Factors determining the quality of screening colonoscopy: a prospective study on adenoma detection rates, from 12 134 examinations (Berlin colonoscopy project 3, BECOP-3)

Adler, Andreas; Wegscheider, Karl; Lieberman, David A.; Aminalai, A; Aschenbeck, Jens; Drossel, R; Mayr, Michael; Mroß, Michael; Scheel, Mathias; Schröder, Andreas; Gerber, Kathrin; Stange, G; Roll, Stephanie; Gauger, Ulrich; Wiedenmann, Bertram; Altenhofen, L; Rösch, Thomas

doi:10.1136/gutjnl-2011-300167

Cited by 202 publications

(182 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

155

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Die Rückzugszeit wird ebenfalls häufig als Qualitätsparameter genannt; diesbezüglich konnte in vielen, aber nicht in allen Studien demonstriert werden, dass die Polypendetektionsrate mit der Rückzugszeit nach Erreichen des Coecums korreliert, wobei der Grenzwert bei 6 min lag [421 -424]. Allerdings konnte in anderen Studien auch gezeigt werden, dass bei einer weiteren Erhöhung der Rückzugszeit > 6 min die Adenomrate nicht weiter ansteigt [425,426] und dass der genannte Cut-off von 6 min in größeren Datenbank-Analysen nicht mit der ADR korreliert [427].…”

Section: Level Of Evidence 1cunclassified

S3-Leitlinie – Kolorektales Karzinom

Schmiegel

Buchberger

Follmann³

et al. 2017

Z Gastroenterol

147

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Level Of Evidence 1cunclassified

S3-Leitlinie – Kolorektales Karzinom

Schmiegel

Buchberger

Follmann³

et al. 2017

Z Gastroenterol

147

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The utility of WT as a quality measure has been somewhat disputed, as the evidence is contradictory about its correlation with adenoma or polyp detection rates 19,[36][37][38][39] . Recently, the results of a large observational study from England, which included over 31000 colonoscopies, support the value of WT as a quality metric 40 .…”

Section: Withdrawal Timementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Whereas several factors could contribute to limited effectiveness of colonoscopy 16 , data suggest that endoscopist-related factors are the most important element [17][18][19] . In fact, 71% to 86% of interval cancers can be attributed to colonoscopist-related factors, as they represent missed lesions or result from incompletely resected lesions [20][21][22][23] .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Colonoscopy Quality Assessment

Fayad

Kahi

2015

Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Clinics of North America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Colonoscopy is the cornerstone of colorectal cancer screening programs. There is significant variability in the quality of colonoscopy between endoscopists. Colonoscopy quality assessment tracks various metrics in order to improve the effectiveness of colonoscopy, aiming at reducing the incidence and mortality from colorectal cancer. Adenoma detection rate is the prime metric, as it is associated with the risk of interval cancers. Implementing processes to measure and improve the adenoma detection rate is essential to improve the quality of colonoscopy.

show abstract

“…7 Each 1% increase in ADR by endoscopists is associated with a 3% decrease in patient cancer risk. the specialty of the endoscopist, 10,11 caecal intubation rate, 10 quality of bowel preparation, 3,12 and the quality of endoscopic equipment. 11,13 Polyp-related factors are their size and shape, with decreased detection rates for the flat, depressed or serrated adenomas, or their location in the right colon.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Distribution, size and shape of colorectal adenomas as determined by a colonoscopist with a high lesion detection rate: Influence of age, sex and colonoscopy indication

Klein

Okcu²,

Preisegger³

et al. 2015

United European Gastroenterology Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Increasing attention is focused on polyp-related features that may contribute to the operator-dependent nature of colonoscopy. Few data on polyps are available from high-yield colonoscopies, which may serve as a benchmark for quality control. Objectives: Describe regional distribution, histology, size and shape of polyps, and the influence of patient age and gender, in colonoscopies performed by a colonoscopist with high lesion detection rate. Methods: Analysis of 698 consecutive patients with diagnostic, screening or surveillance colonoscopies. Results: In 704 colonoscopies, 1908 polyps were removed (360 were protruded and 1548 flat; 1313 were hyperplastic, 562 adenomas, 5 serrated adenomas and 8 mixed). There were 232 adenomas in female patients and 343 in male patients; 39% of the adenomas were protruded and 61% were flat. The peak adenoma detection rate (ADR) was 51% in patients beyond age 79 years. Men older than 49 years had a higher ADR than women. In men and women, respectively: 40% and 32% of adenomas were in the right colon, 31% and 22% were in the transverse colon, and 30% and 47% were in the left colon. Beyond age 59 years, the majority of adenomas were in the proximal colon. Conclusions: An excess of adenomas in the proximal colon started at age 60 and this was more pronounced in men than in women. In all colonic regions, the majority of adenomas had a shape that was flat and smaller than 6 mm.

show abstract

Factors determining the quality of screening colonoscopy: a prospective study on adenoma detection rates, from 12 134 examinations (Berlin colonoscopy project 3, BECOP-3)

Abstract: Clinical Trial Gov Registration number: NCT00860665.

Cited by 202 publications

References 32 publications

S3-Leitlinie – Kolorektales Karzinom

S3-Leitlinie – Kolorektales Karzinom

Colonoscopy Quality Assessment

Distribution, size and shape of colorectal adenomas as determined by a colonoscopist with a high lesion detection rate: Influence of age, sex and colonoscopy indication

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About