A comparative study of standard vs. high definition colonoscopy for adenoma and hyperplastic polyp detection with optimized withdrawal technique

Standard-definition White-light, High-definition White-light versus Narrow-band Imaging Endoscopy for Detecting Colorectal Adenomas: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare the performance of standard-definition white-light endoscopy (SD-WL), high-definition white-light endoscopy (HD-WL), and high-definition narrow-band imaging (HD-NBI) in detecting colorectal lesions in the Chinese population.

METHODS

This was a multicenter, single-blind, randomized, controlled trial with a non-inferiority design. Patients undergoing endoscopy for physical examination, screening, and surveillance were enrolled from July 2017 to December 2020. The primary outcome measure was the adenoma detection rate (ADR), defined as the proportion of patients with at least one adenoma detected. The associated factors for detecting adenomas were assessed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

Out of 653 eligible patients enrolled, data from 596 patients were analyzed. The ADRs were 34.5% in the SD-WL group, 33.5% in the HD-WL group, and 37.5% in the HD-NBI group (P=0.72). The advanced neoplasm detection rates (ANDRs) in the three arms were 17.1%, 15.5%, and 10.4% (P=0.17). No significant differences were found between the SD group and HD group regarding ADR or ANDR (ADR: 34.5% vs. 35.6%, P=0.79; ANDR: 17.1% vs. 13.0%, P=0.16, respectively). Similar results were observed between the HD-WL group and HD-NBI group (ADR: 33.5% vs. 37.7%, P=0.45; ANDR: 15.5% vs. 10.4%, P=0.18, respectively). In the univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses, neither HD-WL nor HD-NBI led to a significant difference in overall adenoma detection compared to SD-WL (HD-WL: OR 0.91, P=0.69; HD-NBI: OR 1.15, P=0.80).

CONCLUSION

HD-NBI and HD-WL are comparable to SD-WL for overall adenoma detection among Chinese outpatients. It can be concluded that HD-NBI or HD-WL is not superior to SD-WL, but more effective instruction may be needed to guide the selection of different endoscopic methods in the future. Our study's conclusions may aid in the efficient allocation and utilization of limited colonoscopy resources, especially advanced imaging technologies.

Improving sessile serrated adenoma detection rates with high definition colonoscopy: A retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Sessile serrated adenomas (SSAs) are important premalignant lesions that are difficult to detect during colonoscopy due to poor definition, concealment by mucous caps, and flat appearance. High definition (HD) colonoscopy may uniquely aid in the detection of these inconspicuous lesions compared to standard definition (SD) colonoscopes. In the absence of existing clinical guidelines to obligate the use of HD colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening in average-risk patients, demonstrating the benefit of HD colonoscopy on SSA detection rate (SSADR) may help strengthen the evidence to recommend its use in all settings.

AIM

To evaluate the benefit of HD colonoscopy compared to SD colonoscopy on SSADR in average-risk patients undergoing screening colonoscopy.

METHODS

Data from screening colonoscopies for patients aged 50-76 years two years before and two years after the transition from SD colonoscopy to HD colonoscopy at our large, academic teaching center were collected. Patients with symptoms of colorectal disease, positive occult blood test, history of colon polyps, cancer, polyposis syndrome, inflammatory bowel disease or family history of colon cancer or polyps were excluded. Patients whose endoscopists did not perform colonoscopies both before and after scope definition change were also excluded. Differences in individual endoscopist SSADR, average SSADR, and overall SSADR with SD colonoscopy vs HD colonoscopy were also evaluated for significance.

RESULTS

A total of 3657 colonoscopies met eligibility criteria with 2012 colonoscopies from the SD colonoscopy period and 1645 colonoscopies from the HD colonoscopy period from a pool of 11 endoscopists. Statistically significant improvements of 2.30% in mean SSADR and 2.53% in overall SSADR were noted with HD colonoscopy (P = 0.00028 and P = 0.00849, respectively). On the individual level, three endoscopists experienced statistically significant benefit with HD colonoscopy (+5.74%, P = 0.0056; +4.50%, P = 0.0278; +4.84%, P = 0.03486).

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests that HD colonoscopy statistically significantly improves sessile serrated adenoma detection rate in the screening of average risk patients during screening colonoscopy. By improving the detection and removal of these lesions, adoption of HD colonoscopy may reduce the significant premalignant burden of sessile serrated adenomas.

Improving sessile serrated adenoma detection rates with high definition colonoscopy: A retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Sessile serrated adenomas (SSAs) are important premalignant lesions that are difficult to detect during colonoscopy due to poor definition, concealment by mucous caps, and flat appearance. High definition (HD) colonoscopy may uniquely aid in the detection of these inconspicuous lesions compared to standard definition (SD) colonoscopes. In the absence of existing clinical guidelines to obligate the use of HD colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening in average-risk patients, demonstrating the benefit of HD colonoscopy on SSA detection rate (SSADR) may help strengthen the evidence to recommend its use in all settings.

AIM

To evaluate the benefit of HD colonoscopy compared to SD colonoscopy on SSADR in average-risk patients undergoing screening colonoscopy.

METHODS

Data from screening colonoscopies for patients aged 50-76 years two years before and two years after the transition from SD colonoscopy to HD colonoscopy at our large, academic teaching center were collected. Patients with symptoms of colorectal disease, positive occult blood test, history of colon polyps, cancer, polyposis syndrome, inflammatory bowel disease or family history of colon cancer or polyps were excluded. Patients whose endoscopists did not perform colonoscopies both before and after scope definition change were also excluded. Differences in individual endoscopist SSADR, average SSADR, and overall SSADR with SD colonoscopy vs HD colonoscopy were also evaluated for significance.

RESULTS

A total of 3657 colonoscopies met eligibility criteria with 2012 colonoscopies from the SD colonoscopy period and 1645 colonoscopies from the HD colonoscopy period from a pool of 11 endoscopists. Statistically significant improvements of 2.30% in mean SSADR and 2.53% in overall SSADR were noted with HD colonoscopy (P = 0.00028 and P = 0.00849, respectively). On the individual level, three endoscopists experienced statistically significant benefit with HD colonoscopy (+5.74%, P = 0.0056; +4.50%, P = 0.0278; +4.84%, P = 0.03486).

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests that HD colonoscopy statistically significantly improves sessile serrated adenoma detection rate in the screening of average risk patients during screening colonoscopy. By improving the detection and removal of these lesions, adoption of HD colonoscopy may reduce the significant premalignant burden of sessile serrated adenomas.

Factors Associated with Polyp Detection Rate in European Colonoscopy Practice: Findings of The European Colonoscopy Quality Investigation (ECQI) Group

Background: The European Colonoscopy Quality Investigation (ECQI) Group aims to raise awareness for improvement in colonoscopy standards across Europe. We analysed data collected on a sample of procedures conducted across Europe to evaluate the achievement of the polyp detection rate (PDR) target. We also investigated factors associated with PDR, in the hope of establishing areas that could lead to a quality improvement. Methods: 6445 form completions from 12 countries between 2 June 2016 and 30 April 2018 were considered for this analysis. We performed an exploratory analysis looking at PDR according to European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) definition. Stepwise multivariable logistic regression analysis was conducted to determine the most influential associated factors after adjusting for the other pre-specified variables. Results: In our sample there were 3365 screening and diagnostic procedures performed in those over 50 years. The PDR was 40.5%, which is comparable with the ESGE minimum standard of 40%. The variables found to be associated with PDR were in descending order: use of high-definition equipment, body mass index (BMI), patient gender, age group, and the reason for the procedure. Use of HD equipment was associated with a significant increase in the reporting of flat lesions (14.3% vs. 5.7%, p < 0.0001) and protruded lesions (34.7% vs. 25.4%, p < 0.0001). Conclusions: On average, the sample of European practice captured by the ECQI survey meets the minimum PDR standard set by the ESGE. Our findings support the ESGE recommendation for routine use of HD colonoscopy.

Serrated polyps of the colon and rectum: a concise review

"Serrated polyps" is the term used for epithelial lesions of the colon and rectum that have a "sawtooth" pattern on the polyp's surface and crypt epithelium. The so-called serrated pathway describes the progression of sessile serrated adenomas and traditional serrated adenomas to colorectal cancer. Said pathway is well recognized as an alternative mechanism of carcinogenesis and accounts for 15-30% of the cases of colorectal cancer. It also explains a large number of the cases of interval colorectal cancer. Thus, due to their usually aggressive and uncertain behavior, serrated polyps are of the utmost importance in colorectal cancer screening. Our aim was to review the history, current nomenclature, pathophysiology, morphology, treatment, and surveillance of serrated polyps.

≥3 Nonadvanced Adenomas are More Common in the Era of Contemporary Colonoscopy and Not Associated With Metachronous Advanced Neoplasia

INTRODUCTION

Data from standard definition colonoscopy era demonstrate patients with an advanced adenoma (≥10 mm, villous features or high-grade dysplasia) or ≥3 nonadvanced adenomas are considered high-risk for metachronous advanced neoplasia (MAN). Low-risk adenoma (LRA) patients are those with 1 to 2, <10 mm tubular adenomas. High definition colonoscopy, split-dose bowel preparation, and attention to adenoma detection enhance diminutive adenoma detection. We compared baseline adenoma characteristics between patients undergoing colonoscopy in a historic cohort (HC) and contemporary cohort (CC) to determine if number of patients with ≥3 nonadvanced adenomas are increased in CC, and if those features are associated with MAN in CC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients undergoing their first colonoscopy in HC (<2006) and CC (≥2006) at age 50 and above were identified through natural language processing. Multivariable regression analysis compared baseline adenoma characteristics between HC and CC, and determined the association between baseline characteristics and MAN in CC patients.

RESULTS

In total, 255,074 colonoscopies were performed between 1990 and 2015. A total of 9773 colonoscopies performed in the HC and 59,531 in the CC were included. At baseline, CC patients were more likely to have ≥3 nonadvanced adenomas [odds ratio (OR): 2.1, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.7-2.6]. In 3,377 CC patients undergoing follow-up colonoscopy, the risk of MAN did not differ between patients with LRA versus those with ≥3 nonadvanced adenomas (6.3% vs. 4.6%, OR: 1.4, CI: 0.58-3.5) including 3-4 (6.1%, OR: 1.4, CI: 0.52-3.6) and ≥5 (7.7%, OR: 1.8, CI: 0.23-14.6), although few patients had ≥5 nonadvanced adenomas.

CONCLUSIONS

Colonoscopy in the contemporary era increases detection of patients with ≥3 nonadvanced adenomas, which do not increase the risk of MAN compared with LRA patients. A similar surveillance to LRA patients should be considered for those patients.

Comparison of the detection of colorectal lesions in different endoscopic modalities: A network meta-analysis and systematic review

A colonoscopy is considered to be the standard diagnostic test used to detect early colorectal lesions. Detection rates are expected to improve with optimised visualisation. A systematic review and network meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate detection efficiency in several colonoscopic modalities. Relevant articles were identified in searches of the PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases. The modalities, comprising of standard-definition white light (SDWL), high-definition white light (HDWL), narrow-band imaging (NBI), autofluorescence imaging (AFI), PENTAX image enhanced technology (i-SCAN), Fuji Intelligent Color Enhancement (FICE), dye-based chromoendoscopy and novel image enhanced systems, including blue laser imaging (BLI) and linked color imaging (LCI), were compared to identify the most efficient modalities that could be used to detect colorectal lesions. Odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. As a result, 40 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Overall, in the network meta-analyses, NBI (OR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.04-1.58), FICE (OR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.11-1.77), chromoendoscopy (OR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.22-1.93) and AFI (OR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.07-2.87) were significantly better compared with SDWL at identifying adenoma in patients, and chromoendoscopy also proved significantly superior to HDWL (OR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.06-1.60). In pairwise analyses, it was demonstrated that chromoendoscopy was significantly superior to HDWL at detecting the number of polyps (MD, -1.11; 95% CI, -1.46, -0.76) and flat lesions (MD, -0.30; 95% CI, -0.49, -0.10) per subject. Additionally, FICE detected a significantly greater number of subjects with polyps (OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.64-0.96) and NBI was significantly better at detecting the number of subjects with flat lesions (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.60-0.99) compared with HDWL. Based on the meta-analysis, NBI, FICE and AFI were significantly better compared with SDWL at detecting patients with adenoma. Additionally, chromoendoscopy was significantly better than SDWL and HDWL at detecting the number of colorectal adenoma, however additional studies are needed to confirm these findings.

ADR evaluation of screening colonoscopies during 2016 - 2017 in a private health clinic in Peru

Background and study aims  High-quality colonoscopy is fundamental for preventing colorectal cancer (CRC). The adenoma detection rate (ADR) is a key colonoscopy quality measure. The aim of this study was to establish the screening colonoscopy ADR of a tertiary referral center in Peru, identify the relationship between the ADR and patient age, sex and the colonoscopist, and determine the endoscopic and histopathological characteristics of the lesions found. Patients and methods  A retrospective observational longitudinal study was undertaken between January 2016 and June 2017. Results  Eight colonoscopists performed screening colonoscopies on 620 patients scoring ≥ 6 points on the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS); cecal intubation was complete in 595 patients (cecal intubation rate [CIR] 95.9 %). The overall ADR was 29.7 % (females 25.4 %, males 33.1 %, P  = 0.040, 95 %Cl). The ADR colonoscopist range was 25.0 % to 34.4 %. The highest ADR (41.2 %, P  = 0.013, 95 %Cl) was for patients aged 65 to 75 years. Adenoma colon locations were: left 49 %, transverse 21.6 % and right 29.4 %. Adenoma dysplasia grades: low 98 %, high 2 %. Sixty-three percent of the lesions were 5 mm to 10 mm. Resections performed: 78.5 % cold biopsy forceps (CBF), 3.4 % cold snare polypectomy (CSP) and 18.1 % endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). Conclusions  The ADR established was in line with the joint American College of Gastroenterology (ACG)/American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) recommendations and related to patient age and gender but not to the colonoscopist. Colonoscopists should ensure rigorous application of the colonoscopy quality actions. ADR should be evaluated frequently.

Temporal trends in postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer rates in 50- to 74-year-old persons: a population-based study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Colorectal cancers (CRCs) diagnosed between 6 and 36 months after colonoscopy, termed postcolonoscopy CRCs (PCCRCs), arise primarily due to missed or inadequately treated neoplasms during colonoscopy. Introduction of multiple quality indicators and technological advances to colonoscopy practice should have reduced the PCCRC rate over time. We assessed temporal trends in the population rate of PCCRC as a measure of changing colonoscopy quality.

METHODS

We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study of persons aged 50 to 74 years without advanced risk factors for CRC who underwent complete colonoscopy in Ontario, Canada between 1996 and 2010. We defined the PCCRC rate as the proportion of individuals diagnosed with CRC within 36 months of colonoscopy that had PCCRC. We compared age-adjusted and sex-adjusted rates of PCCRC over time based on 3 periods (1996-2001, 2001-2006 and 2006-2010) and assessed the independent association between time period and PCCRC risk through multivariable regression, with respect to all PCCRCs, proximal PCCRC and distal PCCRC.

RESULTS

There was a marked increase in colonoscopy volumes over the study period, particularly in younger age groups and non-hospital settings. Among 1,093,658 eligible persons the PCCRC rate remained stable at approximately 8% over the 15-year study period. The adjusted odds of PCCRC, distal PCCRC and proximal PCCRC, comparing the 2006 to 2010 period with the 1996 to 2001 period, were 1.14 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.0-1.31), 1.11 (95% CI, 0.91-1.34), and 1.14 (95% CI, 0.94-1.38), respectively. Temporal trends in PCCRC risk did not differ by endoscopist specialty or institutional setting after covariate adjustment.

CONCLUSION

The PCCRC rate in Ontario has remained consistently high over time. Widespread initiatives are needed to improve colonoscopy quality.

Can technology increase adenoma detection rate?

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer worldwide and the second most common cause of cancer-related death in Europe and North America. Colonoscopy is the gold standard investigation for the colon but is not perfect, and small or flat adenomas can be missed which increases the risk of patients subsequently developing colorectal cancer. Adenoma detection rate is the most widely used marker of quality, and low rates are associated with increased rates of post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer. Standards of colonoscopy and adenoma detection vary widely between different endoscopists. Interventions to improve adenoma detection rate are therefore required. Many devices have been purported to increase adenoma detection rate. This review looks at current available evidence for device technology to improve adenoma detection rate during colonoscopy.

Carbon dioxide insufflation is associated with increased serrated polyp detection rate when compared to room air insufflation during screening colonoscopy

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Sessile serrated adenomas (SSA) and traditional serrated adenomas (TSA) have been increasingly recognized as precursors of colorectal cancer. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of carbon dioxide insufflation (CO ₂ I) vs. room air insufflation (AI) on serrated polyp detection rate (SPDR) and to identify factors associated with SPDR.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Single-center retrospective cohort study of 2083 screening colonoscopies performed with AI (November 2011 through January 2013) or CO ₂ I (February 2013 to June 2015). Data on demographics, procedure characteristics and histology results were obtained from a prospectively maintained endoscopy database and chart review. SPDR was defined as proportion of colonoscopies in which ≥ 1 SSA, TSA or hyperplastic polyp (HP) ≥ 10 mm in the right colon was detected. Multi-variate analysis (MVA) was performed to identify predictors of SPDR.

RESULTS

A total of 131 histologically confirmed serrated polyps (129 SSA, 2 TSA and 0 HP ≥ 10 mm) were detected. SPDR was higher with CO ₂ I vs. AI (4.8 % vs. 1.4 %; P  < 0.0001). On MVA, CO ₂ I was associated with higher SPDR when compared to AI (OR: 9.52; 95 % CI: 3.05 - 30.3). Both higher body mass index (OR 1.05; 95 % CI:1.02 - 1.09) and longer colonoscope withdrawal time (OR 1.11; 95 % CI: 1.07 - 1.16) were also associated with higher SPDR.

CONCLUSION

CO ₂ I is associated with higher SPDR when compared to AI during screening colonoscopy. While the mechanism remains unknown, we speculate that the favorable gas characteristics of CO ₂ compared to room air results in improved polyp detection by optimizing bowel insufflation. These findings suggest an additional reason to prefer the use of CO ₂ I over AI during colonoscopy.

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

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

A guide to multimodal endoscopy imaging for gastrointestinal malignancy - an early indicator

Multimodality imaging is an essential aspect of endoscopic surveillance for the detection of neoplastic lesions, such as dysplasia or intramucosal cancer, because it improves the efficacy of endoscopic surveillance and therapeutic procedures in the gastrointestinal tract. This approach reveals mucosal abnormalities that cannot be detected by standard endoscopy. Currently, these imaging techniques are divided into those for primary detection and those for targeted imaging and characterization, the latter being used to visualize areas of interest in detail and permit histological evaluation. This Review outlines the use of virtual chromoendoscopy, narrow-band imaging, autofluorescence imaging, optical coherence tomography, confocal endomicroscopy and volumetric laser endomicroscopy as new imaging techniques for diagnostic investigation of the gastrointestinal tract. Insights into use of multimodal endoscopic imaging for early disease detection, in particular for pre-malignant lesions, in the oesophagus, stomach and colon are described.

Technological advances for improving adenoma detection rates: The changing face of colonoscopy

Worldwide, colorectal cancer is the third commonest cancer. Over 90% follow an adenoma-to-cancer sequence over many years. Colonoscopy is the gold standard method for cancer screening and early adenoma detection. However, considerable variation exists between endoscopists' detection rates. This review considers the effects of different endoscopic techniques on adenoma detection. Two areas of technological interest were considered: (1) optical technologies and (2) mechanical technologies. Optical solutions, including FICE, NBI, i-SCAN and high definition colonoscopy showed mixed results. In contrast, mechanical advances, such as cap-assisted colonoscopy, FUSE, EndoCuff and G-EYE™, showed promise, with reported detections rates of up to 69%. However, before definitive recommendations can be made for their incorporation into daily practice, further studies and comparison trials are required.

Serrated lesions and serrated polyposis syndrome

The serrated pathway has been shown to be an alternative colorectal carcinogenetic route potentially accounting for up to one third of all CRCs. Serrated lesions, particularly SSPs, have been a focus of research during the past few years. They have well-established histological and molecular characteristics that account for their potential carcinogenetic risk through the accumulation BRAF, KRAS and methylator profile (CpG) mutations. Their endoscopic identification and resection represent a challenge because of their specific characteristics, and the need for an adequate specimen for histological diagnosis. Knowledge of these lesions is key, as is the adoption of established criteria for their endoscopic description and histological diagnosis. SPS is the maximum expression of involvement by serrated lesions, is associated with increased risk for CRC, and requires attentive endoscopic follow-up, as well as family screening. While the exact etiopathogenic mechanism remains unknown, current research will likely provide us with appropriate answers in the not too distant future.

Does carbon dioxide insufflation impact adenoma detection rate? A single-center retrospective analysis

Background and study aims: Carbon dioxide (CO₂) has been associated with reduced post-procedural pain and improved patient satisfaction when compared to air insufflation (AI). The effect of CO₂ insufflation (CO₂I) on the adenoma detection rate (ADR) remains unclear. The aims of this study are to compare ADR in patients undergoing screening colonoscopy with AI vs. CO₂I and identify predictors of ADR. Patients and methods: Single-center retrospective cohort study of 2,107 patients undergoing screening colonoscopy at the University of Florida Hospital between November 2011 and June 2015. Patient demographics, procedural parameters, and histology results were retrospectively obtained from a prospectively maintained colonoscopy database. Univariate and multivariate analysis were performed to identify predictors of ADR. Results: A total of 2107 colonoscopies (644 with AI and 1463 with CO₂I) were analyzed. Overall ADR was 27.8 %. There was no significant difference in ADR between AI (27.6 %) vs. CO₂I (27.8 %) (P = 0.93). Method of insufflation (AI vs. CO₂I) was not significantly associated with ADR (OR 0.9; 95 % CI:0.7 - 1.2). Older age (OR: 1.02; 95 % CI: 1.001 - 1.03 per year increase), male gender (OR 1.48; 95 % CI: 1.17 - 1.87), and longer scope withdraw time (OR 1.13; 95 % CI: 1.1 - 1.16 per minute) were associated with a higher ADR. Fellow involvement was negatively associated with ADR (OR 0.60; 95 % CI: 0.47 - 0.77). Conclusion: ADR was similar between patients who underwent screening colonoscopy with AI vs. CO₂I. While CO₂I has been associated with improved patient comfort and post-procedural recovery time, there is no definitive evidence to suggest that this method of luminal distention enhances ADR.

Expert opinions and scientific evidence for colonoscopy key performance indicators

Colonoscopy is a widely performed procedure with procedural volumes increasing annually throughout the world. Many procedures are now performed as part of colorectal cancer screening programmes. Colonoscopy should be of high quality and measures of this quality should be evidence based. New UK key performance indicators and quality assurance standards have been developed by a working group with consensus agreement on each standard reached. This paper reviews the scientific basis for each of the quality measures published in the UK standards.

FICE vs Narrow Band Imaging for In Vivo Histologic Diagnosis of Polyps

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Gastrointestinal cancers are the most frequently occurring cancers worldwide. Diagnosis and removal of polyps during screening endoscopy decreases the prevalence of colon cancer and cancer-related mortality, and it is considered to be the gold standard in gastrointestinal system cancer prevention. Technological innovations in endoscopy have led to revolutionary developments in many areas. Flexible spectral imaging color enhancement (FICE) and narrow-band imaging (NBI) are forms of digital chromoendoscopy and enhance the endoscopic images without the need for a dye. This study seeks to evaluate the efficacy of FICE and NBI on polyp screening and real-time histologic diagnosis with endoscopy and to compare them.

METHODS

A total of 134 patients (male/female = 72/62) and 161 polyps were evaluated with FICE or NBI, and real-time histologic diagnosis predictions were classified as neoplastic or nonneoplastic, according to Kudo's pit pattern classification. Pathological results and real-time endoscopic diagnoses were statistically interpreted for both FICE and NBI. Positive predictive value, negative predictive value, sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy rates were calculated and compared for both modalities.

RESULTS

When both systems were compared, the negative predictive value of NBI was found to be higher than that of FICE statistically (P < .001). Specificity and positive predictive value in the FICE group were higher than in the NBI group, but the difference was not statistically significant (P = .082 and P = .153, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Aside from being safe in polyp detection, digital chromoendoscopy also helps the endoscopist in selecting the type of simultaneous intervention (eg, polypectomy, endomucosal resection, or submucosal dissection) by enabling endoscopic histologic diagnosis.

Can Technology Improve the Quality of Colonoscopy?

In order for screening colonoscopy to be an effective tool in reducing colon cancer incidence, exams must be performed in a high-quality manner. Quality metrics have been presented by gastroenterology societies and now include higher adenoma detection rate targets than in the past. In many cases, the quality of colonoscopy can often be improved with simple low-cost interventions such as improved procedure technique, implementing split-dose bowel prep, and monitoring individuals' performances. Emerging technology has expanded our field of view and image quality during colonoscopy. We will critically review several technological advances in the context of quality metrics and discuss if technology can really improve the quality of colonoscopy.

High-definition colonoscopy increases adenoma detection rate

BACKGROUND

The adenoma detection rate (ADR) is a quality indicator for colonoscopy. High-definition (HD) imaging has been reported to increase polyp detection rates.

OBJECTIVE

The primary objective of this study was to compare polyp detection rate (PDR) and adenoma detection rate (ADR) before and after the implementation of HD colonoscopy.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed on patients aged 48-55 years old, who underwent first-time screening colonoscopy. The first group underwent standard-definition (SD) colonoscopy in the first 6 months of 2011. The second group underwent screening with HD colonoscopy during the first 6 months of 2012. We compared age, gender, PDR, ADR, and average sizes of adenomatous polyps between gastroenterologist and colorectal surgeon and among physicians themselves. Statistical analysis was performed with Fischer's exact test and Pearson Chi-square.

RESULTS

A total of 1268 patients were involved in the study (634 in each group). PDR (35.6 vs. 48.2 %, p < 0.001) and ADR (22.2 vs. 30.4 %, p = 0.02) were higher in the HD group. The average size of an adenomatous polyp was the same in the two groups (0.58 vs. 0.57, p = 0.69). However, this difference was not seen among colorectal surgeons PDR (35.7 vs. 37 %, p = 0.789), ADR (22.9 vs. 24.5 % p = 0.513), but clearly seen among gastroenterologist, PDR (35.6 vs. 53.1 % p < 0.001) and ADR (21.9 vs. 32.9 % p < 0.001). When polyps were categorized into size groups, there was no difference in ADR between the two timeframes (<5 mm in size (41.5 vs. 35.4 %), 5-10 mm (49.3 vs. 60.1 %) and >10 mm (9.2 vs. 4.5 %), p = 0.07). Polyps were most commonly seen in the sigmoid colon (26.1 vs. 24.7 %). There was no difference in the rate of synchronous polyp detection between modalities (25.6 vs. 29 %, p = 0.51). Withdrawal time was the same in both procedure (9.2 vs. 8.5 min, p = 0.10).

CONCLUSION

Screening colonoscopy with high-definition technology significantly improved both PDR and ADR. In addition, high-definition colonoscopy may be particularly useful and advantageous among less experienced endoscopists in various community settings. However, there needs to be application to specific patient populations in future studies to assess for any statistical differences between standard- and high-definition modalities to determine clinical utility.

Chromoscopy versus conventional endoscopy for the detection of polyps in the colon and rectum

BACKGROUND

Although conventional colonoscopy is the most accurate test available for the investigation of the colorectum for polyps, data exist that raise concerns about its sensitivity. Chromoscopy (spraying dye onto the surface of the colon to make polyps more visible) may be one way of enhancing the ability of colonoscopy to detect polyps, particularly diminutive flat lesions, which otherwise may be difficult to detect.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether the use of chromoscopy enhances the detection of polyps and neoplasia during endoscopic examination of the colon and rectum.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases: Cochrane Colorectal Cancer Group Specialised Register (October 2015), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Cochrane Library; Issue 10, 2015), MEDLINE (January 1950 to October 2015), EMBASE (January 1974 to October 2015), and ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (both November 2015). We also handsearched abstracts from relevant meetings from 1980 to 2015. Search terms included 'randomised trials' containing combinations of the following: 'chromoscopy' 'colonoscopy' 'dye-spray' 'chromo-endoscopy' 'indigo-carmine' 'magnifying endoscopy'.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all prospective randomised trials comparing chromoscopic with conventional endoscopic examination of the whole of the colon and rectum. We excluded studies of people with inflammatory bowel disease or polyposis syndromes and any studies that combined chromoscopy with additional interventions (cap assistance, water-perfused, etc.).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the methodological quality of potentially eligible trials, and two review authors independently extracted data from the included trials. Outcome measures included the detection of polyps (neoplastic and non-neoplastic), the detection of diminutive lesions, the number of participants with multiple neoplastic lesions, and the extubation time.

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven trials (2727 participants) in this update. Five trials were of sufficiently similar design to allow for pooled results. Two trials differed substantially in design and were included in a subgroup analysis. All the trials had some methodological drawbacks. However, combining the results showed a significant difference in favour of chromoscopy for all detection outcomes. In particular, chromoscopy was likely to yield significantly more people with at least one neoplastic lesion (odds ratio (OR) 1.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.31 to 1.79; 7 trials; 2727 participants), and at least one diminutive neoplastic lesion (OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.92; 4 trials; 1757 participants). Significantly more people with three or more neoplastic lesions were also detected, but only when studies that used high-definition colonoscopy in the control group were excluded (OR 4.63, 95% CI 1.99 to 10.80; 2 trials; 519 participants). None of the included studies reported any adverse events related to the use of the contrast dye.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is strong evidence that chromoscopy enhances the detection of neoplasia in the colon and rectum. People with neoplastic polyps, particularly those with multiple polyps, are at increased risk of developing colorectal cancer. Such lesions, which presumably would be missed with conventional colonoscopy, could contribute to the interval cancer numbers on any surveillance programme.

Improving the utility of colonoscopy: Recent advances in practice

Colonoscopy is a frequently performed diagnostic and therapeutic test and the primary screening tool in several nationalized bowel cancer screening programs. There has been a considerable focus on maximizing the utility of colonoscopy. This has occurred in four key areas: Optimizing patient selection to reduce unnecessary or low yield colonoscopy has offered cost-benefit improvements in population screening. Improving quality assurance, through the development of widely accepted quality metrics for use in individual practice and the research setting, has offered measurable improvements in colonoscopic yield. Significant improvements have been demonstrated in colonoscopic technique, from the administration of preparation to the techniques employed during withdrawal of the colonoscope. Improved techniques to avoid post-procedural complications have also been developed-further maximizing the utility of colonoscopy. The aim of this review is to summarize the recent evidence-based advances in colonoscopic practice that contribute to the optimal practice of colonoscopy.

Chromocolonoscopy

Chromoendoscopy techniques improve the visualization of mucosal structures. This article reviews and summarizes key studies addressing the impact of chromoendoscopy on colonic neoplasia detection and differentiation of neoplastic from non-neoplastic polyps in average and high-risk populations, including patients with colonic inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). In this context, there are convincing data that chromoendoscopy differentiates neoplastic from non-neoplastic polyps in average-risk populations with high accuracy. Moreover, dye-based chromoendoscopy improves neoplasia detection in colonic IBD surveillance.

How can screening colonoscopy be optimized?

Since the implementation of screening programmes, both the incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer have been decreasing. The choice of the preferred screening tool, however, is divergent and the adherence to screening programmes in most countries is still low. Cancer detection tests such as the guaiac faecal occult blood test (gFOBT) and the immunohistochemical FOBT (iFOBT) achieve higher acceptance than endoscopy. The sensitivity and specificity of iFOBT are higher than those of gFOBT, but gFOBT is cheaper and easier to perform. Endoscopic screening, which represents cancer prevention tests, has higher sensitivity for premalignant lesions than gFOBT and iFOBT and enables diagnosis and therapy in one single procedure. Since screening colonoscopy and sigmoidoscopy are invasive procedures with potentially severe adverse events, the highest possible quality must be provided. High-tech equipment, experience, training, quality control programmes, excellent bowel preparation and low adverse event rates are pivotal. Alternative screening tools such as CT colonography, barium enema CT and multitarget stool DNA tests have not been established as routine screening tools to date.

Endoscopists with low adenoma detection rates benefit from high-definition endoscopy

BACKGROUND

An endoscopists adenoma detection rate (ADR) of less than 20 % correlates with high risk for occurrence of interval cancer. The impact of high-definition (HD) imaging on the ADR is discussed controversially. We aimed to investigate whether detection rates of individual endoscopists increase within 1 year before and 1 year after the switch from standard to HD endoscopy.

METHODS

This cohort study analyzed 6,330 screening colonoscopies (2,968 with standard and 3,362 with HD) performed by 42 endoscopists between November 2007 and March 2013 within a nationwide quality assurance program for screening colonoscopy.

RESULTS

The ADR of endoscopists with a low ADR (<20 %) increased significantly higher (from 11.8 to 18.1 %, p = 0.003) than of those with a high ADR (≥ 20 %) (from 28.6 to 30.7 %, p = 0.439) after switch from standard to HD colonoscopes (p = 0.0076). The proportion of endoscopists with an ADR < 20 % decreased from 45 to 42.9 % (p = 0.593). There was no significant increase in age- and sex-adjusted detection rates of adenomas (20.2 vs 23.7 %; p = 0.089), advanced adenomas (4.7 vs 5.5 %; p = 0.479), flat adenomas (2.7 vs 3.1 %; p = 0.515), polyps (38.8 vs 41.5 %; p = 0.305), proximal polyps (18.5 vs 20 %; p = 0.469) and hyperplastic polyps (15 vs 17.2 %; p = 0.243) of endoscopists after switch to HD colonoscopes. There was no difference in detection rates of flat polyps (5.5 vs 5.5 %; p = 0.987).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of HD scopes is associated with marginal improvement in adenoma detection rates limited to those endoscopists with low adenoma detection rates prior to its introduction.

Novel diagnostic and therapeutic techniques for surveillance of dysplasia in patients with inflammatory bowel disease

The risk for developing dysplasia and colorectal cancer in patients with longstanding inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) involving the colon is well documented. Random biopsies during white-light, standard-definition colonoscopy (33 to 50 biopsies) with or without dye spraying chromoendoscopy has been the recommended strategy in North America to detect dysplastic lesions in IBD. However, there are several limitations to this approach including poor physician adherence, poor sensitivity, increased procedure time and considerable cost. The new generation of high-definition endoscopes with electronic filter technology provide an opportunity to visualize colonic mucosal and vascular patterns in minute detail, and to identify subtle flat, multifocal, polypoid and pseudopolypoid neoplastic and non-neoplastic lesions. The application of these new technologies in IBD is slowly being adopted in clinical practice. In addition, the advent of confocal laser endomicroscopy provides an opportunity to explore real-time histology, thus redefining the understanding and characterization of the lesions in IBD. There is emerging evidence that serrated adenomas are also associated with longstanding IBD colitis and may be recognized as another important contributing factor to colorectal cancer development. The circumscribed neoplastic lesions can be treated using endoscopic therapeutic management such as mucosal resection or, especially, endoscopic submucosal dissection. This may replace panproctocolectomy in selected patients. The authors review the potential of these techniques to transform endoscopic diagnosis and therapeutic management of dysplasia in IBD.

High-definition vs. standard-definition endoscopy with indigo carmine for the in vivo diagnosis of colonic polyps

BACKGROUND

There is growing evidence that indigo carmine chromoendoscopy is effective for the in vivo diagnosis of colonic polyps. However, the impact of colonoscope resolution on diagnostic accuracy has not been investigated.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to compare the effectiveness of in vivo diagnosis of small colonic polyps using indigo carmine dye spray with standard-definition and high-definition colonoscopes.

METHODS

Procedures were performed using Fujinon colonoscopes and EPX 4400 processor. Fujinon standard-definition (SD) and high-definition (HD) colonoscopes were used, with the endoscopist blinded to colonoscope definition. Polyps <10 mm were assessed using 0.2% indigo carmine dye spray, with the predicted diagnosis recorded. In each case the kind of colonoscope (SD or HD) was recorded. Polyps were removed and sent for histological analysis, with the pathologist blinded to the diagnosis made by the endoscopist. The predicted diagnosis was compared with the true histology to calculate the accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of in vivo assessment using either SD or HD scopes.

RESULTS

In total 237 polyps <10 mm in size were examined. There was no statistically significant difference for any of the measured parameters between SD and HD assessments, with an accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of 89%, 91% and 87% with SD colonoscopes and 92%, 96% and 84% with HD colonoscopes.

CONCLUSIONS

The accuracy of in vivo assessment of small colonic polyps with indigo carmine dye spray is excellent with standard-definition colonoscopes and is not improved with high-definition colonoscopes.

Postpolypectomy haemorrhage following removal of large polyps using mechanical haemostasis or epinephrine: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Postpolypectomy haemorrhage (PPH) is a known adverse event that can occur following polypectomy, occurring in 0.3-6.1% of cases. Previous meta-analysis has included small polyps, which are less likely to bleed, and less amenable to some methods of mechanical haemostasis. No comprehensive cost-benefit analysis of this topic is available. The aim of this study was to perform a meta-analysis of randomized trials and a cost-benefit analysis of prophylactic haemostasis in PPH.

METHODS

A total of 3092 abstracts from prospective trials conducted in human colonoscopic polypectomy were screened. Outpatients undergoing polypectomy in seven suitable studies (1426 episodes), without polyposis syndromes or bleeding diathesis, were identified. The interventions of prophylactic haemostatic measures (clips, loops, and/or adrenaline injection) to prevent PPH were assessed. The main outcome measurements were PPH measured by haematochezia or drop in haematocrit >10% or haemoglobin >1 g/dl. Risk ratio and number needed to treat (NNT) were generated using meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Comparing any prophylactic haemostasis to none, the pooled risk ratio for PPH was 0.35 (0.21-0.57; p < 0.0001), NNT was 13.6, and cost to prevent one PPH was USD652. Using adrenaline alone vs. no prophylactic haemostasis revealed a pooled risk ratio of 0.37 (0.20-0.66; p = 0.001), NNT 14.0, cost to prevent one PPH USD382. Any prophylactic mechanical haemostasis compared to adrenaline produced a RR for PPH of 0.28 (0.14-0.57; p < 0.0001), NNT 12.3, and cost to prevent one PPH USD1368.

CONCLUSIONS

Adrenaline injection or mechanical haemostasis reduces the risk of PPH. Routine prophylactic measures to reduce PPH for polyps larger than 10 mm are potentially cost effective, although more thorough cost-benefit modelling is required.

Endoscopic innovations to increase the adenoma detection rate during colonoscopy

Up to a quarter of polyps and adenomas are missed during colonoscopy due to poor visualization behind folds and the inner curves of flexures, and the presence of flat lesions that are difficult to detect. These numbers may however be conservative because they mainly come from back-to-back studies performed with standard colonoscopes, which are unable to visualize the entire mucosal surface. In the past several years, new endoscopic techniques have been introduced to improve the detection of polyps and adenomas. The introduction of high definition colonoscopes and visual image enhancement technologies have been suggested to lead to better recognition of flat and small lesions, but the absolute increase in diagnostic yield seems limited. Cap assisted colonoscopy and water-exchange colonoscopy are methods to facilitate cecal intubation and increase patients comfort, but show only a marginal or no benefit on polyp and adenoma detection. Retroflexion is routinely used in the rectum for the inspection of the dentate line, but withdrawal in retroflexion in the colon is in general not recommended due to the risk of perforation. In contrast, colonoscopy with the Third-Eye Retroscope^® may result in considerable lower miss rates compared to standard colonoscopy, but this technique is not practical in case of polypectomy and is more time consuming. The recently introduced Full Spectrum Endoscopy™ colonoscopes maintains the technical capabilities of standard colonoscopes and provides a much wider view of 330 degrees compared to the 170 degrees with standard colonoscopes. Remarkable lower adenoma miss rates with this new technique were recently demonstrated in the first randomized study. Nonetheless, more studies are required to determine the exact additional diagnostic yield in clinical practice. Optimizing the efficacy of colorectal cancer screening and surveillance requires high definition colonoscopes with improved virtual chromoendoscopy technology that visualize the whole colon mucosa while maintaining optimal washing, suction and therapeutic capabilities, and keeping the procedural time as low and patient discomfort as optimal as possible.

Advanced imaging in colonoscopy and its impact on quality

Detecting and resecting colonic polyps during endoscopy has been shown to reduce CRC. At the same time, endoscopy has faced substantial technical improvements and continues to undergo major changes. Detection of colorectal neoplasias is facilitated by using high-definition endoscopy, and characterization of lesions is more accurate by using virtual CE. High-definition endoscopy has found widespread use, whereas virtual CE is still more often used in tertiary centers and for high-risk patient groups. Endomicroscopy has opened the door for in vivo histology and functional as well as molecular imaging. Thorough training of the endoscopists is necessary, and redefined reimbursement codes may help make these techniques available in the clinical arena for high-risk patients who are most probable to benefit from the more advanced diagnostic endoscopy techniques. Over recent years, there has also been an increasing push by healthcare payors and providers to improve the quality of healthcare services. The ultimate goal of monitoring quality measures is to improve the overall health of the population and, for colon cancer screening, to reduce the incidence and mortality of colon cancer. However, the development of an appropriate quality measure and ensuring the accuracy of the data on which we base our efforts are among the first challenges that we must meet (Table 1). The continued technologic advancements in colonoscopy and endoscopic imaging may result in improvements in the quality of colonoscopy and should lead to a decrease in the incidence and mortality from colon cancer.

Endoscopic mucosal imaging of gastrointestinal neoplasia in 2013

The holy grail of gastrointestinal endoscopy consists of the detection, in vivo characterization, and endoscopic removal of early or premalignant mucosal lesions. While our ability to achieve this goal has improved substantially since the development of the modern video-endoscope, inadequate visual inspection, errors of interpretation, and lesion subtlety all contribute to the continued suboptimal detection and assessment of early neoplasia. A myriad of new technologies has thus emerged that may help resolve these shortcomings; high magnification endoscopes, as well as the techniques of dye-based and virtual chromoendoscopy, are now widely available, while confocal laser endomicroscopy and endocystoscopy, optical coherence tomography, and autofluorescence imaging are generally applicable only in a research setting. Such technologies can be broadly categorized according to whether they potentially afford endoscopists improved detection, or real-time characterization, of mucosal lesions. Enhanced detection of otherwise "invisible" lesions, such as a flat area of intramucosal adenocarcinoma within Barrett's esophagus, carries the potential of an endoscopic cure prior to the development into a more advanced or metastatic disease. The ability to characterize a lesion to achieve an in vivo diagnosis, such as a colonic polyp, potentially affords endoscopists the ability to decide which lesions require removal and which can be safely left behind or discarded without histological assessment. Furthermore targeted biopsies, such as in the surveillance of chronic colitis, may prove to be more accurate and efficacious than the current protocol of random biopsies. An important caveat in the discussion of developing technologies in early cancer detection is the fundamental importance of a health-care system that promotes screening programs to recruit at-risk individuals. The ideal tool to optimize the use of endoscopy in population screening would be a panel of reliable biomarkers (blood, stool, or urine) that could effectively select a high-risk group, thus reducing the indiscriminate use of an expensive technology. The following review summarizes the current endoscopic imaging techniques available, and in development, for the early identification of gastrointestinal neoplasia.

Ancillary imaging techniques and adenoma detection

Advancements in image technology have allowed recognition of mucosal architecture in more detail and may improve adenoma detection. This review provides a technical overview on individual imaging technologies and their effect on detection of adenomas. Only high-definition endoscopy has been shown to improve detection of small adenomas. None of the digital chromoendoscopy technologies improves adenoma detection. Limited studies on autoimmunfluorescence imaging in conjunction with high-definition endoscopy may improve detection of small adenomas.

Can colonoscopy remain cost-effective for colorectal cancer screening? The impact of practice patterns and the Will Rogers phenomenon on costs

OBJECTIVES

The adenoma detection rate (ADR) in screening colonoscopy is higher than original cost-effectiveness models estimated. Future colorectal cancer (CRC) risk is decreased once the ADR is 20%, but it is unclear how much additional protection is provided with higher ADRs. We modeled the impact of a high ADR on future CRC risk and surveillance colonoscopy burden.

METHODS

We created three hypothetical scenarios for 100,000 average-risk individuals undergoing screening colonoscopy at age 50: (i) 20% ADR with 30% future CRC risk reduction; (ii) 50% ADR with 30% future CRC risk reduction; and (iii) 50% ADR with 50% future CRC risk reduction. After colonoscopy, patients could have high-risk or low-risk adenomas, or no adenomas.

RESULTS

When the ADR increases from 20% to 50% but no additional CRC cases are prevented, future CRC risk for each group is still reduced, because lower-risk patients migrate into apparently higher-risk groups (the Will Rogers phenomenon). Future risk is further reduced if a 50% ADR leads to greater protection from CRC. However, despite the reductions in group-specific and overall future CRC risk, 34,635 additional surveillance colonoscopies are performed before the cohort is 60 years old when the ADR is 50% compared with 20%.

CONCLUSIONS

If current surveillance practices continue along with high ADRs, screening colonoscopy may not remain cost-effective.

Advanced colorectal polyp detection techniques

A long-term follow-up of the landmark National Polyp Study recently showed that colonoscopy was associated with critical clinical benefit, including reduced overall death rate, colorectal cancer (CRC) death rate, and CRC incidence Zauber et al. (N Engl J Med 366(8):687-96, 2012). This and other recent studies emphasize the need for high-quality colonoscopy to realize maximal benefit. Adenoma detection has emerged as an important predictor of quality colonoscopy. Studies from Europe have shown that individuals whose colonoscopy was performed by a physician with high adenoma detection have a much lower likelihood of interval CRC. Studies now suggest that it is possible to train endoscopists to improve their adenoma detection rate. The specific methods associated with higher quality colonoscopy include careful inspection behind folds, washing the colon surface, adequate insufflation, and recognition of subtle flat polyps. Use of high-definition white light colonoscopy, chromoendoscopy, and cap-fitted colonoscopy has also been studied as potential methods for increasing adenoma detection. We will review these methods and techniques in this article.

Nurse observation during colonoscopy increases polyp detection: a randomized prospective study

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether a second observer during colonoscopy increases adenoma detection.

METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing screening colonoscopy were prospectively randomized to routine colonoscopy or physician and nurse observation during withdrawal.

RESULTS

Of 502 patients, 249 were randomized to routine colonoscopy, and 253 to physician plus nurse observation during withdrawal. A total of 592 polyps were detected, 40 identified by the endoscopy nurse only. With nurse observation, 1.32 polyps and 0.82 adenomas were found per colonoscopy, vs. 1.03 polyps and 0.64 adenomas in the routine group, demonstrating a 1.29-fold and a 1.28-fold increase in the average number of polyps and of adenomas detected, respectively. The overall adenoma detection rate (ADR) was 44.1%, with trends toward increased ADR and all-polyp detection rate with nurse observation.

CONCLUSIONS

Nurse observation during colonoscopy resulted in an increase in the number of polyps and adenomas found per colonoscopy, along with a trend toward improved overall ADR and all-polyp detection rate.

Endoscopic techniques for improving colorectal adenoma detection: Recent progress

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common malignant neoplasms worldwide and develops mostly from precancerous lesions such as colorectal adenomas. Therefore, early detection and resection of colorectal adenomas is key to preventing CRC. At present, colonoscopy is acknowledged as the gold standard for the diagnosis and treatment of colorectal lesions; however, conventional colonoscopy is still associated with a certain rate of missed lesions. It is reported that the missed detection rate is 6% when adenomas are more than 1 cm, 13% for adenomas 6-9 mm, and 27% for adenomas less than 5 mm. The missed detection rate for right colonic adenomas is higher than that for left colonic adenomas. The missed diagnosis of colorectal adenomas or malignant tumors invariably increases surgical rate and mortality. Currently, great efforts have been made to improve the detection rate of colorectal adenomas. This paper will briefly review recent advances in endoscopic techniques for improving the detection rate of colorectal adenomas.

High-definition colonoscopy with i-Scan: Better diagnosis for small polyps and flat adenomas

AIM: To investigate if high-definition (HD) colonoscope with i-Scan gave a higher detection rate of mucosal lesions vs standard white-light instruments.

METHODS: Data were collected from the computerized database of the endoscopy unit of our tertiary referral center. We retrospectively analyzed 1101 consecutive colonoscopies that were performed over 1 year with standard white-light (n = 849) or HD+ with i-Scan (n = 252) instruments by four endoscopists, in an outpatient setting. Colonoscopy records included patients’ main details and family history for colorectal cancer, indication for colonoscopy (screening, diagnostic or surveillance), type of instrument used (standard white-light or HD+ plus i-Scan), name of endoscopist and bowel preparation. Records for each procedure included whether the cecum was reached or not and the reason for failure, complications during or immediately after the procedure, and number, size, location and characteristics of the lesions. Polyps or protruding lesions were defined as sessile or pedunculated, and nonprotruding lesions were defined according to Paris classification. For each lesion, histological diagnosis was recorded.

RESULTS: Eight hundred and forty-nine colonoscopies were carried with the standard white-light video colonoscope and 252 with the HD+ plus i-Scan video colonoscope. The four endoscopists did 264, 300, 276 and 261 procedures, respectively; 21.6%, 24.0%, 21.7% and 24.1% of them with the HD+ plus i-Scan technique. There were no significant differences between the four endoscopists in either the number of procedures done or the proportions of each imaging technique used. Both techniques detected one or more mucosal lesions in 522/1101 procedures (47.4%). The overall number of lesions recognized was 1266; 645 in the right colon and 621 in the left. A significantly higher number of colonoscopies recognized lesions in the HD+ plus i-Scan mode (171/252 = 67.9%) than with the standard white-light technique (408/849 = 48.1%) (P < 0.0001). HD+ with i-Scan colonoscopies identified more lesions than standard white-light imaging (459/252 and 807/849, P < 0.0001), in the right or left colon (mean ± SD, 1.62 ± 1.36 vs 1.33 ± 0.73, P < 0.003 and 1.55 ± 0.98 vs 1.17 ± 0.93, P = 0.033), more lesions < 10 mm (P < 0.0001) or nonprotruding (P < 0.022), and flat polyps (P = 0.04). The cumulative mean number of lesions per procedure detected by the four endoscopists was significantly higher with HD+ with i-Scan than with standard white-light imaging (1.82 ± 2.89 vs 0.95 ± 1.35, P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION: HD imaging with i-Scan during the withdrawal phase of colonoscopy significantly increased the detection of colonic mucosal lesions, particularly small and nonprotruding polyps.

Prevalence of missed adenomas in patients with inadequate bowel preparation on screening colonoscopy

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of missed polyps in patients with inadequate bowel preparation on screening colonoscopy is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the prevalence of missed adenomas in average-risk patients presenting for screening colonoscopy who are found to have inadequate bowel preparation.

DESIGN

Retrospective chart review. Endoscopy and pathology reports were examined to determine the characteristics of polyps. Data from repeat colonoscopies were collected through 2010.

SETTING

Outpatient endoscopy center at an academic medical center.

PATIENTS

This study involved patients who underwent outpatient average-risk screening colonoscopy between 2004 and 2009 documented to have inadequate bowel preparation and who had colonoscopy to the cecum.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Initial adenoma detection rate and adenoma detection rate on follow-up examination.

RESULTS

Inadequate bowel preparation was reported on 373 patients, with an initial adenoma detection rate of 25.7%. Of 133 patients who underwent repeat colonoscopy, 33.8% had at least 1 adenoma detected, and 18.0% had high-risk states detected (≥ 3 adenomas, 1 adenoma ≥ 1 cm, or any adenoma with villous features or high-grade dysplasia). Per-adenoma miss rate was 47.9%. Among patients with at least 1 adenoma on repeat colonoscopy, 31.1% had no polyps on initial colonoscopy; mean time between colonoscopies was 340 days. Among patients with high-risk states, 25.0% had no polyps seen on initial colonoscopy; mean time between colonoscopies was 271 days.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective design.

CONCLUSION

Adenomas and high-risk lesions were frequently detected on repeat colonoscopy in patients with inadequate bowel preparation on initial screening colonoscopy, suggesting that these lesions were likely missed on initial colonoscopy.

The relationship between distal and proximal colonic neoplasia: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the association between proximal colonic neoplasia and distal lesions as a function of the lesion type. The extent to which health, demographic, and study characteristics moderate this association was also examined.

DATA SOURCES

Google Scholar, Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Studies allowing the calculation of OR of proximal neoplasia (PN) and proximal advanced neoplasia (PAN) for distal hyperplastic polyps (HP), nonadvanced adenomas (NAA), adenomas (AD), and advanced neoplasia (AN); also, studies for which the proportions of subjects with isolated (i.e., not accompanied by distal lesions) PN (IPN) and PAN (IPAN) over the total number of subjects with PN or PAN could be calculated.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS

Thirty-two studies were included for calculating OR between proximal neoplasia and distal lesions and 40 studies for proportions of IPN and IPAN. Subgroup analyses were conducted for presence of symptoms, prevalence of PN and PAN, age, proportion of males, geographic region, study design, and demarcation point.

RESULTS

The association between distal lesions and proximal neoplasia increased with the severity of the distal lesions. Odds of PN were higher in subjects with HP compared to subjects with a normal distal colon. Odds of PN and PAN were higher in subjects with NAA, AD, and AN than in subjects with a normal distal colon. PAN were more strongly associated with distal lesions in asymptomatic populations, in young populations, and in populations with a low prevalence of PAN. In approximately 60% of the subjects with PN and PAN, these neoplasia were isolated.

LIMITATIONS

The present results may be affected by publication bias and dichotomization in the subgroup analyses. Limitations related to the individual studies include self-selection, lesion misclassification and misses, and technological advances leading to changes in the detection of lesions during the time span of the included studies.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS

All types of distal lesions are predictive of PN. All types of distal neoplasia are predictive of PAN. The association between distal lesions and proximal neoplasia increases with the severity of the distal lesion. The association between distal lesions and proximal advanced neoplasia is stronger in low-risk groups as compared to high-risk groups.

High colonoscopic prevalence of proximal colon serrated polyps in average-risk men and women

BACKGROUND

Proximal colon serrated polyps likely contribute to the decreased protection of colonoscopy against right-sided colorectal cancer.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the prevalence and extrapolated detection rate of proximal serrated polyps at screening colonoscopy.

DESIGN

Retrospective study.

PATIENTS

The study involved secondary analyses that used two databases. The first includes screening colonoscopies performed by 15 attending gastroenterologists at two academic endoscopy units between 2000 and 2009. The second includes average-risk patients who had previously participated in a randomized trial comparing high-definition chromocolonoscopy and white-light colonoscopy.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Prevalence of proximal serrated polyps found by the highest-level detectors and proximal serrated polyp detection rates corresponding to adenoma detection rates of 25% in men and 15% in women, respectively.

RESULTS

We analyzed 6681 procedures from the first database. Mean (± standard deviation) detection rates for adenomas and proximal serrated polyps were 38% ± 7.8% (range 17%-47%) and 13% ± 4.8% (1%-18%), respectively. There was a significant correlation between detection rates for adenomas and proximal serrated polyps for men (R = 0.71; P = .003) and women (R = 0.73; P = .002). Adenoma detection rates of 25% for men and 15% for women both corresponded to a detection rate of 4.5% for proximal serrated polyps. The prevalence of proximal serrated polyps found by the highest-level detector was 18%. The corresponding rate derived from the high-definition screening colonoscopy database was 20%.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective study.

CONCLUSION

The prevalence of proximal colon serrated polyps in average-risk patients undergoing screening colonoscopy is higher than previously reported. An extrapolated proximal serrated polyp detection rate of 5% is suggested for average-risk men and women.

Improving protection against proximal colon cancer by colonoscopy

Colonoscopy protection against proximal cancer can be achieved, but the level of protection has thus far been less than left colon protection. Improved proximal protection begins with effective right colon bowel preparation, best achieved by split dosing the preparation regimen. Cecal intubation in screening examinations should exceed 95%, and must be documented by photography. Examiners must be proficient in detection of subtle right colon lesions, including serrated lesions as well as flat and depressed adenomas. Effective examination should be demonstrated by meeting recommended targets for adenoma detection.

A morphologic analysis of sessile serrated polyps observed during routine colonoscopy (with video)

BACKGROUND

Proximal colorectal cancer may arise from sessile serrated polyps (SSPs), which are often inconspicuous during colonoscopy. The gross morphologic characteristics of SSPs have not been systematically described, and this omission may contribute to colonoscopists overlooking them.

OBJECTIVES

To analyze the gross morphologic characteristics of SSPs detected during routine colonoscopy.

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of high-resolution endoscopic video clips depicting SSPs in situ.

SETTING

Outpatient gastroenterology practice.

PATIENTS

A total of 124 subjects undergoing surveillance or screening colonoscopy after split-dose bowel preparation.

INTERVENTIONS

Analysis of 158 SSPs performed by using validated descriptors.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

The prevalence of morphologic characteristics related to polyp shape, color, and texture.

RESULTS

A total of 158 SSPs were studied. For 7 visual descriptors, a κ coefficient of ≥ 0.7 was achieved, indicating good to excellent intraobserver agreement. The most prevalent visual descriptors were the presence of a mucous cap (63.9%), rim of debris or bubbles (51.9%), alteration of the contour of a fold (37.3%), and interruption of the underlying mucosal vascular pattern (32.3%). The most common "sentinel signs" were the presence of a mucous cap and alteration of the contour of a mucosal fold (each 24.6%), rim of debris or bubbles (21.7%), and a dome-shaped protuberance (20.3%). When comparing SSPs with adenomatous polyps, the frequencies of 5 of 7 morphologic characteristics and the distribution of sentinel signs differed (P < .01).

LIMITATIONS

Single-site, retrospective analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

SSPs exhibit distinct, variable morphologic characteristics. Many do not display classic features such as a mucous cap. Enhanced appreciation of these morphologic characteristics may improve SSP detection and thereby colorectal cancer prevention.

Participation by experienced endoscopy nurses increases the detection rate of colon polyps during a screening colonoscopy: a multicenter, prospective, randomized study

BACKGROUND

No reported prospective, randomized study has evaluated the impact of an endoscopy nurse participating as a second observer during colonoscopy.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether the participation of an endoscopy nurse enhanced the polyp detection rate (PDR) and adenoma detection rate (ADR) during screening colonoscopy.

DESIGN

Multicenter, prospective, randomized study.

SETTING

Academic hospitals.

PATIENTS

A total of 844 consecutive patients undergoing screening colonoscopy.

INTERVENTIONS

Single observation by colonoscopist or dual observation by colonoscopist and endoscopy nurse during colonoscope withdrawal.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

PDR and ADR.

RESULTS

No significant difference in patient demographic data, adequacy of bowel preparation, or mean withdrawal time was observed between the 2 groups. In total, 1153 polyps, including 762 adenomas, were detected in 791 patients. Seven nonpolypoid, depressed neoplastic lesions (0-IIc or combined types) were only detected in the dual observation group. A multivariate analysis revealed that experienced (≥ 2 years) endoscopy nurse participation significantly increased the PDR and ADR compared with those in the single observation group by a colonoscopist alone (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.58 [95% CI, 1.07-2.32]; adjusted OR 1.47 [95% CI, 1.01-2.12], respectively). Additionally, the PDR was significantly higher in the dual-observation group with fellows (<500 colonoscopies) and an experienced endoscopy nurse versus that in the single observation group (adjusted OR 2.07 [95% CI, 1.15-3.74]). There was no significant benefit of experienced nurse participation in the subgroup with experienced colonoscopists.

LIMITATIONS

Absence of colonoscopist blinding.

CONCLUSIONS

Experienced endoscopy nurse participation increased the PDR and ADR during screening colonoscopy. However, the benefit of participation by experienced nurses appears to be exclusively with inexperienced colonoscopists.

Role of high definition colonoscopy in colorectal adenomatous polyp detection

AIM: To investigate the rates of polyp detection in a mixed risk population using standard definition (SDC) vs high definition colonoscopes (HDC).

METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort comparative study of 3 colonoscopists who each consecutively performed 150 SDC (307, 200 pixel) and 150 HDC (792, 576 pixels) in a community teaching hospital.

RESULTS: A total of 900 colonoscopies were evaluated (mean age 56, 46.8% men), 450 with each resolution. Polyps of any type were detected in 46.0% of patients using SDC and 43.3% with HDC (P = 0.42). There was no significant difference between the overall number of polyps, HDC (397) and SDC (410), detected among all patients examined, (P = 0.73). One or more adenomatous polyps were detected in 24.2% of patients with HDC and 24.9% of patients with SDC colonoscopy (P = 0.82). There was no significant difference between HDC (M = 0.41) and SDC (M = 0.42) regarding adenomatous polyp (P = 0.88) or advanced adenoma (P = 0.56) detection rate among all patients examined.

CONCLUSION: HDC did not improve yield of adenomatous polyp, advanced adenoma or overall polyp detection in a population of individuals with mixed risk for colorectal cancer.

Colonoscopy: basic principles and novel techniques

Colonoscopy is considered the 'gold standard' for detection and removal of premalignant lesions in the colon. However, studies suggest that colonoscopy is less protective for right-sided than for left-sided colorectal cancer. Optimizing the effectiveness of colonoscopy is a continuous process, and during the past decade several important quality indicators have been defined that can be used to measure the performance of colonoscopy and to identify areas for quality improvement. The quality of bowel preparation can be enhanced by split-dose regimens, which are superior to single-dose regimens. Cecal intubation rates should approximate 95% and can be optimized by good technique. In selected patients, specific devices can be used to facilitate cecal intubation. Adenoma detection rates should be monitored and exceed a minimum of 25% in men and 15% in women. To this aim, optimal withdrawal technique and adequate time for inspection are of utmost importance. Of all advanced imaging techniques, chromoendoscopy is the only technique with proven benefit for adenoma detection. Finally, the technique of polypectomy affects the number of complications as well as the success of completely removing a lesion. In this Review, we provide an overview of both standard and novel colonoscopy techniques and their impact on quality indicators.