Endoscopist Characteristics and Polyp Detection in Colonoscopy: Cross-Sectional Analyses of Screening of Swedish Colons

Colorectal Neuroendocrine Neoplasm Detection Rate During Colonoscopy: Results From Large-Scale Data of Colonoscopies in Japan

INTRODUCTION

This study investigated the detection rate of colorectal neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) using large-scale colonoscopy data.

METHODS

This cross-sectional analysis used large-scale data from a Japanese multicenter observational study of colonoscopies performed from 2010 to 2020.

RESULTS

Among 82,005 colonoscopy cases, colorectal NENs were identified in 71 (67 of which were neuroendocrine tumors), with a detection rate of 0.087% (95% confidence interval: 0.069-0.109). Most were small rectal lesions, with only 4 >10 mm in size and 3 located in the colon.

DISCUSSION

The detection rate of colorectal NENs during colonoscopy is substantially higher than expected.

Effect of different working periods on missed diagnosis of colorectal polyps in colonoscopy

BACKGROUND

To investigate the effect of different working periods on missed diagnoses in patients with colorectal polyps in colonoscopy.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients who were diagnosed with colorectal polyps during colonoscopy in an outpatient department between July and December 2022. These patients were subsequently hospitalized for resection during this period. Patients with missed diagnoses were those who had newly discovered polyps in a second colonoscopy. The working periods were categorized as work, near the end of work, and delayed work, respectively, in the morning and afternoon.

RESULTS

A total of 482 patients were included, and the miss rate of diagnosis was 48.1% (232/482), mainly in the transverse colon (25%), and the ascending colon (23%). Patient age was a risk factor for the miss rate of diagnosis (OR = 1.025, 95%CI: 1.009-1.042, P = 0.003) and was also associated with the number of polyps detected for the first colonoscopy (χ2 = 18.196, P = 0.001). The different working periods had no statistical effect on the missed rate of diagnosis (χ2 = 1.998, P = 0.849). However, there was an increasing trend in miss rates towards the end of work and delayed work periods, both in the morning and afternoon. The highest miss rate (60.0%) was observed during delayed work in the afternoon. Additionally, poor bowel preparation was significantly more common during delayed work in the afternoon.

CONCLUSIONS

The increasing trend in miss rates towards the end of work and delayed work periods deserves clinical attention. Endoscopists cannot always stay in good condition under heavy workloads.

The role of endoscopist adenoma detection rate in in sex differences in colonoscopy findings: cross-sectional analysis of the SCREESCO randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Fewer adenomas are detected at colonoscopy in women compared to men and failure to detect adenomas and sessile serrated polyps is associated with an increased risk of post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer. The aim of this study was to investigate whether this was in part due to the greater difficulty of conducting colonoscopy in women, with the difference being more apparent in colonoscopies conducted by less skilled endoscopists.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Cross-sectional exploratory analysis of data on 16,551 individuals undergoing a primary colonoscopy (PCOL group) or colonoscopy after positive faecal immunochemical test (FIT group) within the randomized controlled trial SCREESCO. Endoscopist adenoma detection rate (ADR; low or high) was determined based on each endoscopist's colonoscopies performed in SCREESCO. In each study group, the relationship between the sex difference in colonoscopy outcome and endoscopist ADR was assessed using multiplicative interaction tests.

RESULTS

Endoscopists performed equally many colonoscopies in men and women (median 52% men). There were no signs of effect modification of the risk ratio of any finding (men vs women) by endoscopist ADR in the PCOL group (p = 0.33) or the FIT group (p = 0.30). The proportion of incomplete index colonoscopies was lower in men than in women in both groups and there was no effect modification by endoscopist ADR in either the PCOL group (p = 0.41) or the FIT group (p = 0.96).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides no evidence that endoscopist skill measured by ADR underlies the sex difference in adenoma detection at colonoscopy. This study has trial number NCT02078804 and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov.

Endoscopist-related factors affecting adenoma detection during colonoscopy: Data from the J-SCOUT study

OBJECTIVES

Colonoscopy withdrawal times are associated with the adenoma detection rate (ADR). However, the relationship between ADR and cecal insertion time has been inadequately characterized. We aimed to evaluate endoscopist-related factors involved in the ADR, including the average individual colonoscopy insertion and withdrawal times.

METHODS

This observational study used a colonoscopy database with pathology data from routine clinical practice in Japanese institutions. The odds ratios (OR) of endoscopist-related factors related to ADRs were examined using a generalized linear mixed model.

RESULTS

Of the 186,293 colonoscopies performed during the study period, 47,705 colonoscopies by 189 endoscopists in four hospitals were analyzed for ADR. The overall ADR was 38.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] 37.8, 38.7). Compared to endoscopists with mean cecal insertion times of <5 min, the OR of ADR for those with mean cecal insertion times of 5-9, 10-14, and ≥15 min were 0.84 (95% CI 0.71, 0.99), 0.68 (95% CI 0.52, 0.90), and 0.45 (95% CI 0.25, 0.78), respectively. Compared to endoscopists with mean withdrawal times of <6 min, the OR of ADR for those with mean withdrawal times of 6-9, 10-14, and ≥15 min were 1.38 (95% CI 1.03, 1.85), 1.48 (95% CI 1.09, 2.02), and 1.68 (95% CI 1.04, 2.61), respectively. There were no significant differences in ADRs by endoscopist specialty, gender, or the total number of examinations performed.

CONCLUSION

Individual mean colonoscopy insertion time was associated with ADR and might be considered as a colonoscopy quality indicator as well as withdrawal time.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of computer-aided detection systems for colonoscopy in Japan

OBJECTIVES

The usefulness of computer-aided detection systems (CADe) for colonoscopy has been increasingly reported. In many countries, however, data on the cost-effectiveness of their use are lacking; consequently, CADe for colonoscopy has not been covered by health insurance. We aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of colonoscopy using CADe in Japan.

METHODS

We conducted a simulation model analysis using Japanese data to examine the cost-effectiveness of colonoscopy with and without CADe for a population aged 40-74 years who received colorectal cancer (CRC) screening with a fecal immunochemical test (FIT). The rates of receiving FIT screening and colonoscopy following a positive FIT were set as 40% and 70%, respectively. The sensitivities of FIT for advanced adenomas and CRC Dukes' A-D were 26.5% and 52.8-78.3%, respectively. CADe colonoscopy was judged to be cost-effective when its incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was below JPY 5,000,000 per quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained.

RESULTS

Compared to conventional colonoscopy, CADe colonoscopy showed a higher QALY (20.4098 vs. 20.4088) and lower CRC incidence (2373 vs. 2415 per 100,000) and mortality (561 vs. 569 per 100,000). When the CADe cost was set at JPY 1000-6000, the ICER per QALY gained for CADe colonoscopy was lower than JPY 5,000,000 (JPY 796,328-4,971,274). The CADe cost threshold at which the ICER for CADe colonoscopy exceeded JPY 5,000,000 was JPY 6040.

CONCLUSIONS

Computer-aided detection systems for colonoscopy has the potential to be cost-effective when the CADe cost is up to JPY 6000. These results suggest that the insurance reimbursement of CADe for colonoscopy is reasonable.