What level of bowel prep quality requires early repeat colonoscopy: Systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of preparation quality on adenoma detection rate

American Journal of Gastroenterology

Volumn 109, Issue 11, 2014, Pages 1714-1723

  Clark, Brian T ^a   Rustagi, Tarun ^a   Laine, Loren ^a,b  

^a YALE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b VA CONNECTICUT HEALTHCARE SYSTEM   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ATTRIBUTABLE RISK; COLON ADENOMA; COLON MUCOSA; COLONOSCOPY; COLORECTAL CANCER; COLORECTAL TUMOR; EMBASE; GASTROENTEROLOGY; HUMAN; INTESTINE PREPARATION; MEDLINE; META ANALYSIS; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; QUALITY CONTROL; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; REVIEW; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; ADENOMA; COLONIC POLYPS; COLORECTAL NEOPLASMS; RETREATMENT;

LAXATIVE;

ADENOMA; CATHARTICS; COLONIC POLYPS; COLONOSCOPY; COLORECTAL NEOPLASMS; HUMANS; RETREATMENT;

EID: 84909958431     PISSN: 00029270     EISSN: 15720241     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/ajg.2014.232     Document Type: Review

References (39)

1. Siegel R, Naishadham D, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin 2012; 62: 10-29.
2. Rex DK, Johnson DA, Anderson JC et al. American College of Gastroenterology guidelines for colorectal cancer screening 2009 [corrected]. Am J Gastroenterol 2009; 104: 739-50.
3. Th iis-Evensen E, Hoff GS, Sauar J et al. Population-based surveillance by colonoscopy: eff ect on the incidence of colorectal cancer. Telemark Polyp Study I. Scand J Gastroenterol 1999; 34: 414-20.
4. Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, O'Brien MJ et al. Randomized comparison of surveillance intervals aft er colonoscopic removal of newly diagnosed adenomatous polyps. The National Polyp Study Workgroup. N Engl J Med 1993; 328: 901-6.
5. Citarda F, Tomaselli G, Capocaccia R et al. Efficacy in standard clinical practice of colonoscopic polypectomy in reducing colorectal cancer incidence . Gut 2001; 48: 812-5.
6. Rex DK, Petrini JL, Baron TH et al. Quality indicators for colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2006; 101: 873-85.
7. Kaminski MF, Regula J, Kraszewska E et al. Quality indicators for colonoscopy and the risk of interval cancer. N Engl J Med 2010; 362: 1795-803.
8. Harewood GC, Sharma VK, de Garmo P. Impact of colonoscopy preparation quality on detection of suspected colonic neoplasia. Gastrointest Endosc 2003; 58: 76-9.
9. Froehlich F, Wietlisbach V, Gonvers JJ et al. Impact of colonic cleansing on quality and diagnostic yield of colonoscopy: the European Panel of Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy European multicenter study. Gastrointest Endosc 2005; 61: 378-84.
10. Adler A, Wegscheider K, Lieberman D et al. Factors determining the quality of screening colonoscopy: a prospective study on adenoma detection rates, from 12,134 examinations (Berlin colonoscopy project 3, BECOP-3). Gut 2013; 62: 236-41.
11. Lieberman D, Nadel M, Smith RA et al. Standardized colonoscopy reporting and data system: report of the Quality Assurance Task Group of the National Colorectal Cancer Roundtable. Gastrointest Endosc 2007; 65: 757-66.
12. Lieberman DA, Rex DK, Winawer SJ et al. Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance aft er screening and polypectomy: a consensus update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Gastroenterology 2012; 143: 844-57.
13. Ben-Horin S, Bar-Meir S, Avidan B. The impact of colon cleanliness assessment on endoscopists'recommendations for follow-up colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2007; 102: 2680-5.
14. Menees SB, Kim HM, Elliott EE et al. The impact of fair colonoscopy preparation on colonoscopy use and adenoma miss rates in patients undergoing outpatient colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2013; 78: 510-6.
15. Calderwood AH, Jacobson BC. Comprehensive validation of the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 72: 686-92.
16. Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC et al. Meta-Analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-Analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA 2000; 283: 2008-12.
17. Wells G SB, O'Connell J, Robertson J et al. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-Analysis [Website]. 2013 Available from: http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical-epidemiology/oxford.asp.
18. Whiting PF, Rutjes AW, Westwood ME et al. QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med 2011; 155: 529-36.
19. Aronchick CA, Lipshutz WH, Wright SH et al. A novel tableted purgative for colonoscopic preparation: efficacy and safety comparisons with Colyte and Fleet Phospho-Soda. Gastrointest Endosc 2000; 52: 346-52.
20. Lai EJ, Calderwood AH, Doros G et al. The Boston bowel preparation scale: a valid and reliable instrument for colonoscopy-oriented research. Gastrointest Endosc 2009; 69: 620-5.
21. Rostom A, Jolicoeur E. Validation of a new scale for the assessment of bowel preparation quality. Gastrointest Endosc 2004; 59: 482-6.
22. Boroff ES, Gurudu SR, Hentz JG et al. Polyp and adenoma detection rates in the proximal and distal colon. Am J Gastroenterol 2013; 108: 993-9.
23. Francis DL, Rodriguez-Correa DT, Buchner A e t al. Application of a conversion factor to estimate the adenoma detection rate from the polyp detection rate. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 493-7.
24. Higgins JPT, Green S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from: www.cochrane-handbook.org.
25. Zhang J, Yu KF. What's the relative risk? A method of correcting the odds ratio in cohort studies of common outcomes. JAMA 1998; 280: 1690-1.
26. Sterne JA, Sutton AJ, Ioannidis JP e t al. Recommendations for examining and interpreting funnel plot asymmetry in meta-Analyses of randomised controlled trials. BMJ 2011; 343: d4002.
27. Aslanian HR, Shieh FK, Chan FW et al. Nurse observation during colonoscopy increases polyp detection: a randomized prospective study. Am J Gastroenterol 2013; 108: 166-72.
28. Chiu HM, Lin JT, Lee YC et al. Diff erent bowel preparation schedule leads to diff erent diagnostic yield of proximal and nonpolypoid colorectal neoplasm at screening colonoscopy in average-risk population. Dis Colon Rectum 2011; 54: 1570-7.
29. de Jonge V, Sint Nicolaas J, Cahen DL et al. Quality evaluation of colonoscopy reporting and colonoscopy performance in daily clinical practice. Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 75: 98-106.
30. Froehlich F, Wietlisbach V, Gonvers JJ et al. Impact of colonic cleansing on quality and diagnostic yield of colonoscopy: the European Panel of Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy European multicenter study. Gastrointest Endosc 2005; 61: 378-84.
31. Jover R, Zapater P, Polania E et al. Modifiable endoscopic factors that influence the adenoma detection rate in colorectal cancer screening colonoscopies . Gastrointest Endosc 2013; 77: 381-9. e1.
32. Perez VP, Yamamoto JW, Nago AN et al. Quality indicators for colonoscopy in the Peruvian Japanese Policlinic: linked factors]. Acta Gastroenterol Latinoam 2011; 41: 288-95.
33. Radaelli F, Meucci G, Sgroi G et al. Technical performance of colonoscopy: the key role of sedation/analgesia and other quality indicators. Am J Gastroenterol 2008; 103: 1122-30.
34. Adler A, Wegscheider K, Lieberman D et al. Factors determining the quality of screening colonoscopy: a prospective study on adenoma detection rates, from 12,134 examinations (Berlin colonoscopy project 3, BECOP-3). Gut 2013; 62: 236-41.
35. Sherer EA, Imler TD, Imperiale TF. The eff ect of colonoscopy preparation quality on adenoma detection rates. Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 75: 545-53.
36. Bryant RV, Schoeman SN, Schoeman MN. Shorter preparation to procedure interval for colonoscopy improves quality of bowel cleansing. Intern Med J 2013; 43: 162-8.
37. Gao Y, Lin JS, Zhang HD et al. Pilot validation of the Boston bowel preparation scale in China. Dig Endosc 2013; 25: 167-73.
38. Stryker SJ, Wolff BG, Culp CE et al. Natural history of untreated colonic polyps. Gastroenterology 1987; 93: 1009-13.
39. Peery AF, Dellon ES, Lund J et al. Burden of gastrointestinal disease in the United States: 2012 update. Gastroenterology 2012; 143: 1179-87. e1-3.