Serious Complications Within 30 Days of Screening and Surveillance Colonoscopy Are Uncommon

University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195, USA.
Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology: the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association (Impact Factor: 7.9). 10/2009; 8(2):166-73. DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2009.10.007
Source: PubMed


The risk of serious complications after colonoscopy has important implications for the overall benefits of colorectal cancer screening programs. We evaluated the incidence of serious complications within 30 days after screening or surveillance colonoscopies in diverse clinical settings and sought to identify potential risk factors for complications.
Patients age 40 and over undergoing colonoscopy for screening, surveillance, or evaluation based an abnormal result from another screening test were enrolled through the National Endoscopic Database (CORI). Patients completed a standardized telephone interview approximately 7 and 30 days after their colonoscopy. We estimated the incidence of serious complications within 30 days of colonoscopy and identified risk factors associated with complications using logistic regression analyses.
We enrolled 21,375 patients. Gastrointestinal bleeding requiring hospitalization occurred in 34 patients (incidence 1.59/1000 exams; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.10-2.22). Perforations occurred in 4 patients (0.19/1000 exams; 95% CI, 0.05-0.48), diverticulitis requiring hospitalization in 5 patients (0.23/1000 exams; 95% CI, 0.08-0.54), and postpolypectomy syndrome in 2 patients (0.09/1000 exams; 95% CI, 0.02-0.30). The overall incidence of complications directly related to colonoscopy was 2.01 per 1000 exams (95% CI, 1.46-2.71). Two of the 4 perforations occurred without biopsy or polypectomy. The risk of complications increased with preprocedure warfarin use and performance of polypectomy with cautery.
Complications after screening or surveillance colonoscopy are uncommon. Risk factors for complications include warfarin use and polypectomy with cautery.

Download full-text


Available from: Marcia A Ciol, Mar 11, 2014
  • Source
    • "This risk of complication is similar to the 0.28-0.32 % complication (SAE) rate reported for colonoscopy[53,54]which is routinely used and repeated for colorectal cancer screening. Importantly, a bronchoscopy with brush biopsy limited to the central airways for collection of NBEC, the procedure used here, virtually eliminates risk for the primary complications reported to be associated with bronchoscopy, including pneumothorax or significant hemorrhage. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: The Lung Cancer Risk Test (LCRT) trial is a prospective cohort study comparing lung cancer incidence among persons with a positive or negative value for the LCRT, a 15 gene test measured in normal bronchial epithelial cells (NBEC). The purpose of this article is to describe the study design, primary endpoint, and safety; baseline characteristics of enrolled individuals; and establishment of a bio-specimen repository. Methods/Design: Eligible participants were aged 50-90 years, current or former smokers with 20 pack-years or more cigarette smoking history, free of lung cancer, and willing to undergo bronchoscopic brush biopsy for NBEC sample collection. NBEC, peripheral blood samples, baseline CT, and medical and demographic data were collected from each subject. Discussion: Over a two-year span (2010-2012), 403 subjects were enrolled at 12 sites. At baseline 384 subjects remained in study and mean age and smoking history were 62.9 years and 50.4 pack-years respectively, with 34 % current smokers. Obstructive lung disease (FEV1/FVC <0.7) was present in 157 (54 %). No severe adverse events were associated with bronchoscopic brushing. An NBEC and matched peripheral blood bio-specimen repository was established. Trial registration: The LCRT Study, NCT 01130285, was registered with on May 24, 2010.
    Full-text · Article · Dec 2016 · BMC Pulmonary Medicine
  • Source
    • "Coté et al. [21] found a percentage of 12.5 % sedation-related hypoxemic events during propofol sedations performed by anesthesia nurses. In a review of over 20,000 reports in the Clinical Outcomes Research Initiative Database, sedation-related complications occurred in 1.3 % [22]. The most common complications were respiratory depression (0.75 %) and cardiovascular events (0.49 %), delayed recovery of psychomotoric function, and delayed discharge. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Colonoscopy is a proven method for bowel cancer screening and is often experienced as a painful procedure. Today, there are two main strategies to facilitate colonoscopy. First, deep sedation results in satisfied patients but increases sedation-associated risks and raises costs for healthcare providers. Second, there is the advocacy for colonoscopies without any form of sedation. This might be an option for a special group of patients, but does not hold true for everybody. Following Moerman's hypothesis: "If pain is the crucial point, why do we need sedation?" this review shows the analgesic options for a painless procedure, increasing success rates without increasing risk of sedation. There are two agents, with the potential to be a nearly ideal analgesic agent for colonoscopy: alfentanil and nitrous oxide (N(2)O). Administration of either substance causes the patient to be comfortable yet alert and facilitates a short turnover. Advantages of these drugs include rapid onset and offset of action, analgesic and anxiolytic effects, ease of titration to desired level, rapid recovery, and an excellent safety profile.
    Full-text · Article · Jun 2012 · Techniques in Coloproctology
  • Source
    • "Colonoscopy is an invasive and costly procedure: serious complications, including bleeding and bowel perforation may occur in 0.1-0.6% of procedures [11-13]. Further, colonoscopy is a scarce resource. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Colonoscopy is an invasive and costly procedure with a risk of serious complications. It would therefore be useful to prioritise colonoscopies by identifying people at higher risk of either cancer or premalignant adenomas. The aim of this study is to assess a model that identifies people with colorectal cancer, advanced, large and small adenomas. Patients seen by gastroenterologists and colorectal surgeons between April 2004 and December 2006 completed a validated, structured self-administered questionnaire prior to colonoscopy. Information was collected on symptoms, demographics and medical history. Multinomial logistic regression was used to simultaneously assess factors associated with findings on colonoscopy of cancer, advanced adenomas and adenomas sized 6 -9 mm, and ≤ 5 mm. The area under the curve of ROC curve was used to assess the incremental gain of adding demographic variables, medical history and symptoms (in that order) to a base model that included only age. Sociodemographic variables, medical history and symptoms (from 8,204 patients) jointly provide good discrimination between colorectal cancer and no abnormality (AUC 0.83), but discriminate less well between adenomas and no abnormality (AUC advanced adenoma 0.70; other adenomas 0.67). Age is the dominant risk factor for cancer and adenomas of all sizes. Having a colonoscopy within the last 10 years confers protection for cancers and advanced adenomas. Our models provide guidance about which factors can assist in identifying people at higher risk of disease using easily elicited information. This would allow colonoscopy to be prioritised for those for whom it would be of most benefit.
    Full-text · Article · Sep 2011 · BMC Gastroenterology
Show more