Article

Incomplete Polyp Resection During Colonoscopy-Results of the Complete Adenoma Resection (CARE) Study

Department of Gastroenterology, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, New Hampshire. Electronic address: .
Gastroenterology (Impact Factor: 13.93). 09/2012; 144(1). DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2012.09.043
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND & AIMS: Although the adenoma detection rate is used as a measure of colonoscopy quality, there are limited data on the quality of endoscopic resection of detected adenomas. We determined the rate of incompletely resected neoplastic polyps in clinical practice. METHODS: We performed a prospective study on 1427 patients who underwent colonoscopy at 2 medical centers and had at least 1 nonpedunculated polyp (5-20 mm). After polyp removal was considered complete macroscopically, biopsies were obtained from the resection margin. The main outcome was the percentage of incompletely resected neoplastic polyps (incomplete resection rate [IRR]) determined by the presence of neoplastic tissue in post-polypectomy biopsies. Associations between IRR and polyp size, morphology, histology, and endoscopist were assessed by regression analysis. RESULTS: Of 346 neoplastic polyps (269 patients; 84.0% men; mean age, 63.4 years) removed by 11 gastroenterologists, 10.1% were incompletely resected. IRR increased with polyp size and was significantly higher for large (10-20 mm) than small (5-9 mm) neoplastic polyps (17.3% vs 6.8%; relative risk = 2.1), and for sessile serrated adenomas/polyps than for conventional adenomas (31.0% vs 7.2%; relative risk = 3.7). The IRR for endoscopists with at least 20 polypectomies ranged from 6.5% to 22.7%; there was a 3.4-fold difference between the highest and lowest IRR after adjusting for size and sessile serrated histology. CONCLUSIONS: Neoplastic polyps are often incompletely resected, and the rate of incomplete resection varies broadly among endoscopists. Incomplete resection might contribute to the development of colon cancers after colonoscopy (interval cancers). Efforts are needed to ensure complete resection, especially of larger lesions. ClinicalTrials.gov Number: NCT01224444. ClinicalTrials.gov Number: NCT002209456.

0 Followers
 · 
195 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Several studies have raised warnings about the limited effectiveness of colonoscopy for the prevention of colorectal cancer (CRC), especially of the proximal colon. Two major categories of factors might be responsible for the development of interval cancers, namely technical, endoscopist-dependent factors and biological characteristics of the cancer that lead to more rapid tumour progression. Recognition of endoscopist-dependent factors is critical, as these factors are probably amenable to correction through improved awareness and education of endoscopists, using quality metrics (such as adenoma detection rates and cecal intubation rates) for objective evaluation and feedback. In this article, the current literature regarding the incidence of, and potential explanations for, interval CRCs is outlined. Although there is probably an interaction between technical and biology-related factors--and an attempt to dissect the biology from the technology might be fraught with difficulties--a structured analysis of individual cases of interval cancer might help in the continuous monitoring of the quality of colonoscopy, and ultimately might reduce the number of interval CRCs.
    Nature Reviews Gastroenterology &#38 Hepatology 08/2012; 9(9):550-4. DOI:10.1038/nrgastro.2012.136 · 10.81 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Approximately 30 % of colorectal carcinomas develop via the serrated neoplasia pathway characterized by widespread DNA methylation and frequent BRAF mutation. Serrated polyps represent a heterogeneous group of polyps which are the precursor lesions to serrated pathway colorectal carcinomas. The histological classification of serrated polyps has evolved over the last two decades to distinguish three separate entities: hyperplastic polyp, sessile serrated adenoma (SSA), and traditional serrated adenoma (TSA). The malignant potential of SSAs and TSAs has been clearly demonstrated. SSAs are more challenging to detect by colonoscopy and are likely to account for some interval carcinomas of the proximal colon. Serrated polyposis syndrome is now widely recognized as conferring a high risk of colorectal carcinoma although its cause remains elusive. The current understanding of the actual malignant potential of each serrated polyp subtype is still limited due to the lack of large-scale prospective studies. Patient management guidelines have been recently updated although high-level evidence to support them is still required.
    Journal of Gastroenterology 12/2012; 48(3). DOI:10.1007/s00535-012-0720-y · 4.02 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The first evidence that screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) could effectively reduce mortality dates back 20 years. However, actual population screening has, in many countries, halted at the level of individual testing and discussions on differences between screening tests. With a wealth of new evidence from various community-based studies looking at test uptake, screening-programme organization and the importance of quality assurance, population screening for CRC is now moving into a new realm, promising better results in terms of reducing CRC-specific morbidity and mortality. Such a shift in the paradigm requires a change from opportunistic, individual testing towards organized population screening with comprehensive monitoring and full-programme quality assurance. To achieve this, a combination of factors-including test characteristics, uptake, screenee autonomy, costs and capacity-must be considered. Thus, evidence from randomized trials comparing different tests must be supplemented by studies of acceptance and uptake to obtain the full picture of the effectiveness (in terms of morbidity, mortality and cost) the different strategies have. In this Review, we discuss a range of screening modalities and describe the factors to be considered to achieve a truly effective population CRC screening programme.
    Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology 02/2013; 10(3). DOI:10.1038/nrclinonc.2013.12 · 15.70 Impact Factor
Show more