کد مقاله | کد نشریه | سال انتشار | مقاله انگلیسی | نسخه تمام متن |
---|---|---|---|---|
3303212 | 1210311 | 2014 | 8 صفحه PDF | دانلود رایگان |
BackgroundThe effect of colon preparation quality on adenoma detection rates (ADRs) is unclear, partly because of lack of uniform colon preparation ratings in prior studies. The New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry collects detailed data from colonoscopies statewide, by using a uniform preparation quality scale after the endoscopist has cleaned the mucosa.ObjectiveTo compare the overall and proximal ADR and serrated polyp detection rates (SDR) in colonoscopies with differing levels of colon preparation quality.DesignCross-sectional.SettingNew Hampshire statewide registry.PatientsPatients undergoing colonoscopy.InterventionsWe examined colon preparation quality for 13,022 colonoscopies, graded by using specific descriptions provided to endoscopists. ADR and SDR are the number of colonoscopies with at least 1 adenoma or serrated polyp (excluding those in the rectum and/or sigmoid colon) detected divided by the total number of colonoscopies, for the preparation categories: optimal (excellent and/or good), fair, and poor.Main Outcome MeasurementsOverall/proximal ADR/SDR.ResultsThe overall detection rates in examinations with fair colon preparation quality (SDR 8.9%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 7.4-10.7, ADR 27.1%; 95% CI, 24.6-30.0) were similar to rates observed in colonoscopies with optimal preparation quality (SDR 8.8%; 95% CI, 8.3-9.4, ADR 26.3%; 95% CI, 25.6-27.2). This finding also was observed for rates in the proximal colon. A logistic regression model (including withdrawal time) found that proximal ADR was statistically lower in the poor preparation category (odds ratio 0.45; 95% CI, 0.24-0.84; P < .01) than in adequately prepared colons.LimitationsHomogeneous population.ConclusionIn our sample, there was no significant difference in overall or proximal ADR or SDR between colonoscopies with fair versus optimal colon preparation quality. Poor colon preparation quality may reduce the proximal ADR.
Journal: Gastrointestinal Endoscopy - Volume 80, Issue 3, September 2014, Pages 463–470