Temporal Trends in the Detection of Right-Sided Colon Polyps: Summary Data of Large GI Practices

Although overall colorectal cancer incidence and mortality has decreased in those undergoing colonoscopy, there is still a concern regarding efficacy of colonoscopy in detection of right-sided colonic lesions and prevention of colon cancers on the right side. Quality measures in colonoscopy have traditionally looked at detecting adenomatous polyps from throughout the colon. Data regarding polyp detection and cancer prevention in the left vs. right side are sparse

Capsule Endoscopy Is Superior to Small-bowel Follow-through and Equivalent to Ileocolonoscopy in Suspected Crohn's Disease

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Evaluation of the small intestine for inflammation has traditionally relied on small-bowel follow-through (SBFT), but multiple studies have demonstrated its low diagnostic accuracy. Capsule endoscopy (CE) transmits high-quality images of the small intestinal mucosa; it can be used to visualize the entire length of the small bowel and much of the mucosa. We compared the diagnostic yields of CE vs SBFT in a prospective study of patients with suspected small-bowel Crohn's disease. METHODS: Eighty patients with signs and/or symptoms of small-bowel Crohn's disease (age, 10-65 years) underwent CE, followed by SBFT and ileocolonoscopy. Readers were blinded to other test results. The primary outcome was the diagnostic yield for inflammatory lesions found with CE before ileocolonoscopy compared with SBFT and ileocolonoscopy. A secondary outcome was the incremental diagnostic yield of CE compared with ileocolonoscopy and CE compared with SBFT. RESULTS: The combination of CE and ileocolonoscopy detected 107 of 110 inflammatory lesions (97.3%), whereas the combination of SBFT and ileocolonoscopy detected only 63 lesions (57.3%) (P < .001). The diagnostic yield of CE compared with ileocolonoscopy was not different (P = .09). The diagnostic yield was higher for CE than for SBFT (P < .001). Of the 80 patients with suspected Crohn's disease, 25 (31.3%) had the diagnosis confirmed. Eleven were diagnosed by CE findings alone and 5 by ileocolonoscopy findings alone. In the remaining 9 patients, diagnostic findings were identified by at least 2 of the 3 modalities. No diagnoses were made on the basis of SBFT findings alone. CONCLUSIONS: CE was better than SBFT and equivalent to ileocolonoscopy in detecting small-bowel inflammation. Although ileocolonoscopy remains the initial diagnostic test of choice, CE is safe and can establish the diagnosis of Crohn's disease in patients when ileocolonoscopy results are negative or the terminal ileum cannot be evaluated. ClinicalTrials.gov Number: NCT00487396

Longitudinal Assessment of Colonoscopy Quality Indicators: A Report From the Gastroenterology Practice Management Group (GPMG)

BACKGROUND: There is increasing demand for colonoscopy quality measures for procedures performed in ambulatory surgery centers. Benchmarks such as adenoma detection rate (ADR) are traditionally reported as static, one-dimensional point estimates at a provider or practice level. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate 6-year variability of ADRs for 370 gastroenterologists from across the nation. DESIGN: Observational cross-sectional analysis. SETTING:Collaborative quality metrics database from 2007 to 2012. PATIENTS:Patients who underwent colonoscopies in ambulatory surgery centers. INTERVENTIONS: Colonoscopy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: The number of colonoscopies with an adenomatous polyp divided by the total number of colonoscopies (ADR-T), inclusive of indication and patient\u27s sex. RESULTS: Data from 368,157 colonoscopies were included for analysis from 11 practices. Three practice sites (5, 8, and 10) were significantly above and 2 sites (3, 7) were significantly below mean ADR-T, with a 95% confidence interval (CI). High-performing sites had 9.0% higher ADR-T than sites belonging to the lowest quartile (P \u3c .001). The mean ADR-T remained stable for 9 of 11 sites. Regression analysis showed that the 2 practice sites where ADR-T varied had significant improvements in ADR-T during the 6-year period. For each, mean ADR-T improved an average of 0.5% per quarter for site 2 (P = .001) and site 3 (P = .021), which were average and low performers, respectively. LIMITATIONS: Summary-level data, which does not allow cross-reference of variables at an individual level. CONCLUSION: We found performance disparities among practice sites remaining relatively consistent over a 6-year period. The ability of certain sites to sustain their high-performance over 6 years suggests that further research is needed to identify key organizational processes and physician incentives that improve the quality of colonoscopy