-
Andreas Adler,
Karl Wegscheider,
David Lieberman,
Alireza Aminalai,
Jens Aschenbeck,
Rolf Drossel, Michael Mayr,
Michael Mroß,
Mathias Scheel,
Andreas Schröder,
Katharina Gerber,
Gabriela Stange,
Stephanie Roll,
Ulrich Gauger,
Bertram Wiedenmann,
Lutz Altenhofen,
Thomas Rosch
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Screening colonoscopy (SC) outcome quality is best determined by the adenoma detection rate (ADR). The substantial variability in the ADRs between endoscopists may reflect different skills, experience and/or equipment. OBJECTIVE: To analyse the potential factors that may influence ADR variance, including case volume. DESIGN: 12 134 consecutive SCs (mean age 64.5 years, 47% men) from 21 Berlin private-practice colonoscopists were prospectively studied during 18 months. The data were analysed using a two-level mixed linear model to adequately address the characteristics of patients and colonoscopists. The ADR was regressed after considering the following factors: sex, age, bowel cleanliness, NSAID intake, annual SC case volume, lifetime experience, instrument withdrawal times, instrument generations used, and the number of annual continuing medical education (CME) meetings attended by the physician. The case volume was also retrospectively analysed from the 2007 national SC registry data (312 903 colonoscopies and 1004 colonoscopists). RESULTS: The patient factors that correlated with the ADR were sex, age (p<0.001) and low quality of bowel preparation (p=0.005). The factors that were related to the colonoscopists were the number of CME meetings attended (p=0.012) and instrument generation (p=0.001); these factors accounted for approximately 40% of the interphysician variability. Within a narrow range (6-11 min), the withdrawal time was not correlated with the ADR. Annual screening case volume did not correlate with the ADR, and this finding was confirmed by the German registry data. CONCLUSIONS: The outcome quality of screening colonoscopies is mainly influenced by individual colonoscopist factors (ie, CME activities) and instrument quality. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Clinical Trial Gov Registration number: NCT00860665.
Gut 03/2012; · 10.11 Impact Factor
-
Andreas Adler,
Alireza Aminalai,
Jens Aschenbeck,
Rolf Drossel, Michael Mayr,
Mathias Scheel,
Andreas Schröder,
Timur Yenerim,
Bertram Wiedenmann,
Ulrich Gauger,
Stephanie Roll,
Thomas Rösch
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Improvements to endoscopy imaging technologies might improve detection rates of colorectal cancer and patient outcomes. We compared the accuracy of the latest generation of endoscopes with older generation models in detection of colorectal adenomas.
We compared data from 2 prospective screening colonoscopy studies (the Berlin Colonoscopy Project 6); each study lasted approximately 6 months and included the same 6 colonoscopists, who worked in private practice. Participants in group 1 (n = 1256) were all examined by using the latest generation of wide-angle, high-definition colonoscopes that were manufactured by the same company. Individuals in group 2 (n = 1400) were examined by endoscopists who used routine equipment (a mixture of endoscopes from different companies; none of those used to examine group 1). The adenoma detection rate was calculated on the basis of the number of all adenomas/number of all patients.
There were no differences in patient parameters or withdrawal time between groups (8.0 vs 8.2 minutes). The adenoma detection rate was significantly higher in group 1 (0.33) than in group 2 (0.27; P = .01); a greater number of patients with least 1 adenoma were identified in group 1 (22.1%) than in group 2 (18.2%; P = .01). A higher percentage of high-grade dysplastic adenomas were detected in group 1 (1.19%) than in group 2 (0.57%), but this difference was not statistically significant (P = .06).
The latest generation of wide-angle, high-definition colonoscopes improves rates of adenoma detection by 22%, compared with mixed, older technology endoscopes used in routine private practice. These findings might affect definitions of quality control parameters for colonoscopy screening for colorectal cancer.
Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology: the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association 11/2011; 10(2):155-9. · 5.64 Impact Factor
-
Alireza Aminalai,
Thomas Rösch,
Jens Aschenbeck, Michael Mayr,
Rolf Drossel,
Andreas Schröder,
Matthias Scheel,
Doris Treytnar,
Ulrich Gauger,
Gabriela Stange,
Frank Simon,
Andreas Adler
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Fujinon intelligent chromoendoscopy (FICE) is a post-processing imaging technique for increasing contrast of mucosa and mucosal lesions that might lead to improvement in colonic adenoma detection during colonoscopy. Previous studies on similar contrast-enhancing techniques as well as on dye staining have yielded variable and conflicting results. This large randomized trial was undertaken to determine whether FICE technology enhances adenoma detection rate (ADR).
In a prospective study performed in a multicenter private practice and hospital setting, involving 8 examiners with substantial lifetime experience (>10,000 colonoscopies each), 1,318 patients (men 46.7%, women 53.3%; mean age 59.05 years) were randomly assigned to colonoscopy with either FICE or white light imaging on instrument withdrawal. Of the colonoscopies, 68% were screening and 32% were diagnostic examinations. The primary outcome measure was the ADR (i.e., number of adenomas/total number of patients).
There was no difference between the two groups in terms of general ADR (0.28 in both groups), the total number of adenomas (184 vs. 183), or detection of subgroups of adenomas. The rate of identification of hyperplastic polyps was also the same in both groups (127 vs. 121; P=0.67). The results were the same for both the screening and the diagnostic colonoscopy subgroups. Withdrawal time was the same in both groups (8.4 vs. 8.3 min, P=0.55).
This large randomized trial could not show any objective advantage of the FICE technique over conventional high-resolution endoscopy in terms of improved ADR.
The American Journal of Gastroenterology 11/2010; 105(11):2383-8. · 7.28 Impact Factor
-
Alireza Aminalai,
Thomas R|[ouml]|sch,
Jens Aschenbeck, Michael Mayr,
Rolf Drossel,
Andreas Schr|[ouml]|der,
Matthias Scheel,
Doris Treytnar,
Ulrich Gauger,
Gabriela Stange,
Frank Simon,
Andreas Adler
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES: Fujinon intelligent chromoendoscopy (FICE) is a post-processing imaging technique for increasing contrast of mucosa and mucosal lesions that might lead to improvement in colonic adenoma detection during colonoscopy. Previous studies on similar contrast-enhancing techniques as well as on dye staining have yielded variable and conflicting results. This large randomized trial was undertaken to determine whether FICE technology enhances adenoma detection rate (ADR).
The American Journal of Gastroenterology 07/2010; · 7.28 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Narrow-band imaging (NBI) has been implemented in gastrointestinal endoscopy to improve the contrast of endoluminal pathologic structures, one of the aims being to increase colonic adenoma detection. Previous studies from referral centers have yielded variable and conflicting results with regard to improvement in adenoma detection rates by using NBI. The present large randomized trial was designed to finally settle this issue.
In a prospective study performed exclusively in a multicenter private practice setting involving 6 examiners with substantial lifetime experience (>10,000 colonoscopies), 1256 patients (men:women, 47%:53%; mean age, 64.4 y) were randomized to HDTV screening colonoscopy with either NBI or white-light imaging on instrument withdrawal. The primary outcome measure was the adenoma detection rate (ie, number of adenomas/total number of patients).
There was no difference between the 2 groups in terms of the general adenoma detection rate (0.32 vs 0.34), the total number of adenomas (200 vs 216), or in detection in subgroups of adenomas. This was despite a minimal, but significantly longer, withdrawal time in the NBI group (8.5 vs 7.9 min; P < .05). Only hyperplastic polyps were found more frequently in the NBI group (P = .03).
This large randomized trial in a homogeneous private practice screening setting could not show any objective advantage of the NBI technique over white-light high definition television imaging in terms of improved adenoma detection rate. Contrast enhancement therefore likely will not contribute to a reduction in adenoma miss rates among experienced colonoscopists.
Gastroenterology 10/2008; 136(2):410-6.e1; quiz 715. · 11.68 Impact Factor
