training and investigation into the effects of NTS on outcomes. There is a clear need for further research in this field.

Are random biopsies still useful for the detection of neoplasia in patients with IBD undergoing surveillance colonoscopy with chromoendoscopy?

BACKGROUND

Colonoscopy with pan-chromoendoscopy (CE) is superior to standard colonoscopy in detecting neoplasia in patients with IBD. Performing random biopsies in unsuspicious mucosa after CE remains controversial.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with IBD who underwent surveillance colonoscopy using CE were prospectively included. The standardised procedure used CE, performed targeted biopsies or endoscopic resection on suspicious lesions and then quadrant random biopsies every 10 cm. A panel of five expert pathologists reviewed histological slides with dysplasia. Logistic regression model was used to evidence the factors associated with neoplasia in any or in random biopsies.

RESULTS

1000 colonoscopes were performed in 1000 patients (495 UC, 505 Crohn's colitis). In 82 patients, neoplasia was detected from targeted biopsies or removed lesions, and among them dysplasia was detected also by random biopsies in 7 patients. Importantly, in 12 additional patients dysplasia was only detected by random biopsies. Overall, 140 neoplastic sites were found in 94 patients, 112 (80%) from targeted biopsies or removed lesions and 28 (20%) by random biopsies. The yield of neoplasia by random biopsies only was 0.2% per-biopsy (68/31 865), 1.2% per-colonoscopy (12/1000) but 12.8% per-patient with neoplasia (12/94). Dysplasia detected by random biopsies was associated with a personal history of neoplasia, a tubular appearing colon and the presence of primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite their low yield, random biopsies should be performed in association with CE in patients with IBD with a personal history of neoplasia, concomitant PSC or a tubular colon during colonoscopy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

IRB 001508, Paris 7 University.

Endoscopic resection of high-risk T1 colorectal carcinoma prior to surgical resection has no adverse effect on long-term outcomes

OBJECTIVE

It is difficult to predict the presence of histological risk factors for lymph node metastasis (LNM) before endoscopic treatment of T1 colorectal cancer (CRC). Therefore, endoscopic therapy is propagated to obtain adequate histological staging. We examined whether secondary surgery following endoscopic resection of high-risk T1 CRC does not have a negative effect on patients' outcomes compared with primary surgery.

DESIGN

Patients with T1 CRC with one or more histological risk factors for LNM (high risk) and treated with primary or secondary surgery between 2000 and 2014 in 13 hospitals were identified in the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Additional data were collected from hospital records, endoscopy, radiology and pathology reports. A propensity score analysis was performed using inverse probability weighting (IPW) to correct for confounding by indication.

RESULTS

602 patients were eligible for analysis (263 primary; 339 secondary surgery). Overall, 34 recurrences were observed (5.6%). After adjusting with IPW, no differences were observed between primary and secondary surgery for the presence of LNM (OR 0.97; 95% CI 0.49 to 1.93; p=0.940) and recurrence during follow-up (HR 0.97; 95% CI 0.41 to 2.34; p=0.954). Further adjusting for lymphovascular invasion, depth of invasion and number of retrieved lymph nodes did not alter this outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data do not support an increased risk of LNM or recurrence after secondary surgery compared with primary surgery. Therefore, an attempt for an en-bloc resection of a possible T1 CRC without evident signs of deep invasion seems justified in order to prevent surgery of low-risk T1 CRC in a significant proportion of patients.

Effectiveness of screening colonoscopy in reducing the risk of death from right and left colon cancer: a large community-based study

OBJECTIVE

Screening colonoscopy's effectiveness in reducing colorectal cancer mortality risk in community populations is unclear, particularly for right-colon cancers, leading to recommendations against its use for screening in some countries. This study aimed to determine whether, among average-risk people, receipt of screening colonoscopy reduces the risk of dying from both right-colon and left-colon/rectal cancers.

DESIGN

We conducted a nested case-control study with incidence-density matching in screening-eligible Kaiser Permanente members. Patients who were 55-90 years old on their colorectal cancer death date during 2006-2012 were matched on diagnosis (reference) date to controls on age, sex, health plan enrolment duration and geographical region. We excluded patients at increased colorectal cancer risk, or with prior colorectal cancer diagnosis or colectomy. The association between screening colonoscopy receipt in the 10-year period before the reference date and colorectal cancer death risk was evaluated while accounting for other screening exposures.

RESULTS

We analysed 1747 patients who died from colorectal cancer and 3460 colorectal cancer-free controls. Compared with no endoscopic screening, receipt of a screening colonoscopy was associated with a 67% reduction in the risk of death from any colorectal cancer (adjusted OR (aOR)=0.33, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.52). By cancer location, screening colonoscopy was associated with a 65% reduction in risk of death for right-colon cancers (aOR=0.35, CI 0.18 to 0.65) and a 75% reduction for left-colon/rectal cancers (aOR=0.25, CI 0.12 to 0.53).

CONCLUSIONS

Screening colonoscopy was associated with a substantial and comparably decreased mortality risk for both right-sided and left-sided cancers within a large community-based population.

Real-life chromoendoscopy for neoplasia detection and characterisation in long-standing IBD

OBJECTIVE

Outside clinical trials, the effectiveness of chromoendoscopy (CE) for long-standing IBD surveillance is controversial. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of CE for neoplasia detection and characterisation, in real-life.

DESIGN

From June 2012 to 2014, patients with IBD were prospectively included in a multicentre cohort study. Each colonic segment was evaluated with white light followed by 0.4% indigo carmine CE. Specific lesions' features were recorded. Optical diagnosis was assessed. Dysplasia detection rate between expert and non-expert endoscopists and learning curve were ascertained.

RESULTS

Ninety-four (15.7%) dysplastic (1 cancer, 5 high-grade dysplasia, 88 low-grade dysplasia) and 503 (84.3%) non-dysplastic lesions were detected in 350 patients (47% female; mean disease duration: 17 years). Colonoscopies were performed with standard definition (41.5%) or high definition (58.5%). Dysplasia miss rate with white light was 40/94 (57.4% incremental yield for CE). CE-incremental detection yield for dysplasia was comparable between standard definition and high definition (51.5% vs 52.3%, p=0.30). Dysplasia detection rate was comparable between expert and non-expert (18.5% vs 13.1%, p=0.20). No significant learning curve was observed (8.2% vs 14.2%, p=0.46). Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for dysplasia optical diagnosis were 70%, 90%, 58% and 94%, respectively. Endoscopic characteristics predictive of dysplasia were: proximal location, loss of innominate lines, polypoid morphology and Kudo pit pattern III-V.

CONCLUSIONS

CE presents a high diagnostic yield for neoplasia detection, irrespectively of the technology and experience available in any centre. In vivo, CE optical diagnosis is highly accurate for ruling out dysplasia, especially in expert hands. Lesion characteristics can aid the endoscopist for in situ therapeutic decisions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02543762.

The utilization of colonoscopy in Germany

Colorectal cancer is one of the three most common cancers in German adults. There are several legally based examinations for the early detection of colorectal cancer. People aged 50 to 54 years can have a faecal blood test annually. From the age of 55, this test is offered every two years as part of cancer screening, or alternatively a preventive colonoscopy, which can be repeated after ten years if the findings are inconspicuous. However, colonoscopies are also carried out to clarify complaints or other diseases (curative colonoscopy). In the GEDA 2014/2015-EHIS study, the respondents provided the date of their last colonoscopy. No data was collected on the reason why this colonoscopy was performed. 57% of women and 61% of men aged 55 years or older reported that they had a colonoscopy within the last 10 years. New legal regulations envisage the expansion of colorectal cancer screening and its development into an organised, quality-assured early detection programme.

Full-spectrum (FUSE) versus standard forward-viewing colonoscopy in an organised colorectal cancer screening programme

OBJECTIVE

Miss rate of polyps has been shown to be substantially lower with full-spectrum endoscopy (FUSE) compared with standard forward-viewing (SFV) colonoscopy in a tandem study at per polyp analysis. However, there is uncertainty on whether FUSE is also associated with a higher detection rate of colorectal neoplasia, especially advanced lesions, in per patient analysis.

METHODS

Consecutive subjects undergoing colonoscopy following a positive faecal immunochemical test (FIT) by experienced endoscopists and performed in the context of a regional colorectal cancer population-screening programme were randomised between colonoscopy with either FUSE or SFV colonoscopy in seven Italian centres. Randomisation was stratified by gender, age group and screening history. Primary outcomes included detection rates of advanced adenomas (A-ADR), adenomas (ADR) and sessile-serrated polyps (SSPDR).

RESULTS

Of 741 eligible subjects, 658 were randomised to either FUSE (n=328) or SFV (n=330) colonoscopy and included in the analysis. Overall, 293/658 and 143/658 subjects had at least one adenoma (ADR 44.5%) and advanced adenoma (A-ADR 21.7%), respectively, while SSP was the most advanced lesion in 18 cases (SSPDR 2.7%). ADR and A-ADR were 43.6% and 19.5% in the FUSE arm, and 45.5% and 23.9% in the SFV arm, with no difference for both ADR (OR for FUSE: 0.96, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.14) and A-ADR (OR for FUSE: 0.82, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.09). No difference in SSPDR or multiplicity was detected between the two arms. In the per polyp analysis, the mean number of adenomas and proximal adenomas per patient was 0.81±1.25 and 0.47±0.93 in the FUSE arm, and 0.85±1.33 and 0.48±0.96 in the SFV colonoscopy arm (p=NS for both comparisons).

CONCLUSIONS

No statistically significant difference in ADR and A-ADR between FUSE and SFV colonoscopy was detected in a per patient analysis in FIT-positive patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN10357435.

High prevalence of adenomatous colorectal polyps in young cancer survivors treated with abdominal radiation therapy: results of a prospective trial

OBJECTIVE

Cancer survivors treated with abdominal/pelvic radiation therapy (ART) have increased the risks of colorectal cancer (CRC), although evidence supporting early CRC screening for these patients is lacking. We sought to determine whether there is an elevated prevalence of adenomatous colorectal polyps in young survivors prior to the age when screening would be routinely recommended.

DESIGN

We conducted a prospective study of early colonoscopic screening in cancer survivors aged 35-49 who had received ART ≥10 years previously. The planned sample size was based on prior studies reporting a prevalence of adenomatous polyps of approximately 20% among the average-risk population ≥50 years of age, in contrast to ≤10% among those average-risk people aged 40-50 years, for whom screening is not routinely recommended.

RESULTS

Colonoscopy was performed in 54 survivors, at a median age of 45 years (range 36-49) and after median interval from radiation treatment of 19 years (10.6-43.5). Forty-nine polyps were detected in 24 patients, with 15 patients (27.8%; 95% CI 17.6% to 40.9%) having potentially precancerous polyps. Fifty-three per cent of polyps were within or at the edge of the prior ART fields.

CONCLUSIONS

Young survivors treated with ART have a polyp prevalence comparable with the average-risk population aged ≥50 years and substantially higher than previously reported for the average-risk population aged 40-50 years. These findings lend support to the early initiation of screening in these survivors.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT00982059; results.

Deep mural injury and perforation after colonic endoscopic mucosal resection: a new classification and analysis of risk factors

OBJECTIVES

Perforation is the most serious complication associated with endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). We propose a new classification for the appearance and integrity of the muscularis propria (MP) after EMR including various extents of deep mural injury (DMI). Risk factors for these injuries were analysed.

DESIGN

Endoscopic images and histological specimens of consecutive patients undergoing EMR of colonic laterally spreading lesions ≥20 mm at a large Australian tertiary referral endoscopy unit were retrospectively analysed using our new DMI classification system. DMI was graded according to MP injury (I/II intact MP without/with fibrosis, III target sign, IV/V obvious transmural perforation without/with contamination). Histological specimens were examined for included MP and patient outcomes were recorded. All type III-V DMI signs were clipped if possible, types I and II DMI were clipped at the endoscopists' discretion.

RESULTS

EMR was performed in 911 lesions (mean size 37 mm) in 802 patients (male sex 51.4%, mean age 67 years). DMI signs were identified in 83 patients (10.3%). Type III-V DMI was identified in 24 patients (3.0%); clipping was successfully performed in all patients. A clinically significant perforation occurred in two patients (0.2%). Only one of the 59 type I/II cases experienced a delayed perforation. 85.5% of patients with DMI were discharged on the same day, all without sequelae. On multivariable analysis, type III-V DMI was associated with transverse colon location (OR 3.55, p=0.028), en bloc resection (OR 3.84, p=0.005) and high-grade dysplasia or submucosal invasive cancer (OR 2.97, p 0.014).

CONCLUSIONS

In this retrospective analysis, use of the new classification and management with clips appeared to be a safe approach. Advanced DMI types (III-V) occurred in 3.0% of patients and were associated with identifiable risk factors. Further prospective clinical studies should use this new classification.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT01368289; results.

Barriers against split-dose bowel preparation for colonoscopy

OBJECTIVE

Although split regimen is associated with higher adenoma detection and is recommended for elective colonoscopy, its adoption remains suboptimal. The identification of patient-related barriers may improve its implementation. Our aim was to assess patients' attitude towards split regimen and patient-related factors associated with its uptake.

DESIGN

In a multicentre, prospective study, outpatients undergoing colonoscopy from 8:00 to 14:00 were given written instructions for 4 L polyethylene glycol bowel preparation, offering the choice between split-dose and day-before regimens and emphasising the superiority of split regimen on colonoscopy outcomes. Uptake of split regimen and association with patient-related factors were explored by a 20-item questionnaire.

RESULTS

Of the 1447 patients (mean age 59.2±13.5 years, men 54.3%), 61.7% and 38.3% chose a split-dose and day-before regimens, respectively. A linear correlation was observed between time of colonoscopy appointments and split-dose uptake, from 27.3% in 8:00 patients to 96% in 14:00 patients (p<0.001, χ² for linear trend). At multivariate analysis, colonoscopy appointment before 10:00 (OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.18), travel time to endoscopy service >1 h (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.79), low education level (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.96) and female gender (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.95) were inversely correlated with the uptake of split-dose. Overall, the risk of travel interruption and faecal incontinence was slightly increased in split regimen patients (3.0% vs 1.4% and 1.5% vs 0.9%, respectively; p=NS). Split regimen was an independent predictor of adequate colon cleansing (OR 3.34, 95% CI 2.40 to 4.63) and polyp detection (OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.92).

CONCLUSION

Patient attitude towards split regimen is suboptimal, especially for early morning examinations. Interventions to improve patient compliance (ie, policies to reorganise colonoscopy timetable, educational initiatives for patient and healthcare providers) should be considered.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02287051; pre-result.

British Society of Gastroenterology position statement on serrated polyps in the colon and rectum

Serrated polyps have been recognised in the last decade as important premalignant lesions accounting for between 15% and 30% of colorectal cancers. There is therefore a clinical need for guidance on how to manage these lesions; however, the evidence base is limited. A working group was commission by the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) Endoscopy section to review the available evidence and develop a position statement to provide clinical guidance until the evidence becomes available to support a formal guideline. The scope of the position statement was wide-ranging and included: evidence that serrated lesions have premalignant potential; detection and resection of serrated lesions; surveillance strategies after detection of serrated lesions; special situations-serrated polyposis syndrome (including surgery) and serrated lesions in colitis; education, audit and benchmarks and research questions. Statements on these issues were proposed where the evidence was deemed sufficient, and re-evaluated modified via a Delphi process until >80% agreement was reached. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) tool was used to assess the strength of evidence and strength of recommendation for finalised statements. Key recommendation: we suggest that until further evidence on the efficacy or otherwise of surveillance are published, patients with sessile serrated lesions (SSLs) that appear associated with a higher risk of future neoplasia or colorectal cancer (SSLs ≥10 mm or serrated lesions harbouring dysplasia including traditional serrated adenomas) should be offered a one-off colonoscopic surveillance examination at 3 years (weak recommendation, low quality evidence, 90% agreement).

Detection rate of serrated polyps and serrated polyposis syndrome in colorectal cancer screening cohorts: a European overview

OBJECTIVE

The role of serrated polyps (SPs) as colorectal cancer precursor is increasingly recognised. However, the true prevalence SPs is largely unknown. We aimed to evaluate the detection rate of SPs subtypes as well as serrated polyposis syndrome (SPS) among European screening cohorts.

METHODS

Prospectively collected screening cohorts of ≥1000 individuals were eligible for inclusion. Colonoscopies performed before 2009 and/or in individuals aged below 50 were excluded. Rate of SPs was assessed, categorised for histology, location and size. Age-sex-standardised number needed to screen (NNS) to detect SPs were calculated. Rate of SPS was assessed in cohorts with known colonoscopy follow-up data. Clinically relevant SPs (regarded as a separate entity) were defined as SPs ≥10 mm and/or SPs >5 mm in the proximal colon.

RESULTS

Three faecal occult blood test (FOBT) screening cohorts and two primary colonoscopy screening cohorts (range 1.426-205.949 individuals) were included. Rate of SPs ranged between 15.1% and 27.2% (median 19.5%), of sessile serrated polyps between 2.2% and 4.8% (median 3.3%) and of clinically relevant SPs between 2.1% and 7.8% (median 4.6%). Rate of SPs was similar in FOBT-based cohorts as in colonoscopy screening cohorts. No apparent association between the rate of SP and gender or age was shown. Rate of SPS ranged from 0% to 0.5%, which increased to 0.4% to 0.8% after follow-up colonoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

The detection rate of SPs is variable among screening cohorts, and standards for reporting, detection and histopathological assessment should be established. The median rate, as found in this study, may contribute to define uniform minimum standards for males and females between 50 and 75 years of age.

Impact of feedback and monitoring on colonoscopy withdrawal times and polyp detection rates

Background

Previous studies have shown colonoscopy withdrawal time (WT) to be a reliable surrogate indicator for polyp detection rate (PDR) and adenoma detection rate (ADR) in colonoscopy. Our aim was to assess the impact of feedback and monitoring of WT on PDR in routine colonoscopies with long-term follow-up.

Materials and methods

A total of 307 colonoscopies were performed in three separate clinical scenarios. First, PDR and WT were recorded without the staff being aware of the specific objective of the study. Before the second scenario, the staff was given interventional information and feedback on WTs and PDRs from the first scenario and was encouraged to aim for a minimum WT of 8 min. Retention of knowledge gained was reassessed in the third scenario 1 year later.

Results

The PDR in the first two scenarios differed significantly (p<0.01), with a more than 90% increase in PDR after intervention from 22% to 42% (95% CI 1.44 to 4.95), although the mean WT did not change (6.8 vs 7.2 min; p>0.05). The increase in PDR between the first and second scenarios was retained in the third follow-up scenario 1 year later where the WT of both polyp-positive and polyp-negative colonoscopies was found to be longer.

Conclusions

PDR almost doubled from the first to the second scenario of a real-life colonoscopy setting, indicating that awareness of WT is crucial. The knowledge gained from this intervention in routine practice was even retained after a year.