AGA Clinical Practice Update on Strategies to Improve Quality of Screening and Surveillance Colonoscopy: Expert Review

Second Examination of the Right Colon Using Narrow-Band Imaging Increases Adenoma Detection Rates in the Right Colon: A Multicenter, Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Repeat examination of the right colon increases adenoma detection rates (ADRs) in the right colon. This study aimed to investigate whether a second examination of the right colon using narrow-band imaging (NBI) increases ADRs in the right colon compared with repeat examinations using white light imaging (WLI).

METHODS

Consecutive patients with routine indications for colonoscopy were enrolled and randomly assigned to two groups. The control arm underwent two repeat forward examinations of the right colon using WLI only (repeat-WLI group), and the intervention arm underwent the first examination of the right colon using WLI and the second examination using NBI (WLI-NBI group). Lesions detected during the first and second examinations in each group were analyzed. The primary outcome was ADR in the right colon.

RESULTS

A total of 476 colonoscopies were analyzed, including 240 and 236 in the repeat-WLI and WLI-NBI groups, respectively. The overall ADR in the right colon was significantly higher in the WLI-NBI group than that in the repeat-WLI group (27.1% vs. 17.9%; p = 0.022). The number of adenomas per colonoscopy in the right colon was also significantly higher in the WLI-NBI group than in the repeat-WLI group (mean number of adenomas, 0.36 vs. 0.24; p = 0.042). However, there were no significant differences in the detection rates of advanced adenomas and sessile serrated lesions between the WLI-NBI and repeat-WLI groups (advanced adenoma, 4.7% vs. 2.9%; sessile serrated lesion, 2.5% vs. 3.3%).

CONCLUSION

A second forward examination of the right colon using NBI increased ADRs in the right colon.

Comparison of effect of remimazolam and propofol on respiration of patients under deep sedation for colonoscopy: a prospective multicenter randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Remimazolam recently became available as a sedative. The comparison of the respiratory suppression effects of remimazolam and propofol under deep sedation for colonoscopy was not thoroughly unclear, particularly with regard to the novel metric of time to first airway intervention. The goal of this study was to systemically compare the respiration profiles of the patients sedated with remimazolam and propofol at the comparable sedation level in the patients undergoing colonoscopy.

METHODS

Four hundred-fifty outpatients were randomly assigned to remimazolam (Group Rem, n = 225) and propofol (Group Pro, n = 225). The target sedation level was the modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation ≤ 2. The primary outcome was elapsed time from anesthesia induction to first airway intervention. Secondary outcomes included incidence and severity of hypoxia and apnea, minute ventilation (MV), tidal volume (TV), and respiratory rate (RR).

RESULTS

The elapsed time from induction to the first airway intervention was 11 ± 8 min in Group Rem (n = 208) vs. 5 ± 6 min in Group Pro (n = 208, P < 0.001). Patients in Group Rem required less frequent airway intervention and had a lower incidence of and shorter duration of apnea than patients in Group Pro (all P < 0.001). MV at 1 min, 2 min, 4 min post-induction, and at the end of the procedure were higher in Group Rem than those in Group Pro (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients sedated with remimazolam vs. propofol during colonoscopy maintain improved respiration and require less frequent airway intervention, and have lower incidence of adverse events. Clinical trial registration and registry URL ChiCTR2000034527, registered at www.chictr.org.cn.

The Role of Artificial Intelligence and Big Data for Gastrointestinal Disease

Artificial intelligence (AI) is a rapidly evolving presence in all fields and industries, with the ability to both improve quality and reduce the burden of human effort. Gastroenterology is a field with a focus on diagnostic techniques and procedures, and AI and big data have established and growing roles to play. Alongside these opportunities are challenges, which will evolve in parallel.

A comparative study benchmarking colon polyp with computer-aided detection (CADe) software

Background and aims

Computer-aided detection software (CADe) has shown promising results in real-time polyp detection, but a limited head-to-head comparison of the available CADe systems has been performed. Moreover, such systems have not been compared to endoscopists using standardized videos. This study aims to compare the performance of three CADe systems in detecting polyps, employing a novel standardized methodology.

Methods

Videos from 300 colonoscopies conducted at Oslo University Hospital were analyzed. Short video clips (20-45 s) presenting normal mucosa or polyps were randomly selected. These videos were then streamed through each CADe system from Medtronic, Olympus, and Augere Medical. Each system featured diverse configurations, resulting in a total of six software settings. Sensitivity and false positivity (FP) were assessed by comparing the CADe systems to both the mean of the systems and pairwise between them. Furthermore, the systems' performance was compared to the performance of five endoscopists.

Results

CADe systems' sensitivity ranged between 84.9% and 98.7%, with statistically significant differences observed between the systems, both in comparison to the mean and to each other. FP rates ranged between 1.2% and 5.6%, also differing statistically significantly between the systems. The CADe systems achieving the highest sensitivity also exhibited the highest FP. Statistically significant differences in the alert delay were observed between different CADe systems and endoscopists.

Conclusions

This study highlights significant differences between commercially available CADe software regarding sensitivity and FP, but a superior performance compared to endoscopists. The software with the highest sensitivity also exhibited the highest FP, highlighting the need for further refinement.

ARE QUALITY INDICATORS IMPORTANT IN COLONOSCOPIES? ANALYSIS OF 3,076 EXAMS IN A PRIVATE TERTIARY SERVICE IN SOUTHEASTERN BRAZIL

BACKGROUND

The carcinogenesis of colorectal cancer is well understood. Adenomas are the precursor lesions in about 70% of cases, highlighting the importance of screening programs.

AIMS

The aim of this study was to analyze the effectiveness of colonoscopy examinations performed in a private tertiary service by calculating the polyp detection rate (PDR) and adenoma detection rate (ADR) and comparing these rates with literature data.

METHODS

This retrospective observational study evaluated colonoscopies performed at Hospital Centro Médico de Campinas between 2018 and 2020. It assessed the indications and complications of colonoscopy, sex, age group, bowel preparation, cecal intubation rate, ADR, PDR, and advanced adenoma detection rate (AADR).

RESULTS

During the period, 3,686 colonoscopies were performed, and 3,076 were included in the analysis. The mean patient age was 57.2 years, and most patients were female (53.5%). Complications occurred in 39 colonoscopies (1.3%), with bleeding in six cases and perforation in one case. Tubular adenoma was the most prevalent histological subtype found in 20% of tests and in 62.7% of those with positive findings. The PDR was 23% and significantly increased with advancing age (p<0.01). The ADR was 20% and also significantly increased with age (p<0.001). This rate was higher in men (27%). The AADR was 4%.

CONCLUSIONS

Colonoscopy is an effective polyp detection method, and the PDR was higher in men and significantly increased with age. The ADR and AADR were comparable to the literature data.

Optimized computer-assisted technique for increasing adenoma detection during colonoscopy: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Efforts to improve colonoscopy have recently focused on improving adenoma detection through individual interventions. We evaluated an optimized computer-assisted technique (CADopt) versus standard colonoscopy.

METHODS

A prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted enrolling adults (45-80 years) undergoing elective colonoscopy. Participants were randomized (1:1) to the intervention group (CADopt), and control group. In the CADopt group, endoscopists used a computer-aided polyp detection combined with linked color imaging, water exchange colonoscopy, and cecal retroflexion. In the control group, standard colonoscopy was performed. Primary outcome was Adenoma Detection Rate (ADR) in the intervention and control groups. Secondary outcomes included polyp detection rate (PDR), advanced ADR (AADR), sessile-serrated lesion detection rates (SDR), and Adenoma per colonoscopy (APC).

RESULTS

A total of 467 patients were recruited and randomized (CADopt group 229 patients, 50.2% female vs 238 patients, 48.3% female in the control group). ADR was 49.3% (95% CI 42.7-56.0) for the CADopt group vs 38.2% (95% CI 32.0-44.7) for the control group (p = 0.016). PDR, AADR, SDR, and APC were 78.2% (95% CI 72.2-83.3), 13.1% (95% CI 9.0-18.2), 6.6% (95% CI 3.7-10.6), and 0.86 (95% CI 0.70-1.02) for the CADopt group versus 59.2% (95% CI 52.7-65.5), 8.0% (95% CI 4.9-12.2), 7.1% (95% CI 4.2-11.1), and 0.75 (95% CI 0.58-0.92) for the control group, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Using an optimized computer-assisted technique led to significant improvements in ADR, PDR, and a trend towards AADR improvements.

Practical utility of linked color imaging in colonoscopy: Updated literature review

The remarkable recent developments in image-enhanced endoscopy (IEE) have significantly contributed to the advancement of diagnostic techniques. Linked color imaging (LCI) is an IEE technique in which color differences are expanded by processing image data to enhance short-wavelength narrow-band light. This feature of LCI causes reddish areas to appear redder and whitish areas to appear whiter. Because most colorectal lesions, such as neoplastic and inflammatory lesions, have a reddish tone, LCI is an effective tool for identifying colorectal lesions by clarifying the redder areas and distinguishing them from the surrounding normal mucosa. To date, eight randomized controlled trials have been conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of LCI in identifying colorectal adenomatous lesions. The results of a meta-analysis integrating these studies demonstrated that LCI was superior to white-light endoscopy for detecting colorectal adenomatous lesions. LCI also improves the detection of serrated lesions by enhancing their whiteness. Furthermore, accumulating evidence suggests that LCI is superior to white-light endoscopy for the diagnosis of the colonic mucosa in patients with ulcerative colitis. In this review, based on a comprehensive search of the current literature since the implementation of LCI, the utility of LCI in the detection and diagnosis of colorectal lesions is discussed. Additionally, the latest data, including attempts to combine artificial intelligence and LCI, are presented.

Primary sclerosing cholangitis in children with inflammatory bowel disease: An ESPGHAN position paper from the Hepatology Committee and the IBD Porto group

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to provide an evidence-supported approach to diagnose, monitor, and treat children with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC).

METHODS

The core group formulated seven PICO-structured clinical questions. A systematic literature search from inception to December 2022 was conducted by a medical librarian using MEDLINE and EMBASE. Core messages from the literature were phrased as position statements and then circulated to a sounding board composed of international experts in pediatric gastroenterology and hepatology, histopathology, adult gastroenterology and hepatology, radiology, and surgery. Statements reaching at least 80% agreement were considered as final. The other statements were refined and then subjected to a second online vote or rejection.

RESULTS

Regular screening for gamma-glutamyltransferase (GGT) is essential for detecting possible biliary disease in children with IBD. MR cholangiopancreatography is the radiological modality of choice for establishing the diagnosis of PSC. Liver biopsy is relevant in the evaluation of small duct PSC or autoimmune hepatitis. Children who do not have known IBD at the time of PSC diagnosis should undergo initial screening with fecal calprotectin for asymptomatic colitis, and then at least once yearly thereafter. Children with a cholestatic liver enzyme profile can be considered for treatment with ursodeoxycholic acid and can continue if there is a meaningful reduction or normalization in GGT. Oral vancomycin may have a beneficial effect on GGT and intestinal inflammation, but judicious use is recommended due to the lack of long-term studies. Children with PSC-IBD combined with convincing features of autoimmune hepatitis may benefit from corticosteroids and antimetabolites.

CONCLUSIONS

We present state-of-the-art guidance on the diagnostic criteria, follow-up strategies, and therapeutic strategies and point out research gaps in children and adolescents with PSC-IBD.

Texture and color enhancement imaging versus white light imaging for the detection of colorectal adenomas: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and study aims

Texture and color enhancement imaging (TXI) is a novel optical technology designed to improve visibility during endoscopy by highlighting subtle differences in morphology and color. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine whether TXI, compared with conventional white light imaging (WLI), can improve important colonoscopy quality indicators, specifically the adenoma detection rate (ADR) and adenomas per colonoscopy (APC).

Patients and methods

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central for studies comparing TXI to WLI in patients undergoing colonoscopy for any indication. Risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) were computed using a random-effects model.

Results

We included 1541 patients from three studies, of which two were randomized controlled trials (RCTs). TXI was used in 775 patients (50.3%). Indications for colonoscopy varied, including positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT), surveillance, and diagnostic workup for abdominal symptoms. In the pooled data, TXI significantly increased both ADR (57,8% versus 43.6%; RR 1.32; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.20-1.46; P < 0.001; I 2 = 0%) and APC (MD 0.50; 95% CI 0.37-0.64; P < 0.001; I 2 = 0%), compared with WLI. Furthermore, TXI was more effective at detecting nonpolypoid/flat adenomas, proximal/right-sided adenomas, and adenomas ≥ 10 mm in size. Colonoscopies with TXI had shorter withdrawal times.

Conclusions

Our meta-analysis demonstrates that TXI significantly improves detection of colorectal adenomas in patients undergoing colonoscopy for various indications. TXI has the potential to improve overall quality of colonoscopy and contribute to colorectal cancer prevention.

Comparison of Colon Adenoma Detection Rate Using Transparent Cap-Assisted and Conventional Colonoscopy: Result from an International Trial in Asia

INTRODUCTION

Controversy remains regarding transparent cap-assisted technique improves adenoma detection rate (ADR) in colonoscopy. We aimed to investigate the effect of transparent cap-assisted colonoscopy (CAC) on ADR and other colonoscopy performance.

METHODS

We performed subanalysis of an international, multicenter, open-label database containing colonoscopy data from 11 centers in 4 Asian countries/regions on patients who underwent colonoscopy. The patient characteristics, procedure-related characteristics, and pathological findings of all detected lesions were prospectively recorded. The patients were divided into 2 groups as receiving colonoscopy with or without transparent cap attachment. The ADR and procedure time were compared between the 2 groups. Other procedural factors related to ADR were also investigated.

RESULTS

Between November 2020 and January 2022, 3,029 who underwent colonoscopy (transparent CAC, n = 1,796; standard colonoscopy, n = 1,233) were enrolled in this study. The transparent CAC group ADR was significantly higher than the conventional colonoscopy (55.1% vs. 50.0%, p < 0.01). Transparent CAC detected a higher proportion of patients with adenoma (odd ratio [OR]: 1.59, 95% CI: 1.13-2.24, p < 0.01) and any polypoid lesion (OR: 1.49, 95% CI: 1.04-2.16, p = 0.03). Transparent CAC also reduced cecal intubation time (mean difference: -0.35 min) and total colonoscopy time (mean difference -3.4 min). In the other procedural factors, using linked-color imaging (OR: 1.75, 95% CI: 1.49-2.06, p < 0.01), patient body rotation (OR: 1.54, 95% CI: 1.12-2.13, p < 0.01), longer withdrawal time (OR: 1.12, 95% CI: 1.09-1.15, p < 0.01) were also significantly associated to adenoma detection.

CONCLUSION

In real-world practice, transparent CAC is a safe and inexpensive technology that could improve adenoma and polyp detection.

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.

Colonoscopy quality measures and adherence to follow-up guidelines among endoscopists participating in a U.S. endoscopy registry

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Colonoscopy screening can substantially reduce colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. Colonoscopies may achieve maximum benefit when they are performed with high quality and accompanied by follow-up recommendations that adhere to clinical guidelines. This study aimed to determine to what extent endoscopists met targets for colonoscopy quality from 2016 through 2019 (the most recent years before the COVID-19 pandemic).

METHODS

We examined measures of colonoscopy quality and recommended follow-up intervals in the GI Quality Improvement Consortium, a large nationwide endoscopy registry. The analysis included >2.5 million outpatient screening colonoscopies in average-risk adults aged 50 to 75 years.

RESULTS

At least 90% of endoscopists met performance targets for adequate bowel preparation, cecal intubation rate, and adenoma detection rate. However, nonadherence to guidelines for follow-up intervals was common. For patients with no colonoscopy findings, 12.0% received a follow-up interval recommendation of ≤5 years instead of the guideline-recommended 10 years. For patients with 1 to 2 small tubular adenomas, 13.5% received a follow-up interval recommendation of ≤3 years instead of the guideline-recommended 5 to 10 years. For patients with small sessile serrated polyps, 30.7% received a follow-up interval recommendation of ≤3 years instead of the guideline-recommended 5 years. Some patients with higher risk findings received a follow-up interval recommendation of ≥5 years instead of the guideline-recommended 3 years, including 18.2% of patients with advanced serrated lesions.

CONCLUSIONS

Additional attention may be needed to achieve more consistent adherence to guidelines for colonoscopy follow-up recommendations.

Comparison of L L Polyethylene Glycol Plus Ascorbic Acid and Oral Sodium Sulfate Tablets for Colonoscopy Bowel Preparation

Background and Aims: A low-volume (1 L) polyethylene glycol plus ascorbic acid (PEG-A) solution and an oral sodium sulfate tablet (OST) formulation are recently introduced agents for colonoscopy bowel preparation. This study investigated the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of 1 L PEG-A vs. OST. Methods: This single-center, prospective, randomized, endoscopist-blinded study randomly assigned patients into 2 groups: 1 L PEG-A (group A); and OST (group B). Efficacy of bowel preparation was evaluated using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS). Tolerability and safety were investigated with a standardized questionnaire. Results: A total of 174 patients were included in the final analysis (group A, n = 92; group B, n = 82). Successful bowel preparation was achieved in 91.3% and 95.1% of patients in groups A and B, respectively (p = 0.324). Overall mean satisfaction with bowel preparation was greater among those in group B vs. those in group A (8.2 ± 1.7 vs. 6.8 ± 2.0, respectively; p < 0.001). Although abdominal distension was less common in group A than group B (3/92 [3.3%] vs. 9/82 [11.0%], respectively; p = 0.045), overall adverse events developed similarly in both groups (27/92 [29.3%] vs. 21/82 [25.6%], p = 0.583). In subgroup analysis of older patients (≥65 years of age), efficacy, overall satisfaction, and safety profiles were not different between groups A and B. Conclusions: Both 1 L PEG-A and OST demonstrated efficacy, tolerability, and safety for colonoscopy bowel preparation. OST was slightly better tolerated, whereas 1 L PEG-A resulted in less abdominal distension. Both agents were effective and safe in older patients.

Colorectal Neoplasia Detection Rates in Lynch Syndrome

BACKGROUND

The expected and optimal adenoma detection rate (ADR) is not well characterized in Lynch syndrome (LS). The aim of this study is to determine the ADR, the overall colorectal neoplasia detection rate (CNDR), proximal serrated detection rate (PSDR), and CRC detection rate (CRCDR) in an LS cohort.

METHODS

A retrospective study was performed of individuals with LS who were evaluated at a single tertiary care center from May 2001 to September 2023 (n = 542). Data from procedure and pathology reports were collected along with relevant demographic, clinical history, and family history data. Fisher's exact test and the Kruskal-Wallis test were used to assess factors associated with colorectal neoplasia.

RESULTS

Amongst 542 individuals with LS, 352 met the inclusion criteria, and their 1296 colonoscopies/sigmoidoscopies were used for analysis. The cohort was primarily female (64.5%), white (87.5%), and privately insured (76.1%), with a near even distribution across genotypes. CNDR was 27.9%, ADR was 21.4%, PSDR was 7.7%, and CRCDR was 1.5%. Advanced age, Medicare insurance, prior colonic resection, and prior history of non-CRC were significantly associated with an increased CNDR and ADR (p < 0.05). PSDR remained constant with age. There was no association with genotype, biological sex, race, smoking, BMI, aspirin use, nor family history.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite frequent colonoscopies/sigmoidoscopies, individuals with LS maintain a high rate of colorectal neoplasia, primarily driven by increased detection of adenomas with advancing age. Neoplasia rates may serve as helpful "ballpark rates" for endoscopists performing colonoscopies/sigmoidoscopies in LS. However, further studies need to determine whether neoplasia rates are predictive of CRC risk and outcomes in LS.

Terminal ileal intubation is not necessary in routine colonoscopy: data from a large-scale retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Terminal ileal intubation (TII) demonstrates a complete colonoscopy, but whether it should be performed in routine colonoscopies remains uncertain. We aimed to explore the diagnostic yield of TII in routine colonoscopy and investigate the association of TII and the detection of lesion.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study included patients who underwent colonoscopy with cecal intubation at our endoscopic center between November 1 2022 and July 31 2023. Macroscopic and histologic findings of terminal ileum were recorded. We used propensity score matching to adjust for differences between groups and further analyzed the difference of polyp detection rate (PDR), adenoma detection rate (ADR), sessile serrated lesion detection rate (SSDR) and lesion detection rate of right-sided colon, cecum and ascending colon between patients underwent TII or not.

RESULTS

There were 13,372 patients with cecal intubation colonoscopy, including 7599 (56.8%) with TII and 5773 (43.2%) without TII. Abnormal endoscopic findings were observed in 150 of 7599 unselected individuals and only 7 of these cases were regarded as pathologically significant. Likewise, abnormal endoscopic findings were found in 62 of 3502 asymptomatic individuals with 54 nonspecific ileitis determined by histopathology. After PSM, there were no significant differences in PDR (52.0% vs. 52.3%, P = 0.761), ADR (30.9% vs. 32.2%, P = 0.208), SSDR (1.6% vs. 1.5%, P = 0.541), right-sided lesion detection rate (16.9% vs. 16.8%, P = 0.908), lesion detection rate of cecum (4.9% vs. 4.7%, P = 0.613) and ascending colon (13.5% vs. 13.2%, P = 0.656) between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

TII was not necessary in routine colonoscopy, owing to the limited diagnostic value and lack of superiority on lesion detection.

Creating a standardized tool for the evaluation and comparison of artificial intelligence-based computer-aided detection programs in colonoscopy: a modified Delphi approach

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Multiple computer-aided detection (CADe) software programs have now achieved regulatory approval in the United States, Europe, and Asia and are being used in routine clinical practice to support colorectal cancer screening. There is uncertainty regarding how different CADe algorithms may perform. No objective methodology exists for comparing different algorithms. We aimed to identify priority scoring metrics for CADe evaluation and comparison.

METHODS

A modified Delphi approach was used. Twenty-five global leaders in CADe in colonoscopy, including endoscopists, researchers, and industry representatives, participated in an online survey over the course of 8 months. Participants generated 121 scoring criteria, 54 of which were deemed within the study scope and distributed for review and asynchronous e-mail-based open comment. Participants then scored criteria in order of priority on a 5-point Likert scale during ranking round 1. The top 11 highest priority criteria were re-distributed, with another opportunity for open comment, followed by a final round of priority scoring to identify the final 6 criteria.

RESULTS

Mean priority scores for the 54 criteria ranged from 2.25 to 4.38 after the first ranking round. The top 11 criteria after round 1 of ranking yielded mean priority scores ranging from 3.04 to 4.16. The final 6 highest priority criteria, including a tie for first-place ranking, were (1, tied) sensitivity (average, 4.16) and (1, tied) separate and independent validation of the CADe algorithm (average, 4.16); (3) adenoma detection rate (average, 4.08); (4) false-positive rate (average, 4.00); (5) latency (average, 3.84); and (6) adenoma miss rate (average, 3.68).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first reported international consensus statement of priority scoring metrics for CADe in colonoscopy. These scoring criteria should inform CADe software development and refinement. Future research should validate these metrics on a benchmark video data set to develop a validated scoring instrument.

Online patient endoscopy education platform improves outpatient bowel preparation quality: Retrospective observational study

Background and study aims High-quality bowel preparation is integral to high-quality colonoscopy and adenoma detection. Studies evaluating the effect of pre-colonoscopy educational videos on bowel preparation quality have been variable. We investigated whether augmenting bowel preparation education using our professionally produced, patient-oriented, online educational video series would improve preparation quality, reduce need for repeat procedures, and improve adenoma detection rate (ADR). Patients and methods We conducted a pilot, retrospective, single-center observational study using endoscopy data from a tertiary hospital. Colonoscopy outcomes were compared between two discrete 6-month study periods, before (control group) and after (video group) implementation of the online video intervention. All patients received standard-of-care written and verbal instructions. The video group received a link providing access to the video platform. Primary outcome was adequacy of bowel preparation (defined by the Aronchick Scale). Secondary outcomes included rate of repeat colonoscopy due to inadequate preparation, ADR, and sessile serrated lesion (SSL) detection rate. Results The video intervention group had a lower rate of inadequate bowel preparation compared with the control group (6.3% vs 9.8%, P = 0.018). There was no difference between groups in rate of repeat colonoscopies due to inadequate preparation ( P = 0.62), ADR ( P = 0.11), or SSL detection rate ( P = 0.94). Multivariable analysis did not reveal any independent predictors of bowel preparation quality. Conclusions Our study supports the addition of a novel patient-oriented online educational video resource as an effective tool in enhancing bowel preparation adequacy while maintaining provision of high-quality colonoscopy.

Can Artificial Intelligence Create an Accurate Colonoscopy Bowel Preparation Prompt?

Background and Aims

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer in the United States, with colonoscopy being the preferred screening method. Up to 25% of colonoscopies are associated with poor preparation which leads to prolonged procedure time, repeat colonoscopies, and decreased adenoma detection. Artificial intelligence (AI) is being increasingly used in medicine, assessing medical school exam questions, and writing medical reports. Its use in gastroenterology has been used to educate patients with cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma, answer patient questions about colonoscopy and provide correct colonoscopy screening intervals, having the ability to augment the patient-provider relationship. This study aims at assessing the accuracy of a ChatGPT-generated precolonoscopy bowel preparation prompt.

Methods

A nonrandomized cross-sectional study assessing the perceptions of an AI-generated colonoscopy preparation prompt was conducted in a large multisite quaternary health-care institution in the northeast United States. All practicing gastroenterologists in the health system were surveyed, with 208 having a valid email address and were included in the study. A Research Electronic Data Capture survey was then distributed to all participants and analyzed using descriptive statistics.

Results

Overall, 91% of gastroenterologist physicians determined the prompt easy to understand, 95% thought the prompt was scientifically accurate and 66% were comfortable giving the prompt to their patients. Sixty four percent of reviewers correctly identified the ChatGPT-generated prompt, but only 32% were confident in their answer.

Conclusion

The ability of ChatGPT to create a sufficient bowel preparation prompt highlights how physicians can incorporate AI into clinical practice to improve ease and efficiency of communication with patients when it comes to bowel preparation.

Performance of bowel preparation quality scales in patients with Crohn's disease

BACKGROUND

The performance of bowel preparation (BP) in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) is unknown.

AIMS

To evaluate the operating properties of instruments used to assess BP quality in patients with CD.

METHODS

We used the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale, modified Boston Bowel Preparation Scale, Harefield Cleansing Scale, Food and Drug Administration Bowel Cleansing Assessment Scale (BCAS), and a 100-mm visual analogue scale of bowel cleanliness to assess BP quality in 50 videos from 40 patients with CD. We assessed endoscopic activity with the Simple Endoscopic Score for CD (SES-CD). Assessments were on endoscope insertion and withdrawal. Reliability was quantified using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). We assessed validity by within-patient correlation between instruments and the visual analogue scale using mixed-effect models. The correlation between BP quality and SES-SD scores was assessed using Spearman's rho.

RESULTS

Inter- and intra-rater reliability for all BP quality instruments was substantial (ICC ≥0.61) except for the Food and Drug Administration BCAS on insertion (inter-rater reliability ICC ≥0.41). The visual analogue scale had substantial inter- and almost perfect (ICC ≥0.81) intra-rater reliability. Correlation coefficients for the validity of the instruments exceeded 0.58. BP quality and endoscopic disease activity scores in the colon were negatively correlated.

CONCLUSION

Most existing instruments reliably assess BP quality in patients with CD. These results support the use of these instruments in clinical practice, provide a framework for scoring BP quality in CD clinical trials, and support evaluation of novel BP agents in patients with CD.

Imaging colonic polyps in 2024

Screening colonoscopy and polypectomy are the cornerstone in decreasing the incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer. Despite the low incidence of colorectal cancer in India, there has been a rising trend in the incidence of colonic polyps and cancer over the last decade. It is, hence, imperative that we are well equipped in the management of colonic polyps. Adequate training in the detection and characterization of polyps to aid in their management is necessary. Detection of polyps can be increased by adhering to the standards of colonoscopy, including good bowel preparation, cecal intubation rate, adequate withdrawal time and use of distal attachment devices. A detected polyp needs optimal characterization to predict histology in real time and decide on the management strategies. Characterization of the polyps requires high-definition-white light endoscopy and/or image-enhanced endoscopy (dye based or digital). Various factors that help in predicting histology include size, location and morphology of the polyp and the pit pattern, vascular and surface pattern of the polyp. Polyps can be differentiated as neoplastic or non-neoplastic with reasonable accuracy with the above features. Prediction of advanced pathology including high-grade dysplasia and deep sub-mucosal invasion is essential, as it helps in deciding if the lesion is amenable to endotherapy and the technique of endoscopic resection. Adequate training in image-enhanced endoscopy is necessary to assess advanced pathology in polyps. Technology pertaining to image-enhanced endoscopy includes narrow banding imaging and blue laser imaging; newer variations are being introduced every few years making it necessary to be abreast with growing information. The recent advances in gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy with the advent of endocytoscopy and artificial intelligence seem promising and are predicted to be the future of GI endoscopy.

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.

Effect of computer aided detection device on the adenoma detection rate and serrated detection rate among trainee fellows

Background and Aims

The utilization of artificial intelligence (AI) with computer-aided detection (CADe) has the potential to increase the adenoma detection rate (ADR) by up to 30% in expert settings and specialized centers. The impact of CADe on serrated polyp detection rates (SDR) and academic trainees ADR & SDR remains underexplored. We aim to investigate the effect of CADe on ADR and SDR at an academic center with various levels of providers' experience.

Methods

A single-center retrospective analysis was conducted on asymptomatic patients between the ages of 45 and 75 who underwent screening colonoscopy. Colonoscopy reports were reviewed for 3 months prior to the introduction of GI Genius™ (Medtronic, USA) and 3 months after its implementation. The primary outcome was ADR and SDR with and without CADe.

Results

Totally 658 colonoscopies were eligible for analysis. CADe resulted in statistically significant improvement in SDR from 8.92% to 14.1% (P = 0.037). The (ADR + SDR) with CADe and without CADe was 58% and 55.1%, respectively (P = 0.46). Average colonoscopy (CSC) withdrawal time was 17.33 min (SD 10) with the device compared with 17.35 min (SD 9) without the device (P = 0.98).

Conclusion

In this study, GI Genius™ was associated with a statistically significant increase in SDR alone, but not in ADR or (ADR + SDR), likely secondary to the more elusive nature of serrated polyps compared to adenomatous polyps. The use of CADe did not affect withdrawal time.

An Accurate and Automated Method for Adenoma Detection Rate and Report Card Generation Utilizing Common Electronic Health Records

GOALS

To develop an automated method for Adenoma Detection Rate (ADR) calculation and report card generation using common electronic health records (EHRs).

BACKGROUND

ADR is the most widely accepted colonoscopy quality indicator and is inversely associated with interval colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. However, ADR is difficult to efficiently measure and disseminate, due to need for data integration from distinct electronic databases.

METHODS

We migrated data from an endoscopy reporting software (Endosoft) to Epic Reporting Servers where it was combined with anatomic pathology data (Beaker Lab Information System, EPIC Systems). A natural language processing expression was developed to search Beaker pathology reports for accurate identification of adenomatous polyps. A blinded physician manually validated a final cohort of 200 random procedures. ADR report cards were automatically generated utilizing the Crystal Reports feature within EPIC.

RESULTS

Validation of the natural language processing algorithm for ADR showed a sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 100%. ADR was automatically calculated for 12 endoscopists over a calendar year. Two thousand two hundred seventy-six screening colonoscopies were performed with 775 procedures having a least one adenoma detected, for a total ADR of 34%. Report cards were successfully generated within the EPIC EHR and distributed to endoscopists by secure e-mail.

CONCLUSION

We describe an accurate, automated and scalable process for ADR calculation and reporting utilizing commonly adopted EHRs and data integration methods. By integrating the process of ADR collection and streamlining dissemination of reports, this methodology is poised to enhance colonoscopy quality care across health care networks that use it.

Strategies to improve screening colonoscopy quality for the prevention of colorectal cancer

The incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer (CRC) have decreased through regular screening colonoscopy, surveillance, and endoscopic treatment. However, CRC can still be diagnosed after negative colonoscopy. Such CRC is called interval CRC and accounts for 1.8-9.0% of all CRC cases. Most cases of interval CRC originate from missed lesions and incompletely resected lesions. Interval CRC can be minimized by improving the quality of colonoscopy. This has led to a growing interest in and demand for high-quality colonoscopy. It is important to reduce the risk of CRC and its associated mortality by improving the quality of colonoscopy. In this review article, we provide an overview of colonoscopy quality indicators, including bowel preparation adequacy, the cecal intubation rate, the adenoma detection rate, the colonoscopy withdrawal time, appropriate polypectomy, and complication of the procedure. Because colonoscopy is a highly endoscopist-dependent procedure, colonoscopists should be well-acquainted with quality indicators and strive to apply them in daily clinical practice for the prevention of CRC.

Linked color imaging improves colorectal lesion detection especially for low performance endoscopists: An international trial in Asia

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Linked color imaging (LCI) is an image-enhanced endoscopy technique that accentuates the color difference between red and white, potentially improving the adenoma detection rate (ADR). However, it remains unclear whether LCI performance in detecting colorectal lesions differs based on endoscopists' experience levels. We aimed to evaluate the differences in LCI efficacy based on the experience levels of endoscopists by conducting an exploratory analysis.

METHODS

In this post hoc analysis of an international randomized controlled trial comparing the detection of adenoma and other lesions using colonoscopy with LCI and high-definition white light imaging (WLI), we included patients from 11 institutions across four countries/regions: Japan, Thailand, Taiwan, and Singapore. We retrospectively reviewed differences in the lesion detection of LCI according to endoscopists' colonoscopy history or ADR.

RESULTS

We included 1692 and 1138 patients who underwent colonoscopies performed by 54 experts (experience of ≥ 5000 colonoscopies) and by 43 non-experts (experience of < 5000 colonoscopies), respectively. Both expert and non-expert groups showed a significant improvement in ADR with LCI compared to WLI (expert, 61.7% vs 46.4%; P < 0.001; non-expert, 56.6% vs 46.4%; P < 0.001). LCI had no effect on sessile serrated lesion detection rate in non-experts (3.1% vs 2.5%; P = 0.518). LCI significantly improved detection rates in endoscopists with relatively low detection performance, defined as an ADR < 50%.

CONCLUSIONS

This exploratory study analyzed data from a previous trial and revealed that LCI is useful for both experts and non-experts and is even more beneficial for endoscopists with relatively low detection performance using WLI.

Effect of an online educational module incorporating real-time feedback on accuracy of polyp sizing in trainees: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Although polyp size dictates surveillance intervals, endoscopists often estimate polyp size inaccurately. We hypothesized that an intervention providing didactic instruction and real-time feedback could significantly improve polyp size classification.

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter randomized controlled trial to evaluate the impact of different components of an online educational module on polyp sizing. Participants were randomized to control (no video, no feedback), video only, feedback only, or video + feedback. The primary outcome was accuracy of polyp size classification into clinically relevant categories (diminutive [1-5mm], small [6-9mm], large [≥10mm]). Secondary outcomes included accuracy of exact polyp size (inmm), learning curves, and directionality of inaccuracy (over- vs. underestimation).

RESULTS

36 trainees from five training programs provided 1360 polyp size assessments. The feedback only (80.1%, P=0.01) and video + feedback (78.9%, P=0.02) groups had higher accuracy of polyp size classification compared with controls (71.6%). There was no significant difference in accuracy between the video only group (74.4%) and controls (P=0.42). Groups receiving feedback had higher accuracy of exact polyp size (inmm) and higher peak learning curves. Polyps were more likely to be overestimated than underestimated, and 29.3% of size inaccuracies impacted recommended surveillance intervals.

CONCLUSIONS

Our online educational module significantly improved polyp size classification. Real-time feedback appeared to be a critical component in improving accuracy. This scalable and no-cost educational module could significantly decrease under- and overutilization of colonoscopy, improving patient outcomes while increasing colonoscopy access.

Optimal timing of a colonoscopy screening schedule depends on adenoma detection, adenoma risk, adherence to screening and the screening objective: A microsimulation study

Colonoscopy-based screening provides protection against colorectal cancer (CRC), but the optimal starting age and time intervals of screening colonoscopies are unknown. We aimed to determine an optimal screening schedule for the US population and its dependencies on the objective of screening (life years gained or incidence, mortality, or cost reduction) and the setting in which screening is performed. We used our established open-source microsimulation model CMOST to calculate optimized colonoscopy schedules with one, two, three or four screening colonoscopies between 20 and 90 years of age. A single screening colonoscopy was most effective in reducing life years lost from CRC when performed at 55 years of age. Two, three and four screening colonoscopy schedules saved a maximum number of life years when performed between 49-64 years; 44-69 years; and 40-72 years; respectively. However, for maximum incidence and mortality reduction, screening colonoscopies needed to be scheduled 4-8 years later in life. The optimum was also influenced by adenoma detection efficiency with lower values for these parameters favoring a later starting age of screening. Low adherence to screening consistently favored a later start and an earlier end of screening. In a personalized approach, optimal screening would start earlier for high-risk patients and later for low-risk individuals. In conclusion, our microsimulation-based approach supports colonoscopy screening schedule between 45 and 75 years of age but the precise timing depends on the objective of screening, as well as assumptions regarding individual CRC risk, efficiency of adenoma detection during colonoscopy and adherence to screening.

Overall Polyp Detection Rate as a Surrogate Measure for Screening Efficacy Independent of Histopathology: Evidence from National Endoscopy Database

Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is challenging to measure, given its dependency on pathology reporting. Polyp detection rate (PDR) (percentage of screening colonoscopies detecting a polyp) is a proposed alternative to overcome this issue. Overall PDR from all colonoscopies is a relatively novel concept, with no large-scale studies comparing overall PDR with screening-only PDR. The aim of the study was to compare PDR from screening, surveillance, and diagnostic indications with overall PDR and evaluate any correlation between individual endoscopist PDR by indication to determine if overall PDR can be a valuable surrogate for screening PDR. Our study analyzed a prospectively collected national endoscopy database maintained by the National Institute of Health from 2009 to 2014. Out of 354,505 colonoscopies performed between 2009-2014, 298,920 (n = 110,794 average-risk screening, n = 83,556 average-risk surveillance, n = 104,770 diagnostic) met inclusion criteria. The median screening PDR was 25.45 (IQR 13.15-39.60), comparable with the median overall PDR of 24.01 (IQR 11.46-35.86, p = 0.21). Median surveillance PDR was higher at 33.73 (IQR 16.92-47.01), and median diagnostic PDR was lower at 19.35 (IQR 9.66-29.17), compared with median overall PDR 24.01 (IQR 11.46-35.86; p < 0.01). The overall PDR showed excellent concordance with screening, surveillance, and diagnostic PDR (r > 0.85, p < 0.01, 2-tailed). The overall PDR is a reliable and pragmatic surrogate for screening PDR and can be measured in real time, irrespective of colonoscopy indication.

Endoscopist adenomas-per-colonoscopy detection rates and risk for postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer: data from the New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Adenomas per colonoscopy (APC) may be a better measure of colonoscopy quality than adenoma detection rate (ADR) because it credits endoscopists for each detected adenoma. There are few data examining the association between APC and postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer (PCCRC) incidence. We used data from the New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry to examine APC and PCCRC risk.

METHODS

We included New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry patients with an index examination and at least 1 follow-up event, either a colonoscopy or a colorectal cancer (CRC) diagnosis. Our outcome was PCCRC defined as any CRC diagnosed ≥6 months after an index examination. The exposure variable was endoscopist-specific APC quintiles of .25, .40, .50, and .70. Cox regression was used to model the hazard of PCCRC on APC, controlled for age, sex, year of index examination, index findings, bowel preparation, and having more than 1 surveillance examination.

RESULTS

In 32,535 patients, a lower hazard for PCCRC (n = 178) was observed for higher APCs as compared to APCs of <.25 (reference): .25 to <.40: hazard ratio (HR), .35; 95% confidence interval (CI), .22-.56; .40 to <.50: HR, .31; 95% CI, .20-.49; .50 to <.70: HR, .20; 95% CI, .11-.36; and ≥.70: HR, .19; 95% CI, .09-.37. When examining endoscopists with an ADR of at least 25%, an APC of <.50 was associated with a significantly higher hazard than an APC of ≥.50 (HR, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.06-2.56). A large proportion of endoscopists-one-fifth (32 of 152; 21.1%)-had an ADR of ≥25% but an APC of <.50.

CONCLUSIONS

Our novel data demonstrating lower PCCRC risk in examinations performed by endoscopists with higher APCs suggest that APC could be a useful quality measure. Quality improvement programs may identify important deficiencies in endoscopist detection performance by measuring APC for endoscopists with an ADR of ≥25%.

Efficacy, tolerability, and safety of oral sulfate tablet versus 2 L-polyethylene glycol/ascorbate for bowel preparation in older patients: prospective, multicenter, investigator single-blinded, randomized study

BACKGROUND

We compared the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of oral sulfate tablets (OST, which contains simethicone) and 2 L-polyethylene glycol/ascorbate (2 L-PEG/Asc) with a split-dosing regimen in older individuals aged ≥ 70 years who underwent scheduled colonoscopy.

METHODS

This prospective, randomized, investigator-blinded, multicenter study was conducted between June 2022 and October 2023. Participants aged ≥ 70 years were randomized at a ratio of 1:1 to the OST or 2 L-PEG/Asc groups.

RESULTS

In total, 254 patients were evaluated using a modified full analysis set. Successful overall bowel preparation was excellent and similar between the OST and 2 L-PEG/Asc groups for the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) (96.5% vs. 96.6%) and Harefield Cleansing Scale (HCS) (96.5% vs. 97.4%). The overall high-quality preparation rate was higher in the OST group than in the 2 L-PEG/Asc group (BBPS: 55.7% vs. 28.4%, P < 0.001; HCS: 66.1% vs. 38.8%, P < 0.001). The overall adenoma detection rate (54.8% vs. 35.3, P = 0.003) was superior in the OST group compared to the 2 L-PEG/Asc group. Tolerability scores, including overall satisfaction, were generally higher in the OST group than in the 2 L-PEG/Asc group. The incidence of major solicited adverse events was comparable between the two groups (55.7% vs. 68.1, P = 0.051), and there were no clinically significant changes in the serum laboratory profiles on the day of or 7 days after colonoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

OST is an effective and safe low-volume agent for colonoscopy, with better tolerance than 2 L-PEG/Asc, in older individuals aged ≥ 70 years.

Colon Polyp Surveillance: Separating the Wheat From the Chaff

One goal of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is to prevent CRC incidence by removing precancerous colonic polyps, which are detected in up to 50% of screening examinations. Yet, the lifetime risk of CRC is 3.9%-4.3%, so it is clear that most of these individuals with polyps would not develop CRC in their lifetime. It is, therefore, a challenge to determine which individuals with polyps will benefit from follow-up, and at what intervals. There is some evidence that individuals with advanced polyps, based on size and histology, benefit from intensive surveillance. However, a large proportion of individuals will have small polyps without advanced histologic features (ie, "nonadvanced"), where the benefits of surveillance are uncertain and controversial. Demand for surveillance will further increase as more polyps are detected due to increased screening uptake, recent United States recommendations to expand screening to younger individuals, and emergence of polyp detection technology. We review the current understanding and clinical implications of the natural history, biology, and outcomes associated with various categories of colon polyps based on size, histology, and number. Our aims are to highlight key knowledge gaps, specifically focusing on certain categories of polyps that may not be associated with future CRC risk, and to provide insights to inform research priorities and potential management strategies. Optimization of CRC prevention programs based on updated knowledge about the future risks associated with various colon polyps is essential to ensure cost-effective screening and surveillance, wise use of resources, and inform efforts to personalize recommendations.

Improvement of adenoma detection rate by two computer-aided colonic polyp detection systems in high adenoma detectors: a randomized multicenter trial

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the benefits of a self-developed computer-aided polyp detection system (SD-CADe) and a commercial system (CM-CADe) for high adenoma detectors compared with white-light endoscopy (WLE) as a control.

METHODS

Average-risk 50-75-year-old individuals who underwent screening colonoscopy at five referral centers were randomized to SD-CADe, CM-CADe, or WLE groups (1:1:1 ratio). Trainees and staff with an adenoma detection rate (ADR) of ≥35% were recruited. The primary outcome was ADR. Secondary outcomes were the proximal adenoma detection rate (pADR), advanced adenoma detection rate (AADR), and the number of adenomas, proximal adenomas, and advanced adenomas per colonoscopy (APC, pAPC, and AAPC, respectively).

RESULTS

The study enrolled 1200 participants. The ADR in the control, CM-CADe, and SD-CADe groups was 38.3%, 50.0%, and 54.8%, respectively. The pADR was 23.0%, 32.3%, and 38.8%, respectively. AADR was 6.0%, 10.3%, and 9.5%, respectively. After adjustment, the ADR and pADR in both intervention groups were significantly higher than in controls (all P<0.05). The APC in the control, CM-CADe, and SD-CADe groups was 0.66, 1.04, and 1.16, respectively. The pAPC was 0.33, 0.53, and 0.64, respectively, and the AAPC was 0.07, 0.12, and 0.10, respectively. Both CADe systems showed significantly higher APC and pAPC than WLE. AADR and AAPC were improved in both CADe groups versus control, although the differences were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

Even in high adenoma detectors, CADe significantly improved ADR and APC. The AADR tended to be higher with both systems, and this may enhance colorectal cancer prevention.

Sessile serrated polyp detection rates after fecal immunochemical test or multitarget stool DNA test: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and study aims Published studies report a higher adenoma detection rate (ADR) for FIT-DNA as compared with FIT. Data are less replete about the performance of stool-based tests for sessile serrated polyp (SSP) detection. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the performance of FIT and FIT-DNA testing for SSP detection rate (SSPDR) in patients undergoing colonoscopy for follow up of positive noninvasive tests. Methods A comprehensive literature search of multiple databases (until September 2022) was performed to identify studies reporting SSPDR in patients with positive FIT or FIT-DNA tests. The outcome was overall colonoscopy detection of any SSPs and advanced serrated polyps (ASP: SSP ≥ 10 mm and/or dysplasia). Results Included were 482,405 patients (52.4% females) with a mean age of 62.3 ± 4.4 years from 23 studies. The pooled SSPDR for all positive stool-based tests was 5.3% and higher for FIT-DNA (15.0%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 8.3-25.7) versus FIT (4.1%, 95% CI 3.0-5.6; P = 0.0002). The overall pooled ASP detection rate was 1.4% (95% CI 0.81-2.3) and higher for FIT-DNA (3.8 %, 95% CI 1.7-8.6) compared with FIT (0.71%, 95% CI 0.36-1.4; P <0.01). SSPDR with FIT-DNA was also significantly higher than FIT when the FIT cutoff was >10 ug/g and in FIT-positive patients in studies conducted in North America ( P <0.05). Conclusions FIT-DNA outperformed FIT in both SSP and ASP detection including FIT with a lower threshold cutoff of >10 ug/g. Further comparative studies are needed to assess the impact of our findings on colorectal cancer reduction.

The Effects of Combined Use of Linaclotide and Polyethylene Glycol Electrolyte Powder in Colonoscopy Preparation for Patients With Chronic Constipation

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of linaclotide and polyethylene glycol (PEG) electrolyte powder in patients with chronic constipation undergoing colonoscopy preparation.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We included 260 patients with chronic constipation who were scheduled to undergo a colonoscopy. They were equally divided into 4 groups using a random number table: 4L PEG, 3L PEG, 3L PEG+L, and 2L PEG+L. The 4 groups were compared based on their scores on the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) and Ottawa Bowel Preparation Quality Scale (OBPQS), adverse reactions during the bowel preparation procedure, colonoscope insertion time, colonoscope withdrawal time, detection rate of adenomas, and their willingness to repeat bowel preparation.

RESULTS

In terms of the score of the right half of the colon, the score of the transverse colon, the total score using BBPS, and the total score using OBPQS, the 3L PEG (polyethylene glycol)+L group was superior to groups 3L PEG and 2L PEG+L ( P <0.05), but comparable to the 4L PEG group ( P >0.05). The incidence rate of vomiting was higher in the 4L PEG group than in the 2L PEG+L group ( P <0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the insertion time of the colonoscope between the 4 groups. The colonoscope withdrawal time in the 3L PEG+L group was shorter than in groups 4L PEG and 3L PEG ( P <0.05) and comparable to that in the 4L PEG group ( P >0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the rate of adenoma detection among the 4 groups ( P >0.05). The 4L PEG group was the least willing of the 4 groups to undergo repeated bowel preparation ( P <0.05).

CONCLUSION

The 3L PEG+L is optimal among the 4 procedures. It can facilitate high-quality bowel preparation, reduce the incidence of nausea during the bowel preparation procedure, and encourage patients to undertake repeated bowel preparation.

What are the priority quality indicators for colonoscopy in real-world clinical practice?

Colonoscopy is widely used as a colorectal cancer (CRC) screening tool. The effectiveness of a screening colonoscopy is associated with a decreased risk of CRC. However, colonoscopy is an operator-dependent procedure, and endoscopists' quality performance varies widely. This article reviewed the priority metrics and practices that contribute to high-quality screening colonoscopy in real-world clinical practice. With growing evidence, quality indicators have been subject to intense research and associated with reducing postcolonoscopy CRC incidence and mortality. Some quality metrics can reflect an endoscopy unit-based practice (i.e. quality of bowel preparation and withdrawal time). Other quality indicators primarily reflect individuals' skill and knowledge (i.e. cecal intubation rate, adenoma detection rate, and appropriately assigned follow-up colonoscopy interval). Measurement and improvement of priority quality indicators for colonoscopy should be made at both the endoscopist and unit levels. Substantial evidence supports the impact of high-quality colonoscopy in reducing the incidence of postcolonoscopy CRC.

Colon polyps: updates in classification and management

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Colon polyps are potential precursors to colorectal cancer (CRC), which remains one of the most common causes of cancer-associated death. The proper identification and management of these colorectal polyps is an important quality measure for colonoscopy outcomes. Here, we review colon polyp epidemiology, their natural history, and updates in endoscopic classification and management.

RECENT FINDINGS

Colon polyps that form from not only the adenoma, but also the serrated polyp pathway have significant risk for future progression to CRC. Therefore, correct identification and management of sessile serrated lesions can improve the quality of screening colonoscopy. Malignant polyp recognition continues to be heavily reliant on well established endoscopic classification systems and plays an important role in intraprocedural management decisions. Hot snare remains the gold standard for pedunculated polyp resection. Nonpedunculated noninvasive lesions can be effectively removed by large forceps if diminutive, but cold snare is preferred for colon polyps 3-20 mm in diameter. Larger lesions at least 20 mm require endoscopic mucosal resection. Polyps with the endoscopic appearance of submucosal invasion require surgical referral or advanced endoscopic resection in select cases. Advances in artificial intelligence may revolutionize endoscopic polyp classification and improve both patient and cost-related outcomes of colonoscopy.

SUMMARY

Clinicians should be aware of the most recent updates in colon polyp classification and management to provide the best care to their patients initiating screening colonoscopy.

Endoscopy Unit Level Interventions to Improve Adenoma Detection Rate: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is inversely correlated with the risk of interval colon cancer and is a key target for quality improvement in endoscopy units. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify and evaluate the effectiveness of interventions that can be implemented at the endoscopy unit level to improve ADRs.

METHODS

Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, a systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases between January 1990 and December 2022 to identify relevant studies. Both randomized controlled trials and observational studies were eligible. Data for the primary outcome of ADR were analyzed and reported on the log-odds scale with 95% CIs using a random-effects meta-analysis model using the empiric Bayes estimator.

RESULTS

From 10,778 initial citations, 34 studies were included in the meta-analysis comprising 371,041 procedures and 1501 endoscopists. The provision of report cards (odds ratio [OR], 1.28; 95% CI, 1.13-1.45; P < .001) and the presence of an additional observer to identify polyps (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.09-1.43; P = .002) were associated with significant increases in ADRs whereas multimodal interventions were borderline significant (OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.00-1.40; P = .05) and withdrawal time monitoring was not associated significantly with an increase in ADRs (OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 0.93-1.96; P = .11).

CONCLUSIONS

The provision of report cards and the presence of an additional observer to identify polyps are associated with improved ADRs and should be considered for implementation in endoscopy facilities.

Efficacy and safety of oral sodium sulfate tablet compared with 1-L polyethylene glycol plus ascorbate: a prospective, randomized, endoscopist-blinded trial

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Low-volume bowel preparation solutions, including 1-L polyethylene glycol plus ascorbate (PEG-A), have been developed to improve tolerability. The oral sodium sulfate tablet (OST) is a new agent with simethicone as a preloaded component. We investigated the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of OST compared to 1-L PEG-A.

METHODS

A single-center, prospective, controlled study was performed with randomization into the OST (group A) and 1-L PEG-A (group B) groups. Bowel preparation efficacy was assessed on the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) and Bubble Scale. Safety and tolerability were evaluated using a questionnaire and laboratory examination.

RESULTS

Final analysis was performed on 171 patients (group A: 87, group B: 84). The proportion of bowel preparation success (BBPS ≥ 2 for each colonic segment) in group A was not inferior compared to group B (95.4% vs 96.4%, P = 0.736, 1-sided 97.5% lower confidence limit -7.0%). The adenoma detection rate was not different (59.6% vs 41.9%; P = 0.087). The bubble scale was better in group A (0.2 ± 0.9 vs 1.9 ± 1.7, P < 0.001). All adverse events were mild in both groups. Nausea was less frequent in group A (14.9% vs 38.1%, P = 0.001). Overall satisfaction was better in group A (8.1 ± 2.1 vs 6.4 ± 2.8, P < 0.001). No clinically significant laboratory abnormality developed in both groups. These findings were similarly shown in old patients ≥65 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Both OST and 1-L PEG-A were efficacious, safe, and tolerable for bowel preparation of colonoscopy. The OST showed fewer bubbles and slightly better tolerability.

Multitarget Stool RNA Test for Colorectal Cancer Screening

Importance

Noninvasive tests for colorectal cancer screening must include sensitive detection of colorectal cancer and precancerous lesions. These tests must be validated for the intended-use population, which includes average-risk individuals 45 years or older.

Objective

To evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of a noninvasive, multitarget stool RNA (mt-sRNA) test (ColoSense) test compared with results from a colonoscopy.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This phase 3 clinical trial (CRC-PREVENT) was a blinded, prospective, cross-sectional study to support a premarket approval application for a class III medical device. A total of 8920 participants were identified online using social media platforms and enrolled from June 2021 to June 2022 using a decentralized nurse call center. All participants completed the mt-sRNA test, which incorporated a commercially available fecal immunochemical test (FIT), concentration of 8 RNA transcripts, and participant-reported smoking status. Stool samples were collected prior to participants completing a colonoscopy at their local endoscopy center. The mt-sRNA test results (positive or negative) were compared with index lesions observed on colonoscopy. Over the course of 12 months, individuals 45 years and older were enrolled in the clinical trial using the decentralized recruitment strategy. Participants were enrolled from 49 US states and obtained colonoscopies at more than 3800 different endoscopy centers.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcomes included the sensitivity of the mt-sRNA test for detecting colorectal cancer and advanced adenomas and the specificity for no lesions on colonoscopy.

Results

The mean (range) age of participants was 55 (45-90) years, with 4% self-identified as Asian, 11% as Black, and 7% as Hispanic. Of the 8920 eligible participants, 36 (0.40%) had colorectal cancer and 606 (6.8%) had advanced adenomas. The mt-sRNA test sensitivity for detecting colorectal cancer was 94%, sensitivity for detecting advanced adenomas was 46%, and specificity for no lesions on colonoscopy was 88%. The mt-sRNA test showed significant improvement in sensitivity for colorectal cancer (94% vs 78%; McNemar P = .01) and advanced adenomas (46% vs 29%; McNemar P < .001) compared with results of the FIT.

Conclusions and Relevance

In individuals 45 years and older, the mt-sRNA test showed high sensitivity for colorectal neoplasia (colorectal cancer and advanced adenoma) with significant improvement in sensitivity relative to the FIT. Specificity for no lesions on colonoscopy was comparable to existing molecular diagnostic tests.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04739722.

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.

Performing High-Quality, Safe, Cost-Effective, and Efficient Basic Colonoscopy in 2023: Advice From Two Experts

Based on published evidence and our expert experience, we provide recommendations to maximize the efficacy, safety, efficiency, and cost-effectiveness of routine colonoscopy. High-quality colonoscopy begins with colon preparation using a split or same-day dose and preferably a low-volume regimen for optimal patient tolerance and compliance. Successful cecal intubation can be achieved by choosing the correct colonoscope and using techniques to facilitate navigation through challenges such as severe angulations and redundant colons. Safety is a primary goal, and complications such as perforation and splenic rupture can be prevented by avoiding pushing through fixed resistance and avoiding loops in proximal colon. Furthermore, barotrauma can be avoided by converting to water filling only (no gas insufflation) in every patient with a narrowed, angulated sigmoid. Optimal polyp detection relies primarily on compulsive attention to inspection as manifested by adequate inspection time, vigorous probing of the spaces between haustral folds, washing and removing residual debris, and achieving full distention. Achieving minimum recommended adenoma detection rate thresholds (30% in men and 20% in women) is mandatory, and colonoscopists should aspire to adenoma detection rate approaching 50% in screening patients. Distal attachments can improve mucosal exposure and increase detection while shortening withdrawal times. Complete resection of polyps complements polyp detection in preventing colorectal cancer. Cold resection is the preferred method for all polyps < 10 mm. For effective cold resection, an adequate rim of normal tissue should be captured in the snare. Finally, cost-effective high-quality colonoscopy requires the procedure not be overused, as demonstrated by following updated United States Multi Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer postpolypectomy surveillance recommendations.