Increasing rates of SSA/P detection in a large open-access Australian colonoscopy cohort

Abstract

Background and study aims There are limited longitudinal data regarding detection rates for sessile serrated adenoma/polyps (SSADR) and right-sided hyperplastic polyps (RHPDR) that constitute the proximal serrated lesion detection rate (PSLDR). Recently, a minimum PSLDR of 4.5 % has been suggested. This study was designed to assess SSADR, PSLDR and adenoma detection rate (ADR) for a newly qualified gastroenterologist and compare them to published data and to assess the change in SSADR, PSLDR and ADR over time for potential improvement with experience.

Patients and methods All colonoscopies performed by a single colonoscopist (AM), at one Australian ambulatory direct-access endoscopy center over 4 years from 2011 to 2015 were retrospectively analyzed. Histology was reported by a single expert pathologist (SL). ADR, SSADR, RHPDR and PSLDR were recorded.

Results A total of 841 colonoscopies were performed on 637 patients. Of them, 454 (54 %) were males. Mean age was 59 years. Of the colonoscopies, 87 % were performed for patients with ASA scores of 1 – 2, 422 (50.2 %) were for screening or surveillance, 374 (44.5 %) for investigation of symptoms and 45 (5.4 %) had therapeutic indications. Conventional adenomas were detected in 346 colonoscopies (ADR = 41.1 %), SSA/P in 124 (SSADR = 14.7 %) and RHP in the absence of SSA/P in 35 (RHPDR = 4.2 %). PSLDR was 18.9 %. ADR was stable over time (range 33 %-50 %). SSADR and PSLDR increased over time [SSADR: 8.6 % (2011), 8.4 % (2012), 14.9 % (2013), 18.5 % (2014), 25.0 % (2015); PSLDR: 10.5 % (2011), 11.3 % (2012), 16.8 % (2013), 27.2 % (2014), 29.4 % (2015)]. There was a statistically significant improvement in SSADR (IRR 1.37) and PSLDR (IRR 1.36) over the study period (P < 0.001), whereas the ADR remained stable (IRR 1.04, P = 0.334).

Conclusions SSADR and PSLDR in this unselected direct-access cohort are high and exceed previously reported detection rates in the final 2 years. Detection rates improved with experience, likely representing a learning effect. The minimum expected PSLDR may need to be revised upwards and further studies are required, particularly in areas where screening colonoscopies are offered only for patients with increased colorectal cancer risk (family history or fecal immunochemical test-positive).

• References

• 1 Vogelstein B, Fearon ER, Hamilton SR. et al. Genetic alterations during colorectal-tumor development. N Engl J Med 1988; 319: 525-532
• 2 Kedrin D, Gala MK. Genetics of the serrated pathway to colorectal cancer. Clin Transl Gastroenterol 2015; 6: e84
• 3 Rex DK, Ahnen DJ, Baron JA. et al. Serrated lesions of the colorectum: review and recommendations from an expert panel. Am J Gastroenterol 2012; 107: 1315-1329 quiz 4, 30
• 4 East JE, Vieth M, Rex DK. Serrated lesions in colorectal cancer screening: detection, resection, pathology and surveillance. Gut 2015; 64: 991-1000
• 5 Australian Cancer Network Colorectal Cancer Guidelines Revision Committee. Guidelines for the Prevention, Early Detection and Management of Colorectal Cancer. Sydney: The Cancer Council Australia and Australian Cancer Network; 2005
• 6 Cancer Council Australia Colonoscopy Surveillance Working Party. Clinical Practice Guidelines for Surveillance Colonoscopy – in adenoma follow-up; following curative resection of colorectal cancer; and for cancer surveillance in inflammatory bowel disease. Sydney: Cancer Council Australia; 2011
• 7 Rex DK, Boland CR, Dominitz JA. et al. Colorectal Cancer Screening: Recommendations for Physicians and Patients From the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Gastroenterology 2017; 153: 307-323
• 8 le Clercq CM, Mooi RJ, Winkens B. et al. Temporal trends and variability of colonoscopy performance in a gastroenterology practice. Endoscopy 2016; 48: 248-255
• 9 Bettington M, Walker N, Rahman T. et al. High prevalence of sessile serrated adenomas in contemporary outpatient colonoscopy practice. Intern Med J 2017; 47: 318-323
• 10 Kahi CJ, Hewett DG, Norton DL. et al. Prevalence and variable detection of proximal colon serrated polyps during screening colonoscopy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2011; 9: 42-46
• 11 Dwyer J, Churchill T, Manthe M. et al. Factors influencing sessile serrated adenoma (SSA) detection rates at a multi-centre metropolitan Australian health service. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2014; 29: 27-45
• 12 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
• 13 Rex DK, Ponugoti PL. Calculating the adenoma detection rate in screening colonoscopies only: Is it necessary? Can it be gamed?. Endoscopy 2017; 49: 1069-1074
• 14 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
• 15 Tutticci NJ, Leggett B, Appleyard MN. et al. The prevalence of sessile serrated adenomas in a fecal immunochemical test positive colorectal cancer screening cohort. Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 75: AB342