Patient and Physician Factors Associated with Adenoma and Sessile Serrated Lesion Detection Rates

Sessile serrated lesion prevalence and factors associated with their detection: a post-hoc analysis of a multinational randomized controlled trial from Asia

BACKGROUND

Sessile serrated lesions (SSLs) are associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer. Data on the prevalence of SSLs in Asia are limited. We performed this study to estimate the prevalence of SSLs in Asia and to explore endoscopic factors that are associated with SSL detection.

METHODS

This is a post-hoc analysis of a multicenter randomized controlled trial from four Asian countries/regions that compared adenoma detection rates using linked-color imaging (LCI) and white-light imaging. Colonoscopies were performed in an average-risk population for screening, diagnostic examination, or polyp surveillance. Patients with SSLs were compared against those without SSLs to evaluate for possible predictors of SSL detection using Firth's logistic regression.

RESULTS

2898 participants (mean age 64.5 years) were included in the analysis. The estimated prevalence of SSLs was 4.0% (95%CI 3.4%-4.8%), with no sex or age group differences. On multivariable analysis, use of LCI (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.63, 95%CI 1.10-2.41), experienced endoscopists (aOR 1.94, 95%CI 1.25-3.00), use of transparent cap (aOR 1.75, 95%CI 1.09-2.81), and longer withdrawal time (aOR 1.06, 95%CI 1.03-1.10) were independently associated with SSL detection. Synchronous adenoma detection (aOR 1.89, 95%CI 1.20-2.99) was also predictive of SSL detection.

CONCLUSION

The prevalence of SSLs in Asia is 4.0%. Use of LCI or a transparent cap, greater endoscopist experience, and longer withdrawal time were all associated with increased SSL detection.

Clinical and endoscopic characteristics and management of 220 cases with serrated polyps

BACKGROUND

Serrated polyps are considered the precursor lesions of colorectal cancer through the serrated pathway. In the present study, we aimed to evaluate and discuss the clinical and endoscopic characteristics and management of serrated polyps.

METHODS

The data of 220 cases with serrated polyps between September 2018 and November 2021 in Shenzhen People's Hospital were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

Of all these cases, 32 were hyperplastic polyps, 36 were traditional serrated adenomas, 126 were sessile serrated lesions, 25 were SSLs with dysplasia, and one was an unclassified serrated adenoma. Although most patients were males aged ≥50 years and most serrated polyps were located in the distal colon and rectum with a size of 6-10 mm and the shape of type 0-Is, there was no significant difference (P > 0.05). Serrated polyps of ≤5 mm in size and type 0-IIa were mostly removed by cold biopsy forceps. Cold snare polypectomy was primarily used for those of 6-10 mm in size. Endoscopic mucosal resection was used for those of 6-20 mm, and endoscopic submucosal dissection was used for those of ≥20 mm (P < 0.05). All complications occurred in SSL patients with or without dysplasia (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical and endoscopic characteristics were beneficial for distinguishing and diagnosing serrated polyps. In addition, management options were crucial to prevent recurrence and progression. However, the detection rate of serrated polyps was relatively low. Therefore, prospective multicenter studies with large samples are necessary to better assess colorectal serrated polyps.

Anesthesia Assistance in Colonoscopy: Impact on Quality Indicators

Background

Adenoma detection rate (ADR) and polyp detection rate (PDR) are both indicators for colonoscopy quality. Improving ADR or PDR is critical for reducing the incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer (CRC). Although several studies have focused on identifying the factors that may influence ADR or PDR, the evidence remains limited and inconclusive. We conducted a retrospective study to evaluate the effect of anesthesia assistance (AA) on ADR or PDR in patients undergoing colonoscopy screening and identify risk factors affecting ADR or PDR.

Methods

We reviewed electronic medical records of patients who underwent colonoscopy screening between May 2019 and August 2020. Patients were divided into two groups according to whether they received AA: patients in Group A underwent colonoscopy screening with AA, whereas patients in Group O underwent colonoscopy screening without AA. Propensity score matching (PSM) was utilized to account for differences in baseline characteristics. After, ADR and PDR were compared between the two groups. Binary logistic regression was employed to identify risk factors that affected ADR or PDR.

Results

Of 9432 patients who underwent colonoscopy examination during the study period, 7170 were included in the final analyses (Group A = 5756 and Group O = 1414). After PSM, 736 patients remained in each group for analyses. There was no significant difference between groups A and O (P &gt; 0.05) in ADR or PDR. Binary logistic regression indicated that the endoscopic device version (Olympus HQ290), equipment image-based technique and number of images were independent risk factors that affected ADR, and the age (50–59 years and 60–69 years), gender (male), high-risk status, endoscopist seniority (senior endoscopist), equipment image-based technique and number of images were all independent risk factors that affected PDR.

Conclusions

We discovered that AA does not affect ADR or PDR. Despite improved patient satisfaction, using AA is unnecessary for improving colonoscopy quality. Endoscopists should consider all these factors as much as possible when performing colonoscopy screening.

A comparison of 9-min colonoscopy withdrawal time and 6-min colonoscopy withdrawal time: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The optimal colonoscopy withdrawal time is still a controversial topic. While several studies demonstrate that longer withdrawal time improves adenoma detection rate, others have contradicted these findings.

METHODS

Three independent reviewers performed a comprehensive review of all original articles published from inception to January 2021 and included studies reporting comparison of the two cohorts-(i) ≥ 6 but less than 9 min of colonoscopy withdrawal time (CWT) and (ii) ≥ 9 min of CWT. The outcome measures were the following: (i) adenoma detection rate (ADR), (ii) advanced ADR, and (iii) sessile serrated adenoma detection rate (SDR). The meta-analysis was performed, and the statistics were two-tailed.

RESULTS

A total of seven studies met the inclusion criteria after a thorough search of the literature was completed. The analysis revealed that ≥ 9 min of CWT had significantly higher odds of adenoma detection as compared with 6-9 min of CWT (odds ratio [OR] 1.54, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.30-1.82; I²  = 93.7). Additionally, a significantly higher odds of sessile serrated adenoma detection (OR 1.68, 95% CI 1.28-2.22; I²  = 0) and a trend towards higher odds of advanced adenoma detection (OR 1.38, 95% CI 0.98-1.95, I²  = 90) were seen with CWT of at least 9 min when compared with 6-9 min of CWT.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review and meta-analysis analysis provides further evidence that at least 9 min of CWT cohort had significantly higher ADR and SDR as compared with the at least 6 min but less than 9 min of cohort.

Patient, Physician, and Procedure Characteristics Are Independently Predictive of Polyp Detection Rates in Clinical Practice

BACKGROUND

Variability in colon polyp detection impacts patient outcomes. However, the relative influence of physician, patient, and procedure-specific factors on polyp detection is unclear. Therefore, determining how these factors contribute to adenoma and sessile serrated polyp (SSP) detection is important to contextualize measures of colonoscopy quality such as adenoma detection rate and patient outcomes.

AIMS

To determine the relative contribution of physician, patient, and procedure-specific factors in total polyp, adenoma, and SSP detection rates.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study of patients undergoing screening colonoscopy and used a two-level generalized linear mixed regression model to identify factors associated with polyp detection.

RESULTS

7799 average risk screening colonoscopies were performed between July 2016 and October 2017. The patient factor most strongly associated with increased risk of adenoma and sessile serrated polyp detection was white race (OR 1.21, 95% CI 1.05-1.39 and OR 3.17, 95% CI 2.34-4.30, respectively). Adenomatous (OR 1.92, 95% CI 1.04-3.57) and sessile serrated polyps (OR 5.56, 95% CI 1.37-20.0) were more likely to be found during procedures performed with anesthesia care as compared to those with moderate sedation. Physician with a luminal gastrointestinal focus had increased odds of adenoma detection (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.02-2.50).

CONCLUSIONS

In a multi-level model accounting for clustering effects, we identified patient, provider and procedural factors independently influence adenoma and sessile serrated polyp detection. Our findings suggest that to compare polyp detection rates between endoscopists, even at the same institution, risk adjustment by characteristics of the patient population and practice is necessary.