Correlation Between Bowel Preparation and the Adenoma Detection Rate in Screening Colonoscopy

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.

Evaluating the Efficacy of Resect-and-Discard and Resect-and-Retrieve Strategies for Diminutive Colonic Polyps

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Diminutive polyps present a unique challenge in colorectal cancer (CRC) prevention strategies. This study aims to assess the characteristics and variables of diminutive polyps in a Romanian cohort, intending to develop a combined resect-and-retrieve or resect-and-discard strategy that reduces the need for an optical diagnosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A prospective cohort study was conducted at two endoscopy centers in Romania from July to December 2021. Adult patients undergoing colonoscopies where polyps were identified and resected were included. Endoscopic procedures employed advanced diagnostic features, including blue-light imaging (BLI) and narrow-band imaging (NBI). Logistic regression analysis was utilized to determine factors impacting the probability of adenomatous polyps with high-grade dysplasia (HGD).

RESULTS

A total of 427 patients were included, with a mean age of 59.42 years (±11.19), predominantly male (60.2%). The most common indication for a colonoscopy was lower gastrointestinal symptoms (42.6%), followed by screening (28.8%). Adequate bowel preparation was achieved in 87.8% of cases. The logistic regression analysis revealed significant predictors of HGD in adenomatous polyps: age (OR = 1.05, 95% CI: 1.01-1.08, p = 0.01) and polyp size (>5 mm vs. ≤5 mm, OR = 4.4, 95% CI: 1.94-10.06, p < 0.001). Polyps classified as Paris IIa, Ip, and Isp were significantly more likely to harbor HGD compared to the reference group (Is), with odds ratios of 6.05, 3.68, and 2.7, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The study elucidates significant associations between the presence of HGD in adenomatous polyps and factors such as age, polyp size, and Paris classification. These findings support the feasibility of a tailored approach in the resect-and-discard and resect-and-retrieve strategies for diminutive polyps, potentially optimizing CRC prevention and intervention practices. Further research is warranted to validate these strategies in broader clinical settings.

Split doses versus whole dose bowel preparation using polyethylene glycol for colonoscopy: A multicentric prospective Lebanese randomized trial between 2021 and 2023

Background and Aims

Bowel preparation is considered as major obstacle before colonoscopy, and it is often reported as the most feared part of the procedure. The aim of this study is to determine the difference in efficacy between a split dose of PEG and the previous day regimen in cleaning the colon, using Boston bowel preparation scale. In addition, also to evaluate patient satisfaction regarding the modality of preparation.

Methods

The study included 200 hospitalized patients undergoing colonoscopy at Beirut hospitals between 2021 and 2023. One of the two regimens will be prescribed randomly to the patients before colonoscopy: 98 (49%) in Group A (patients treated with PEG preparation as a split dose for 2 days), and 102 (51%) in Group B (patients taking PEG preparation as a whole dose). Data was analyzed using SPSS version 25.

Results

Patients were distributed between 105 (52.5%) males and 95 (47.5%) females. The top two indications for colonoscopy were bleeding (34%), change in bowel habits (constipation/diarrhea) (32%). Patients experienced adverse events noting cramps (48.5%), stomach ache (32%), headache (31%), vomiting (53%), nausea (53%), sleep disturbance (27%), bloating (26.5%), and malaise (26%). A statistically significant difference (p = 0.040) was detected in sleep disturbance: 20.4% of patients in group A and 33.3% of patients in group B. The average satisfaction score was 3.02 ± 1.03 over 4 (Group A) and 3.04 ± 0.99 over 4 (Group B) (p = 0.896). The average BBPS was 8.07 ± 1.14 (Group A) and 8.28 ± 1.0 (Group B) (p = 0.162).

Conclusion

The two administrations were almost similar in term of satisfaction and BBPS. As multiple factors like age, sexe, comorbidities may contribute in altering how much a given drug is safe and efficace, more research is needed to choose the best 3regimen for each patient.

Correlation between prescribing doctor attributes and intestinal cleanliness in colonoscopy: a study of 22522 patients

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to analyze the correlation between different attributes of doctors who prescribe colonoscopies and the cleanliness of the intestine to guide the development of colonoscopy application protocols.

METHODS

Data on colonoscopy cases conducted in the gastroenterology department of Hangzhou First People's Hospital between April 2018 and March 2021 were collected. The gender, age, professional attributes of the prescribing doctors, and Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) score were recorded. In addition, the correlation between the prescribing doctors' characteristics and the intestine's cleanliness was analyzed.

RESULTS

The study included 22,522 patients with a mean BBPS score of 6.83 ± 1.94. There were 16,459 male and 6,063 female doctors with similar BBPS scores (p = 0.212). The study found no significant difference in BBPS scores between 19,338 internist and 3,184 non-internist (p = 0.154). However, BBPS scores differed significantly between 18,168 gastroenterologists and 4,354 non-gastroenterologists (p = 0.016) and between 19,990 intestinal-related specialties(gastroenterology and gastrointestinal surgery) and 2,532 non-intestinal-related specialties (p = 0.000). In addition, BBPS scores were significantly different between 18,126 prescribing endoscopiests and 4,396 non-endoscopiests (p = 0.014). However, there was no significant difference in BBPS scores among doctors of different ages (p = 0.190). The study found significant differences in BBPS scores between male and female patients and those under or over 40 years (p = 0.000).

CONCLUSION

To improve colonoscopy preparation quality, priority should be given to doctors in gastroenterology, intestinal-related specialties, and endoscopiests. Their expertise may result in better education and improved bowel cleanliness.

Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in the Association Between Time of Day and Colonoscopy Quality

IMPORTANCE

Time of day was associated with a decline in adenoma detection during colonoscopy. Artificial intelligence (AI) systems are effective in improving the adenoma detection rate (ADR), but the performance of AI during different times of the day remains unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To validate whether the assistance of an AI system could overcome the time-related decline in ADR during colonoscopy.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cohort study is a secondary analysis of 2 prospective randomized controlled trials (RCT) from Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University. Consecutive patients undergoing colonoscopy were randomly assigned to either the AI-assisted group or unassisted group from June 18, 2019, to September 6, 2019, and July 1, 2020, to October 15, 2020. The ADR of early and late colonoscopy sessions per half day were compared before and after the intervention of the AI system. Data were analyzed from March to June 2022.

EXPOSURE

Conventional colonoscopy or AI-assisted colonoscopy.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Adenoma detection rate.

RESULTS

A total of 1780 patients (mean [SD] age, 48.61 [13.35] years, 837 [47.02%] women) were enrolled. A total of 1041 procedures (58.48%) were performed in early sessions, with 357 randomized into the unassisted group (34.29%) and 684 into the AI group (65.71%). A total of 739 procedures (41.52%) were performed in late sessions, with 263 randomized into the unassisted group (35.59%) and 476 into the AI group (64.41%). In the unassisted group, the ADR in early sessions was significantly higher compared with that of late sessions (13.73% vs 5.70%; P = .005; OR, 2.42; 95% CI, 1.31-4.47). After the intervention of the AI system, as expected, no statistically significant difference was found (22.95% vs 22.06%, P = .78; OR, 0.96; 95% CI; 0.71-1.29). Furthermore, the AI systems showed better assistance ability on ADR in late sessions compared with early sessions (odds ratio, 3.81; 95% CI, 2.10-6.91 vs 1.60; 95% CI, 1.10-2.34).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this cohort study, AI systems showed higher assistance ability in late sessions per half day, which suggests the potential to maintain high quality and homogeneity of colonoscopies and further improve endoscopist performance in large screening programs and centers with high workloads.

Colonic bowel prep and body mass index: does one size fit all? A multi-centre review

PURPOSE

To investigate whether body mass index (BMI) is a risk factor for inadequate bowel preparation in elective colonoscopy. The null hypothesis being BMI does not affect bowel preparation adequacy.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of all participants with complete medical records who had an elective colonoscopy was conducted across three tertiary teaching hospitals in Perth, Western Australia, from January 2016 to July 2019. Participants were separated into BMI subgroups of healthy weight, overweight and obese (≥ 30 kg/m²). Data were extracted from medical records, colonoscopy and histopathology reports and were analysed using SPSS v.27.

RESULTS

Of the 1082 cases analysed, 52.7% (n = 570) were male. The median age was 61 (range 18-85 years). The median BMI was 27.8 (range 20-52). The median procedure time is 28 (range 2-69 min). Routine follow-up was the clinical indication for 65% of colonoscopy procedures undertaken during the study period. Multivariate logistic regression, controlled for statistically insignificant confounders of age, type of bowel preparation agent, grade of the endoscopist, the indication for procedure and year of procedure, showed that being obese was significantly and independently associated with inadequate bowel preparation (OR 2.0, 95% CI (1.4-2.9) p < 0.001). Another significant factor was male (OR 1.6, 95% CI (1.2-2.1) p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

This study shows that obese patients are more likely to have inadequate bowel preparation at colonoscopy. Given the increased complication rates and health care costs associated with repeating colonoscopies and the increased risk of colorectal cancer in obese patients, it may be worth tailoring a more extensive bowel preparation regimen to ensure adequate visualisation of the colonic mucosa on the first attempt.

Supplementary education can improve the rate of adequate bowel preparation in outpatients: A systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials

Background

Colonoscopy is widely used for the screening, diagnosis and treatment of intestinal diseases. Adequate bowel preparation is a prerequisite for high-quality colonoscopy. However, the rate of adequate bowel preparation in outpatients is low. Several studies on supplementary education methods have been conducted to improve the rate of adequate bowel preparation in outpatients. However, the controversial results presented encourage us to perform this meta-analysis.

Method

According to the PRISMA statement (2020), the meta-analysis was registered on PROSPERO. We searched all studies up to August 28, 2021, in the three major electronic databases of PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane Library. The primary outcome was adequate bowel preparation rate, and the secondary outcomes included bowel preparation quality score, polyp detection rate, adenoma detection rate, cecal intubation time, withdrawal time, nonattendance rate and willingness to repeat rate. If there was obvious heterogeneity, the funnel plot combined with Egger’s test, meta-regression analysis, sensitivity analysis and subgroup analysis were used to detect the source of heterogeneity. RevMan 5.3 and Stata 17.0 software were used for statistical analysis.

Results

A total of 2061 records were retrieved, and 21 full texts were ultimately included in the analysis. Our meta-analysis shows that supplementary education can increase the rate of adequate bowel preparation for outpatients (79.9% vs 72.9%, RR = 1.14, 95% CI: 1.08–1.20, I² = 87%, p<0.00001). Supplementary education shortened the withdrawal time (MD: -0.80, 95% CI: -1.54 to -0.05, p = 0.04) of outpatients, increased the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (MD: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.36 to 0.44, p<0.00001), reduced the Ottawa Bowel Preparation Scale (MD: -1.26, 95% CI: -1.66 to -0.86, p<0.00001) and increased the willingness to repeat (91.9% vs 81.4%, RR:1.14, 95% CI: 1.04 to 1.25, p = 0.004).

Conclusion

Supplementary education for outpatients based on the standard of care can significantly improve the quality of bowel preparation.

Reinforced education by short message service improves the quality of bowel preparation for colonoscopy

PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate the effect of reinforced education (RE) by short message service (SMS) on the bowel preparation quality of patients undergoing colonoscopy.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), conducted on the effect of RE by SMS on bowel preparation for colonoscopy from inception to November 1, 2021, were queried from databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and EMBASE. After extracting the data, meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager Software version 5.3.

RESULTS

A total of seven RCTs with 5889 patients were subjected to meta-analysis. The rate of adequate bowel preparation in the SMS group (81.7%) was significantly higher than that in the control group (75.7%) (RR: 1.10, 95% CI: 1.03-1.17, p < 0.01). Four studies suggested that RE by SMS significantly reduced the non-attendance rate of patients for scheduled colonoscopy (RR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.56-0.99, p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

RE by SMS for patients undergoing colonoscopy can significantly improve the quality of bowel preparation and decrease the non-attendance rate of patients for scheduled colonoscopy.

Adenoma Detection Rate in Colonoscopic Screening with Ketamine-based Sedation: A Prospective Observational Study

Objective:

This study aimed to determine the relationship between one of the most commonly used anesthesia techniques, ketaminebased sedation, on the value of adenoma detection rate (ADR) during colonoscopy screening.

Methods:

This prospective, observational study included 140 patients, who underwent a standard colonoscopy preparation before the procedure. Sedation regimens included ketamine at 0.5 mg/kg and propofol at 0.5 mg/kg. Additional doses of propofol were administered at 0.5 mg/kg to maintain the Ramsey Sedation scale. Baseline characteristics, ADR, bowel preparation quality according to the Chicago bowel preparation (CHBP) scale, cecal intubation, colonoscopy removal, and complications were analyzed.

Results:

The mean age of patients was 55.76 years; 40 (28.6%) were males and 100 (71.4%) were females. The ADR was 43.57%, wherein 15.71% in males and 27.86% in females. There were 43.6% adenomas, 17.9% biopsies, and 22.9% polypectomies. The largest location of adenomas/polyps were in the rectum and sigmoid and ascending colon (p=0.11), a biopsy of the sigmoid colon and ileum (p<0.05), polypectomy of the rectum and sigmoid and ascending colon (p<0.05). The cecal intubation was 93.6% with a withdrawal time that is >6 min in most patients (80%) (p<0.05). The CHBP scale showed good bowel preparation (p<0.05) without complications.

Conclusions:

Ketamine-based sedation is in good overall correlation with ADR. Therefore, the sedation technique should be included for ADR assessment in the future.

When should we perform colonoscopy to increase the adenoma detection rate?

The rate of adenoma detection is the most reliable quality indicator of colonoscopy. Studies have reported that colonoscopy performed in morning has a higher adenoma detection rate (ADR) than that performed in the afternoon. These studies have explained that several physician-related factors such as undergoing an emergency procedure the night before colonoscopy, accumulated workload, and increased fatigue level in the afternoon might have led to such finding. However, several opposing articles have indicated that the time of day and ADR is not quite related. Complex confounding factors can impact study results. Colonoscopy withdrawal time and bowel preparation quality are key factors. However, queue list numbers, participation of academic fellows, nurses' assistance, and the number of colonoscopies allocated per hour are also notable factors. Recently, an attempt has been made to homogenize the ADR in the morning and afternoon through artificial intelligence-assisted colonoscopy. This review article introduces the history of this long-debated topic, discusses points to consider in real-world practice, and suggests new ideas for planning future research. By understanding this issue, the rate of adenoma detection during colonoscopy is expected to be improved further.

The unmet needs for identifying the ideal bowel preparation

Colonoscopy, since it was first employed over 60 years ago, is now the gold standard method for visualizing the mucosa of the colon, but should be of good quality. Many factors affect quality, including the type of health service organization, type of facility, staff, equipment, patient characteristics, and bowel preparation (BP). The adequacy of bowel cleansing is critical, but, unfortunately, may be inadequate in up to one‐third of procedures. The current article will present and discuss the main BPs and their drawbacks, which include patient‐dependent and procedure‐dependent factors. Cleansing quality depends on the ease/complexity of solution preparation, volume, taste, and timing of consumption. Consequently, important positive factors include simple instructions, easy preparation of the solution, low volume, pleasant taste, short drinking time (e.g. <30 min), and splitting the dose between the evening before and the morning of the colonoscopy (or even better, only one dose in the early morning to avoid night‐time problems), and short onset of action. The BP solution must also be safe with negligible side effects. Furthermore, a positive experience supports patient willingness to repeat the procedure.

Multimedia based education on bowel preparation improves adenoma detection rate: Systematic review & meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cause of cancer worldwide. Studies have shown a strong association between screening colonoscopy and a reduced risk of death from colorectal cancers. The incidence of poor bowel preparation has been reported in up to 25% cases. We conducted a systematic review and comprehensive meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of patient education using multimedia platforms on adenoma detection rate and adequacy of bowel preparation.

METHODS

Multiple databases were searched through May 2020 for studies that reported the efficacy of multimedia education (smartphone app and online audio-visual aids) in improving quality of bowel preparation and its effect on adenoma detection rate (ADR). Meta-analysis was performed to determine whether multimedia based patient education (MM) helps improve ADR and bowel preparation quality as compared to controls (CT).

RESULTS

We included 13 randomized controlled trials with a total of 3754 patients. Eight studies reported outcomes on ADR and 12 reported on adequacy of bowel preparation. Overall ADR was higher in patients receiving multimedia based education as compared to CT (risk ratio (RR) 1.25, confidence interval (CI) 1.01-1.56, P = 0.04). A higher proportion of patients receiving multimedia based education achieved adequate bowel preparation (RR 1.2, CI 1.1-1.3, P = 0.001). In patients with mean age over 50 years, ADR was better in MM cohort as compared to controls (RR 1.3, CI 1.1-1.6, P = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Pre-colonoscopy patient education using multimedia based platforms seems to improve ADR and the adequacy of bowel preparation.

Role of Bowel Preparation in Adenoma Detection Rate and Follow-up Recommendations in African American Dominant Patient Population

Introduction: Bowel preparation quality in colonoscopy is one of the most essential components of quality assessment. According to the latest guidelines, inadequate bowel preparation warrants repeat colonoscopy in less than a year. Our aim was to investigate the role of bowel preparation in adenoma detection rate (ADR), its relationship with patients' demographics, and compliance with subsequent surveillance recommendations with guidelines.

Methods: This is a retrospective chart review study. Bowel preparation quality was divided into three categories: high, intermediate, and low. ADR and polyp detection rates (PDR) were calculated as the number of patients with adenoma or polyp divided by the total number of patients.

Results: Among 1,062 patients (934 African American and 128 non-African American) 81%, 11%, and 8% had high, intermediate, and low-quality bowel preparations, respectively. Race, gender, age, type of endoscopist, and body mass index did not play any role in bowel preparation quality. ADR and PDR were significantly higher in African Americans as compared to non-African Americans. ADR was significantly lower in the low-quality as compared to the high- and intermediate-quality bowel preparations (OR=2.13; p=0.0032). Bowel preparation quality was not correlated with subsequent follow-up recommendations. Academic gastroenterologists and surgeons had the highest and lowest compliance with surveillance guidelines, respectively.

Conclusions: Racial and gender disparity appears to have no meaningful effect on the quality of bowel preparation. Only two categories (adequate [high/intermediate] or inadequate [low-quality]) may be used for follow-up recommendations. Non-compliance with surveillance guidelines is concerning and may inadvertently increase the interval risk of colorectal cancer.

Quality of Preoperative Colonoscopy Affects Missed Postoperative Adenoma Detection in Colorectal Cancer Patients

BACKGROUND

Despite thorough preoperative screening, 19-30% of synchronous polyps or adenomas are detected after colon cancer surgery. Remnant synchronous lesions require additional colonoscopy procedures or surgery.

AIM

To investigate factors of preoperative colonoscopy potentially affecting the detection of missed lesions in patients subjected to colorectal cancer surgery.

METHODS

Of 1147 colorectal cancer patients subjected to curative open or laparoscopic colectomy and colonoscopy at the Chungnam National University Hospital from January 2012 to December 2016, 518 patients underwent pre- and postoperative colonoscopy. The index colonoscopy was defined as the last preoperative endoscopy performed. We analyzed pre- and postoperative medical charts for colonoscopy and pathological data. The effects of patient, procedure, and tumor factors on the postoperative adenoma detection rate, advanced adenoma detection rate, and adenoma miss rate (AMR) were analyzed.

RESULTS

The overall AMR was 25.7% (95% confidence interval, 22.2-29.8%). Comparing optimal and non-optimal bowel preparation groups, the latter had greater postoperative polyp missed rate (PMR), AMR (p < 0.01), and AAMR (p = 0.272). The optimal preparation group allowed identification of more synchronous adenomas than in the fair (OR 5.72) and poor (OR 11.39) preparation groups. On univariate analysis, patient age and left-sided colectomy (p < 0.01) influenced AMR. Multivariate analysis showed that age, preoperative bowel preparation, and left colon resection influenced postoperative AMR.

CONCLUSION

A better quality of index colonoscopy had a positive effect on lowering the detection rate of postoperative adenoma. Older age and suboptimal bowel preparation at the index colonoscopy and left-sided colectomy had negative effects on lowering the postoperative AMR.

Bowel Preparation for Colonoscopy in 2020: A Look at the Past, Present, and Future

PURPOSE OF THIS REVIEW

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer in the USA. Colonoscopy is considered the gold standard for colorectal cancer screening and can offer both diagnosis and therapy. The bowel preparation remains a significant barrier for patients who need to undergo colonoscopy and is often cited as the most dreaded aspect of the colonoscopy process. Inadequate bowel preparations still occur in 10-25% of colonoscopies, and this in turn can lead to increased procedural times, lower cecal intubation rates, and shorter interval between colonoscopies. From a quality standpoint, it is imperative that we do what we can to decrease the rate of inadequate bowel preparations. This review will focus on recent data regarding bowel preparation and offers a glimpse into what may be coming in the future.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent advances in the field have been made to improve tolerability of bowel preparations and allow for more adequate colonoscopies. Newer, lower volume, flavored preparations, the use of adjuncts, and using split-dose preparations all can help with tolerability, compliance, and, in turn, preparation quality. Edible bowel preparations may become available in the near future. Early data on the use of artificial intelligence for assessment of preparation quality has been promising. Additionally, utilization of smartphone technology for education prior to the bowel preparation has also been shown to improve the adequacy of bowel preparations.

CONCLUSIONS

Ongoing efforts to improve the tolerability and palatability of colonoscopy bowel preparations are important from a quality improvement standpoint to ensure the adequacy of colonoscopy. Incorporating patient-specific factors and comorbidities is also an essential aspect of improving the quality of bowel preparation. Leveraging technology to better communicate with and educate patients on the bowel preparation process is likely to play a larger role in the coming years.

Difference in Physician- and Patient-Dependent Factors Contributing to Adenoma Detection Rate and Serrated Polyp Detection Rate

BACKGROUND

Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is correlated with the risk of interval colorectal cancer and is considered as a quality benchmark for colonoscopy. Serrated polyp detection rate (SPDR) might be a more stringent indicator of quality in polyp detection.

AIMS

To evaluate in a 2-year monocentric observational study patient-dependent and endoscopist-dependent factors influencing ADR and SPDR in daily practice.

METHODS

We determined ADR and SPDR. We collected patient-dependent factors and endoscopist-dependent factors. Links between these data and detection rates were assessed by uni- and multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 11682 colonoscopies were performed (female: 54.3%; male: 45.7%; median age 58) by 30 endoscopists (female: 9; male: 21). ADR and SPDR were 29.2% and 8%, respectively. In multivariate analysis, ADR was associated with patient-dependent factors: age (OR 1.044, CI 95% 1.040-1.048), male gender (OR 1.7, CI 95% 1.56-1.85), personal history of polyp/cancer (OR 1.53, CI 95% 1.3-1.9), and positive fecal immunochemical test (OR 2.47, CI 95% 2.0-3.1). In multivariate analysis, SPDR was associated with withdrawal time (OR 1.25, CI 95% 1.17-1.32), low volume activity (OR 1.3, CI 95% 1.1-1.52), and personal history of polyp/cancer (OR 1.61, CI 95% 1.15-2.25).

CONCLUSION

In this large series of routine colonoscopies, we found that ADR was mainly driven by patient-dependent conditions, i.e., age, male gender, colonoscopy indication for positive FIT, and a personal history of polyp or cancer. In contrast, SPDR was mainly related to endoscopist-dependent factor, i.e., withdrawal time and low volume activity.

Efficacy of 1.2 L polyethylene glycol plus ascorbic acid for bowel preparations

BACKGROUND

A low-volume polyethylene glycol (PEG) solution that combines ascorbic acid with PEG-based electrolyte solution (PEG-ASC) is gaining mainstream acceptance for bowel preparation due to reduced volume and improved taste. Although several reports showed that bowel preparation with PEG-ASC volume lower than 2.0 L with laxative agents could be an alternative to traditional preparation regimen, the cleansing protocols have not been fully investigated.

AIM

To evaluate the cleansing efficacy of 1.2 L PEG-ASC solution comparing with 2.0 L PEG electrolyte (PEG-ELS) for bowel preparations.

METHODS

A randomized, single-blinded, open-label, single-center, non-inferiority study was conducted. In total, 312 Japanese adult patients (aged > 18 years) who underwent colonoscopy were enrolled. Patients were randomly allocated to bowel lavage with either 1.2 L of PEG-ASC solution with at least 0.6 L of an additional clear fluid (1.2 L PEG-ASC group) or 2.0 L of PEG-ELS (PEG-ELS group). Then, 48 mg of sennoside was administered at bedtime on the day before colonoscopy, and the designated drug solution was administered at the hospital on the day of colonoscopy. Bowel cleansing was evaluated using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS). The volume of fluid intake and required time for bowel preparation were evaluated. Furthermore, compliance, patient tolerance, and overall acceptability were evaluated using a patient questionnaire, which was assessed using a visual analog scale.

RESULTS

In total, 291 patients (1.2 L PEG-ASC group, 148; PEG-ELS group, 143) completed the study. There was no significant difference in successful cleansing, defined as a BBPS score ≥ 2 in each segment, between the two groups (1.2 L PEG-ASC group, 91.9%; PEG-ELS group, 90.2%; 95%CI: -0.03-0.09). The required time for bowel preparation was significantly shorter (164.95 min ± 68.95 min vs 202.16 min ± 68.69 min, P < 0.001) and the total fluid intake volume was significantly lower (2.23 L ± 0.55 L vs 2.47 L ± 0.56 L, P < 0.001) in the 1.2 L PEG-ASC group than in the PEG-ELS group. Palatability, acceptability of the volume of solution, and overall acceptability evaluated using a patient questionnaire, which was assessed by the visual analog scale, were significantly better in the 1.2 L PEG-ASC group than in the PEG-ELS group (7.70 cm ± 2.57 cm vs 5.80 cm ± 3.24 cm, P < 0.001). No severe adverse event was observed in each group.

CONCLUSION

The 1.2 L PEG-ASC solution was non-inferior to the 2.0 L PEG-ELS solution in terms of cleansing efficacy and had better acceptability among Japanese patients.

Impact of diet restriction on bowel preparation for colonoscopy

Diet restriction is one of the difficult parts of bowel preparation for colonoscopy, and many patients do not follow instructions properly. Few studies have evaluated the impact of dietary restriction in real clinical setting. The aim of this study was to study the effect of diet control on bowel preparation with detailed investigation of unacceptable food list in order to reveal what kind of foods are most problematic in clinical practice.Prospective observational study was carried out at a university-affiliated hospital. Around 4 L polyethylene glycol solution was used for bowel preparation on the day of colonoscopy. Patients were allowed to have regular diet until lunch the day before colonoscopy and educated to control diet from 3 days before colonoscopy with information regarding an unacceptable foods list. Factors associated with inadequate bowel preparation were analyzed using univariate statistics and multivariate logistic regression analysis.Of the 245 patients included in the study, 68 patients (27.8%) followed the diet instructions. Fiber-rich vegetables were the most commonly taken unacceptable foods (N = 143, 58.4%). Inadequate bowel preparation (fair and poor by Aronchick scale) was 47.3%. In multivariate analysis, diabetes [odds ratio (OR) 2.878, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.242-6.671], preparation to colonoscopy interval (OR 1.003, 95% CI 1.000-1.005) and consumption of foods disturbing bowel preparation (OR 2.142, 95% CI 1.108-4.140) were independent predictors of inadequate bowel preparation.We could identify substantially low compliance to diet instructions in real clinical practice. Consumption of any foods disturbing bowel preparation was significant factor predicting inadequate bowel preparation, even though we could not select specific food list compromising preparation significantly. Favorable bowel preparation was achieved in the subgroup compliant to diet restriction, suggesting that regular diet avoiding specific kinds of foods can be possible option for diet restriction before colonoscopy.

Effect of Sending Educational Video Clips via Smartphone Mobile Messenger on Bowel Preparation before Colonoscopy

Background/Aim

We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of sending educational video clips via smartphone mobile messenger (SMM) on enhancing bowel preparation before colonoscopy.

Methods

This was a prospective, endoscopist-blinded, randomized controlled study. Patients in the SMM group received two video clips sent via SMM that explained the diet and regimen for bowel preparation, whereas those in the control group did not receive any video clips. We compared the quality of bowel preparation between the two groups, which was assessed by an endoscopist using the Ottawa scale.

Results

Between August and November 2014, 140 patients in the SMM group and 141 patients in the control group underwent colonoscopic examination. The total Ottawa score of the SMM group was significantly lower than that of the control group (5.47±1.74 vs. 5.97±1.78, p=0.018). These results were particularly prominent in the younger age group; the total Ottawa score of patents in the SMM group aged <40 years was significantly lower than that of patients in the control group aged <40 years (5.10±1.55 vs. 6.22±2.33, p=0.034).

Conclusions

We demonstrated that sending educational video clips via SMM could result in better bowel preparation, especially in the younger age group.