Impact of sedation on the Performance Indicator of Colonic Intubation

Abstract

Background The Performance Indicator of Colonic Intubation (PICI) is a new measure of high-quality colonic intubation. Adequate PICI was defined as cecal intubation without significant discomfort and use of minimal sedation. This study assessed achievement of PICI within the Dutch colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program, and determined the association between PICI and adenoma detection rate (ADR). PICI achievement when using the Dutch median midazolam dose was also assessed.

Methods This retrospective study was conducted within the Dutch fecal immunochemical test-based CRC screening program. Colonoscopy and pathology data were prospectively collected in a national database. Data between January 2016 through January 2018 were analyzed. Adequate PICI was defined as successful cecal intubation, Gloucester Comfort Scale (GCS) of 1 – 3, and use of ≤ 2.5 mg midazolam.

Results 107 328 colonoscopies were performed during the study period. Adequate PICI was achieved in 49 500 colonoscopies (46.1 %). In colonoscopies with inadequate PICI, inadequacy was due to higher sedation doses in 87.8 %. Adequate PICI was associated with higher ADR (odds ratio 1.16, 95 % confidence interval 1.12 – 1.20). When using a cutoff of 5 mg midazolam, median dose in this Dutch population, adequate PICI was achieved in 95 410 colonoscopies (88.9  %).

Conclusion PICI appeared to be heavily dependent on sedation practice. Because of wide variation in sedation practice between individual endoscopists and countries, the benefit of PICI as a quality indicator is limited.

Publication History

Received: 10 April 2020

Accepted: 03 September 2020

Accepted Manuscript online:
03 September 2020

Article published online:
22 October 2020

• References

• 1 Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Dikshit R. et al. Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. Int J Cancer 2015; 136: E359-386
• 2 Brenner H, Chang-Claude J, Seiler CM. et al. Protection from colorectal cancer after colonoscopy: a population-based, case–control study. Ann Intern Med 2011; 154: 22-30
• 3 Zauber AG, Winawer SJ, O’Brien MJ. et al. Colonoscopic polypectomy and long-term prevention of colorectal-cancer deaths. N Engl J Med 2012; 366: 687-696
• 4 Zhao S, Wang S, Pan P. et al. Magnitude, risk factors, and factors associated with adenoma miss rate of tandem colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastroenterology 2019; 156: 1661-1674
• 5 Kaminski MF, Regula J, Kraszewska E. et al. Quality indicators for colonoscopy and the risk of interval cancer. N Engl J Med 2010; 362: 1795-1803
• 6 Corley DA, Jensen CD, Marks AR. et al. Adenoma detection rate and risk of colorectal cancer and death. N Engl J Med 2014; 370: 1298-1306
• 7 Baxter NN, Sutradhar R, Forbes SS. et al. Analysis of administrative data finds endoscopist quality measures associated with postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer. Gastroenterology 2011; 140: 65-72
• 8 Valori RM, Damery S, Gavin DR. et al. A new composite measure of colonoscopy: the Performance Indicator of Colonic Intubation (PICI). Endoscopy 2018; 50: 40-51
• 9 Toes-Zoutendijk E, van Leerdam ME, Dekker E. et al. Real-time monitoring of results during first year of Dutch Colorectal Cancer Screening Program and optimization by altering fecal immunochemical test cut-off levels. Gastroenterology 2017; 152: 767-775
• 10 Bronzwaer MES, Depla A, van Lelyveld N. et al. Quality assurance of colonoscopy within the Dutch national colorectal cancer screening program. Gastrointest Endosc 2019; 89: 1-13
• 11 Nederlandse Vereniging van Maag- Darm- en Leverartsen (Dutch Society of Gastroenterologists). Dutch guideline for sedation practices outside of the operation room. 2010 [in Dutch]. Available at (Accessed 9 March 2020): https://www.mdl.nl/files/richlijnen/Richtlijn_sedatie_of_analgesie_op_locaties_buiten_de_OK_definitief.pdf
• 12 Bannert C, Reinhart K, Dunkler D. et al. Sedation in screening colonoscopy: impact on quality indicators and complications. Am J Gastroenterol 2012; 107: 1837-1848
• 13 Belderbos TD, Grobbee EJ, van Oijen MG. et al. Comparison of cecal intubation and adenoma detection between hospitals can provide incentives to improve quality of colonoscopy. Endoscopy 2015; 47: 703-709
• 14 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: 1122-1130
• 15 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: 381-389
• 16 Kozbial K, Reinhart K, Heinze G. et al. High quality of screening colonoscopy in Austria is not dependent on endoscopist specialty or setting. Endoscopy 2015; 47: 207-216
• 17 Ball AJ, Rees CJ, Corfe BM. et al. Sedation practice and comfort during colonoscopy: lessons learnt from a national screening programme. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2015; 27: 741-746
• 18 Seip B, Bretthauer M, Dahler S. et al. Patient satisfaction with on-demand sedation for outpatient colonoscopy. Endoscopy 2010; 42: 639-646
• 19 Bugajski M, Wieszczy P, Hoff G. et al. Modifiable factors associated with patient-reported pain during and after screening colonoscopy. Gut 2018; 67: 1958-1964
• 20 Froehlich F, Harris JK, Wietlisbach V. et al. Current sedation and monitoring practice for colonoscopy: an International Observational Study (EPAGE). Endoscopy 2006; 38: 461-469
• 21 Lichtenstein DR, Jagannath S. Standards of Practice Committee. et al. Sedation and anesthesia in GI endoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2008; 68: 205-216
• 22 Wernli KJ, Brenner AT, Rutter CM. et al. Risks associated with anesthesia services during colonoscopy. Gastroenterology 2016; 150: 888-894
• 23 Ekkelenkamp VE, Dowler K, Valori RM. et al. Patient comfort and quality in colonoscopy. World J Gastroenterol 2013; 19: 2355-2361
• 24 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 (03) 620-625
• 25 Kastenberg D, Bertiger G, Brogadir S. Bowel preparation quality scales for colonoscopy. World J Gastroenterol 2018; 24: 2833-2843
• 26 Kaminski MF, Thomas-Gibson S, Bugajski M. et al. Performance measures for lower gastrointestinal endoscopy: a European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Quality Improvement Initiative. Endoscopy 2017; 49: 378-397
• 27 Erasmus MC - NKI / AVL. Monitor 2017. National Monitoring of the Colorectal Cancer Screening Programme. 2017 Available at: https://www.rivm.nl/sites/default/files/2018-11/DarmMon2017-Engels5.pdf
• 28 Erasmus MC - NKI / AVL. Monitor 2016. National Monitoring of the Colorectal Cancer Screening Programme. 2016 Available at: https://www.rivm.nl/sites/default/files/2018-11/Folder%20monitor%20bvo%20darmkanker%202016%20Engelstalig.pdf
• 29 van Rossum LG, van Rijn AF, Laheij RJ. et al. Random comparison of guaiac and immunochemical fecal occult blood tests for colorectal cancer in a screening population. Gastroenterology 2008; 135: 82-90
• 30 Hol L, Wilschut JA, van Ballegooijen M. et al. Screening for colorectal cancer: random comparison of guaiac and immunochemical faecal occult blood testing at different cut-off levels. Br J Cancer 2009; 100: 1103-1110
• 31 Hol L, van Leerdam ME, van Ballegooijen M. et al. Screening for colorectal cancer: randomised trial comparing guaiac-based and immunochemical faecal occult blood testing and flexible sigmoidoscopy. Gut 2010; 59: 62-68
• 32 Lund M, Erichsen R, Njor SH. et al. The performance indicator of colonic intubation (PICI) in a FIT-based colorectal cancer screening program. Scand J Gastroenterol 2019; 54: 1176-1181
• 33 Inadomi JM, Gunnarsson CL, Rizzo JA. et al. Projected increased growth rate of anesthesia professional-delivered sedation for colonoscopy and EGD in the United States: 2009 to 2015. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 72: 580-586