No abstract

INTRODUCTION: Given the sparsity of longitudinal studies on colonoscopy use, we quantified utilization of repeat colonoscopy within 10 years and the proportion of persons with polypectomies at first repeat colonoscopy using a large German claims database. METHODS: Based on the German Pharmacoepidemiological Research Database, we identified persons who underwent colonoscopy between 2006 and 2015 (index colonoscopy) and assessed colonoscopies and polypectomies during follow-up. We defined 3 subcohorts based on available procedure/diagnosis codes at index colonoscopy: persons with snare polypectomy, which is reimbursable for lesions ≥5 mm in size (cohort 1), with a forceps polypectomy (cohort 2), and without such procedures/diagnoses (cohort 3). We stratified all analyses by diagnostic vs screening index colonoscopy. RESULTS: Overall, we included 3,076,657 persons (cohort 1–3: 15%, 13%, 72%). Among persons with screening index colonoscopy (30%), the proportions with a repeat colonoscopy within 10 years in cohorts 1, 2, and 3 were 78%, 66%, and 43%, respectively, and a snare polypectomy at first repeat colonoscopy was performed in 27%, 17%, and 12%, respectively. In cohort 1, 32% of persons with a (first) repeat colonoscopy after 9 years had a snare polypectomy (after 3 years: 25%). Among persons with diagnostic index colonoscopies, 80%, 78%, and 65% had a repeat colonoscopy, and 27%, 17%, and 10% had a snare polypectomy at first repeat colonoscopy, respectively. DISCUSSION: Our study suggests substantial underuse of repeat colonoscopy among persons with previous snare polypectomy and overuse among lower risk groups. One-quarter of persons with a snare polypectomy at baseline had another snare polypectomy at first repeat colonoscopy.

Studies have shown that the quality of colonoscopy influences the incidence of postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer (PCCRC). However, data from Germany on this association are lacking. We aimed to assess cumulative incidence of PCCRC in persons undergoing colonoscopy in Germany according to the physician's polyp detection rate (PDR). Using the German Pharmacoepidemiological Research Database (GePaRD) with claims data of 20% of the German population, we included persons with a baseline colonoscopy between 2008 and 2017 and categorized them according to the procedure at baseline (snare polypectomy, forceps polypectomy, no polypectomy). In each subgroup, we distinguished between persons examined by physicians with a PDR in the lowest quartile vs higher quartiles and described cumulative CRC incidence during follow-up. Overall, 822 715 persons examined by 1752 physicians were included. One quarter of the physicians had a PDR ≤21.8% (lowest quartile). In all subgroups, the 5-year cumulative CRC incidence was statistically significantly higher in persons examined by physicians with a PDR ≤21.8% vs >21.8%: It was 69% higher in persons with snare polypectomy (0.88% vs 0.52%), 87% higher in persons with forceps polypectomy (0.58% vs 0.31%), and 48% higher in persons without polypectomy at baseline (0.31% vs 0.21%). In conclusion, we found a substantially increased PCCRC risk in persons examined by physicians with a low PDR in Germany, irrespective of the baseline findings. Our study highlights the importance of a high-quality colonoscopy to maximize the preventive effect of colonoscopy on CRC incidence.

No abstract

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to describe cumulative colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence after screening colonoscopy stratified by tumor location, age, and sex as well as CRC detection rate at first repeat colonoscopy. METHODS: Using the German Pharmacoepidemiological Research Database, we included persons with screening colonoscopy and assessed cumulative CRC incidence after baseline screening colonoscopy with snare polypectomy (cohort 1) and without polypectomy (cohort 2). We also determined the CRC detection rate at first repeat colonoscopy by time since screening colonoscopy. RESULTS: Overall, 1,095,381 persons were included. The 10-year cumulative CRC incidence was 1.5% in cohort 1 and 0.6% in cohort 2. The proportion of proximal CRC increased with age: In women of cohort 1, 47% of CRCs in the age group 55–64 years were proximal (men: 42%) while in the age group 65–74 years, this proportion was 55% (men: 49%). In cohort 2, similar patterns were observed. In cohort 1, the CRC detection rate at first repeat colonoscopy among persons examined within 6–8 years after screening colonoscopy was more than twice as high compared with those examined within 4–6 years (1.7% vs 0.8%). DISCUSSION: Among persons followed up after screening colonoscopy, we observed a steadily increasing predominance of proximal CRC, and this shift showed distinct patterns by age and sex. Because our study suggests higher CRC detection rates among persons with a later repeat colonoscopy, the role of delayed surveillance and the benefit of a reminder system should be explored.