Risk factors of nonadherence to colonoscopy surveillance after polypectomy and its impact on clinical outcomes: a KASID multicenter study

Analysis of the Current Status and Factors Influencing Compliance with Colonoscopic Monitoring After Endoscopic Surgery for Advanced Colorectal Adenoma

Background

Advanced colorectal adenomas are at a risk of malignant transformation following endoscopic resection, and colonoscopic monitoring interval after polypectomy have been widely used. This study aims to investigate the prevailing state of compliance with postoperative colonoscopic surveillance among patients with advanced colorectal adenomas and its' influencing factors at Affiliated Hospital of Jiangnan University between November 2020 and April 2021.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients who underwent endoscopic treatment for ACA at Affiliated Hospital of Jiangnan University from November 2020 to April 2021. Compliance with postoperative colonoscopic surveillance was assessed based on established guidelines. Factors such as sociodemographic features, medical histories, and health beliefs were analyzed to determine their influence on compliance. Univariate analysis, survival analysis, and multi-factor Cox regression analysis were used for statistical evaluation.

Results

A total of 511 patients were included in the study. The compliance rate was found to be 43.2%. The univariate analysis indicated that factors such as gender, education level, work status, type of health insurance, place of residence, marital status, type of consultation, presence of gastrointestinal symptoms, number of polyps, and the maximum diameter of polyps significantly affected compliance. Multi-factor Cox regression analysis revealed that female gender, absence of gastrointestinal symptoms, outpatient endoscopic treatment, and solitary polyps were independent factors influencing compliance. Reasons for poor compliance included underestimating the severity of the disease, fear of colonoscopy, and procedural complexities.

Conclusion

Patients with advanced colorectal adenomas had poor compliance with postoperative colonoscopy monitoring. Tailored health education programs should be designed, targeting women, outpatients undergoing endoscopic procedures, and patients with solitary polyps to enhance their compliance with colonoscopy monitoring.

Risk Factors for Metachronous Colorectal Cancer or Advanced Adenomas After Endoscopic Resection of High-risk Adenomas

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Among the characteristics of high-risk adenomas (HRAs), some may predict a higher risk of metachronous advanced lesions. Our aim was to assess which HRA characteristics are associated with high risk of metachronous colorectal cancer (CRC) or advanced adenomas (AAs).

METHODS

We systematically searched Pubmed, EMBASE, and Cochrane for cohort studies and clinical trials of CRC or AA incidence at surveillance stratified by baseline lesion size, histology, and multiplicity. We calculated pooled relative risks (RRs) using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed with the I² statistic.

RESULTS

Fifty-five studies were included, with 936,540 patients with mean follow-up 5.4 ± 2.9 years. CRC incidence per 1000 person-years was 2.6 (2.1-3.0) for adenomas ≥20 mm, 2.7 (2.2-3.2) for high-grade dysplasia (HGD), 2.0 (1.8-2.3) for villous component, 0.8 (0.1-1.4) for ≥5 adenomas, 1.0 (0.7-1.2) for ≥3 adenomas. Metachronous CRC risk was higher in adenomas ≥20 mm vs 10 to 19 mm (RR, 2.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.20-3.61), HGD vs low-grade dysplasia (RR, 2.89; 95% CI, 1.88-4.44), villous vs tubular (RR, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.33-2.31). No significant differences in CRC risk were found in ≥3 adenomas vs 1 to 2 (RR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.84-1.83), nor in ≥5 adenomas vs 3 to 4 (RR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.30-2.11). Compared with normal colonoscopy, RR for CRC risk was 2.61 (95% CI, 2.06-3.32) for ≥10mm, 6.62 (95% CI, 4.60-9.52) for HGD, 3.58 (95% CI, 2.24-5.73) for villous component, and 2.03 (95% CI, 1.40-2.94) for ≥3 adenomas. Similar trends were seen for metachronous AAs.

CONCLUSION

Metachronous CRC risk is highest in patients with baseline adenomas with ≥20 mm or HGD. Multiplicity does not seem to be associated with substantially higher CRC risk in the near term.

The impact of cumulative colorectal cancer screening delays: A simulation study

OBJECTIVE

Annual fecal immunochemical tests can reduce colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. However, screening is a multi-step process and most patients do not perfectly adhere to guideline-recommended screening schedules. Our objective was to compare the reduction in colorectal cancer incidence and life-years gained based on US guideline-concordant fecal immunochemical test screening to scenarios with a range of delays.

METHOD

The Colorectal Cancer Simulated Population model for Incidence and Natural history (CRC-SPIN) microsimulation model was used to estimate the effect of systematic departures from fecal immunochemical test screening guidelines on lifetime screening benefit.

RESULTS

The combined effect of consistent modest delays in screening initiation (1 year), repeated fecal immunochemical test screening (3 months), and receipt of follow-up or surveillance colonoscopy (3 months) resulted in up to 1.3 additional colorectal cancer cases per 10,000, 0.4 additional late-stage colorectal cancer cases per 10,000 and 154.7 fewer life-years gained per 10,000. A 5-year delay in screening initiation had a larger impact on screening effectiveness than consistent small delays in repeated fecal immunochemical test screening or receipt of follow-up colonoscopy after an abnormal fecal immunochemical test. The combined effect of consistent large delays in screening initiation (5 years), repeated fecal immunochemical test screening (6 months), and receipt of follow-up or surveillance colonoscopy (6 months) resulted in up to 3.7 additional colorectal cancer cases per 10,000, 1.5 additional late-stage colorectal cancer cases per 10,000 and 612.3 fewer life-years gained per 10,000.

CONCLUSIONS

Systematic delays across the screening process can result in meaningful reductions in colorectal cancer screening effectiveness, especially for longer delays. Screening delays could drive differences in colorectal cancer incidence across patient groups with differential access to screening.

Outcomes Of Patients with Delayed Surveillance Colonoscopy

BACKGROUND

Surveillance colonoscopy has been shown to be an effective tool for prevention of CRC in high-risk populations, if adhered to. We aimed to discover the sequelae of late surveillance in a cohort of patient's overdue for colonoscopy, in particular the development of colorectal cancer (CRC) or advanced adenoma (AA) within surveillance subgroups.

METHOD

We conducted a retrospective cohort study on all patients from the Bay of Plenty District Health Board region, New Zealand, placed on the colonoscopy surveillance waitlist from 2006 onwards who had their procedure completed between 1 November 2016 and 31 January 2018, when the total surveillance list was declared up-to-date. Patients with overdue surveillance, defined as done later than 90 days after the recommended due date were compared to patients who were done either early, or on time.

RESULTS

786 patients were recorded as overdue for surveillance colonoscopy, and 386 were completed early or on time. The median time overdue was 22 months. Three cases (0.4%) of CRC were found in overdue patients compared to 4 cases (1%) for those done on time (adjusted p=0.24). There were 86 (11%) AA in patient's overdue compared to 27 (7%) in those not overdue (odds ratio (OR) 1.6, 95% confidence interval (CI) [1.0,2.5], p=0.04). Overdue status increased the expected risk of AA by approximately 60% (adjusted; 95% CI [1%,253%], p=0.04) or 19% per year overdue (95% CI [7%,32%], p=0.002). Surveillance of 248 low-risk post-polypectomy patients demonstrated 26/211 with AA in overdue patients compared to 2/37 (12.3% vs 5.4%, unadjusted p=0.23) for those done on time. Surveillance of 180 high-risk post-polypectomy patients identified 2 CRC's and 8/43 AA in those overdue, as compared to no CRC and 9/137 AA (18.6% vs 6.6%, OR 1.79 (95% CI [1.07,2.0], unadjusted p=0.03) in those done on time.

CONCLUSION

Whilst overdue surveillance is not predictive of increased CRC, it is associated with an increase in expected number of AA, particularly in patients having surveillance for previous high-risk polypectomy. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

How spatial accessibility to colonoscopy affects diagnostic adherences and adverse intestinal outcomes among the patients with positive preliminary screening findings

Background

Colonoscopy is an important procedure for early colorectal cancer (CRC) detection, however, patients with positive preliminary screening results in China may not seek for colonoscopy to confirm the diagnosis. We evaluated the spatial accessibility of colonoscopy among the residents with positive preliminary screening results in Guangzhou, China, and investigated how colonoscopy accessibility was associated with the population adherence and adverse intestinal outcomes.

Methods

This study was based on the Guangzhou community‐based CRC screening program. Spatial accessibility was measured using three metrics including travel time from home to nearest colonoscopy hospital, physician‐to‐population ratio (PPR) and accessibility indicator estimated with enhanced two‐step floating catchment area method (E2SFCA). We used Cox regression and logistic regression to assess the association of colonoscopy accessibility with population adherence and adverse intestinal outcomes, respectively.

Results

A total of 34 606 people were identified with positive preliminary screening findings. Central areas were reported with higher E2SFCA scores, higher PPR and less travel time. The model adjusting for potential individual level confounders found that PPR > 50 (Hazard Ratio (HR) = 1.88, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 1.79‐1.97) and higher scores of E2SFCA (HR = 3.78, 95% CI: 2.07‐6.92) were associated with increased adherence, although estimates were not significant in the model adjusting for both individual and district‐level confounders. For adverse intestinal outcomes, the final multilevel logistic model suggested a lower risk of intestinal lesions among the residents in areas with PPR > 50 (Odds Ratio (OR) = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.24‐0.99) and higher scores of E2SFCA (OR = 0.20, 95% CI: 0.05‐0.82).

Conclusion

Significant inequality of colonoscopy accessibility was observed across Guangzhou. The increased incidence of intestinal lesions was associated with spatial inequalities of medical resources. Policies against the spatial inequality in medical resources should be developed.

Adherence to follow-up in high-risk adenoma patients diagnosed by, and excluded from the Barcelona colorectal cancer screening programme

INTRODUCTION

Colorectal cancer screening programmes have been shown to reduce incidence and mortality. High-risk adenomas (HRA) are the most frequently diagnosed lesions in these programmes, and these patients are referred to a specialist. However, few studies have evaluated the adherence of HRA patients to the recommended endoscopic follow-up.

OBJECTIVES

To analyse follow-up adherence and duration in patients diagnosed with HRA in a screening programme.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of patients diagnosed with HRA within one of the participating hospitals of the colorectal cancer screening programme of Barcelona, during the first round of the programme (2010-2011). The follow-up period was 75.5 months. Descriptive analyses, logistic regression and survival models were performed.

RESULTS

602 patients were included in the study, 66.6% of which were men. The adherence rate was 83.7% (n=504). Follow-up colonoscopy was performed within the recommended time (36±6months) in 57.7%, with a mean follow-up of 34 months. The Cox regression only showed differences at the socioeconomic level, with a lower adherence rate in the most deprived quintile (HR 0.70; 95% CI, 0.53-0.93).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to previous studies, the follow-up adherence rate is considered to be acceptable. However, follow-up was not performed within the recommended time frame in a high proportion of cases. There is a need to further explore the reasons leading to lower follow-up adherence in the most deprived socioeconomic group and to increase the equity of the programme beyond participation.