The Effect of the Bowel Preparation Status on the Risk of Missing Polyp and Adenoma during Screening Colonoscopy: A Tandem Colonoscopic Study

Hong, Sung Noh; Sung, In Kyung; Kim, Jeong Hwan; Choe, Won Hyeok; Kim, Byung Kook; Ko, Soon Young; Lee, Jung Hyun; Seol, Dong Choon; Ahn, Su Young; Lee, Sun-Young; Park, Hyung Seok; Shim, Chan Sup

doi:10.5946/ce.2012.45.4.404

Cited by 78 publications

(72 citation statements)

References 40 publications

(55 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Elderly patients are more likely to have inadequate bowel preparation, thus reducing mucosal visualization and detection of polyps and early CRC. 22,23 Female patients are more likely to have had previous abdominal and pelvic surgery, which may increase the technical difficulty of colonoscopy and impair patient tolerance, reducing the cecal intubation rate. 24 In addition to factors that have an adverse effect on the cecal intubation rate, right side of the colon CRCs are more likely to arise from flat, non-polypoid adenomatous lesions 20,25 that are more difficult to detect with poor bowel preparation.…”

Section: Pccrc Rates Over Timementioning

confidence: 99%

Factors associated with colorectal cancer occurrence after colonoscopy that did not diagnose colorectal cancer

Cheung

Evison

Patel

et al. 2016

Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Pccrc Rates Over Timementioning

confidence: 99%

Factors associated with colorectal cancer occurrence after colonoscopy that did not diagnose colorectal cancer

Cheung

Evison

Patel

et al. 2016

Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A single prospective Korean study evaluated 277 individuals aft er a complete colonoscopy and then a per-protocol repeat "tandem" colonoscopy within 3 months of the initial examination ( 13 ). Th e patient adenoma miss rate increased as baseline preparation quality decreased on the Aronchick scale.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Optimizing Adequacy of Bowel Cleansing for Colonoscopy: Recommendations From the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer

Johnson

Barkun

Cohen

et al. 2014

American Journal of Gastroenterology

128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The American Journal of GASTROENTEROLOGY PRACTICE GUIDELINESColorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancerrelated deaths in the United States ( 1 ). Colonoscopy can prevent CRC by the detection and removal of precancerous lesions. In addition to CRC screening and surveillance, colonoscopy is used widely for the diagnostic evaluation of symptoms and other positive CRC screening tests. Regardless of indication, the success of colonoscopy is linked closely to the adequacy of preprocedure bowel cleansing.Unfortunately, up to 20-25% of all colonoscopies are reported to have an inadequate bowel preparation ( 2,3 ). Th e reasons for this range from patient-related variables such as compliance with preparation instructions and a variety of medical conditions that make bowel cleansing more diffi cult to unit-specifi c factors (eg, extended wait times aft er scheduling of colonoscopy) ( 4 ). Adverse consequences of ineff ective bowel preparation include lower adenoma detection rates, longer procedural time, lower cecal intubation rates, increased electrocautery risk, and shorter intervals between examinations ( 3,5-7 ).Bowel preparation formulations intended for precolonoscopy cleansing are assessed based on their effi cacy, safety, and tolerability. Lack of specifi c organ toxicity is considered to be a prerequisite for bowel preparations. Between cleansing effi cacy and tolerability, however, the consequences of inadequate cleansing suggest that effi cacy should be a higher priority than tolerability. Consequently, the choice of a bowel cleansing regimen should be based on cleansing effi cacy fi rst and patient tolerability second. However, effi cacy and tolerability are closely interrelated. For example, a cleansing agent that is poorly tolerated and thus not fully ingested may not achieve an adequate cleansing.Th e goals of this consensus document are to provide expert, evidence-based recommendations for clinicians to optimize colonoscopy preparation quality and patient safety. Recommendations are provided using the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) scoring system, which weighs the strength of the recommendation and the quality of the evidence ( 8 ). METHODS Search StrategyComputerized medical literature searches were conducted from January 1980 (fi rst year of approval of polyethylene glycol-electrolyte lavage solution [PEG-ELS]-based preparation by the Food and Drug Administration [FDA]) up to August 2013 using MEDLINE, PubMed EMBASE, Scopus, CENTRAL, and ISI Web of knowledge. We used a highly sensitive search strategy to identify reports of randomized controlled trials ( 9 ) with a combination of medical subject headings adapted to each database and text words related to colonoscopy and gastrointestinal agents, bowel preparation, generic name, and brand name. Th e complete search terms are available in Appendix A. Recursive searches and cross-referencing also were performed using a "similar articles" function; hand searches of articles were identifi ed aft er an i...

show abstract

“…[15][16][17][18] Nevertheless, the relationship between bowel preparation and polyp retrieval failure is less documented. 7 In our sample, inadequate bowel preparation was independently associated with polyp retrieval failure.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk factors for polyp retrieval failure in colonoscopy

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Colonoscopy is able to diagnose, resect and retrieve colonic polyps. Although retrieval of resected polyps is still globally advised, it is not always successful. We aimed to define the risk factors for polyp retrieval failure in colonoscopy. Methods: A single-center, retrospective study assessed 3507 consecutive and non-urgent colonoscopies, performed between September 2011 and December 2012. Colonoscopies were included in our analysis if the diagnosis of at least one polyp was established, and one or more snare polypectomies were performed. Demographic and technical data were collected according to the patient's endoscopy report. Results: A total of 1109 polyps were analyzed, corresponding to 496 colonoscopies from 483 different patients. We found that 53 (4.8%) of the resected polyps were not retrieved. In a univariate analysis, the factors associated with polyp retrieval failure were: age, polyp size, resection technique, bowel preparation, location and the presence of a previous colorectal surgery (p < 0.05). In the multivariate analysis, a previous colorectal surgery, resection by cold snare, location in the right colon, inadequate bowel preparation and a polyp size up to 5 mm were independently associated with higher polyp retrieval failure (p < 0.05). Discussion: Different and well-defined factors were associated with polyp retrieval failure. Because bowel preparation was the only modifiable factor identified, a special focus should be given to this topic.

show abstract

The Effect of the Bowel Preparation Status on the Risk of Missing Polyp and Adenoma during Screening Colonoscopy: A Tandem Colonoscopic Study

Cited by 78 publications

References 40 publications

Factors associated with colorectal cancer occurrence after colonoscopy that did not diagnose colorectal cancer

Factors associated with colorectal cancer occurrence after colonoscopy that did not diagnose colorectal cancer

Optimizing Adequacy of Bowel Cleansing for Colonoscopy: Recommendations From the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer

Risk factors for polyp retrieval failure in colonoscopy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About