Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Endosc Int Open 2024; 12(04): E488-E497
DOI: 10.1055/a-2271-1929
Original article

Association between endoscopist adenoma detection rate and serrated polyp detection: Retrospective analysis of over 200,000 screening colonoscopies

Daniela Penz‡
1   Internal Medicine I, St. John of God Hospital Vienna, Vienna, Austria
2   Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Medical University of Vienna, Wien, Austria (Ringgold ID: RIN27271)
,
Daniel Pammer‡
1   Internal Medicine I, St. John of God Hospital Vienna, Vienna, Austria
,
Elisabeth Waldmann
2   Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Medical University of Vienna, Wien, Austria (Ringgold ID: RIN27271)
3   Working Group for Quality Assurance, Austrian Society of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (OEGGH), Vienna, Austria
,
Arno Asaturi
3   Working Group for Quality Assurance, Austrian Society of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (OEGGH), Vienna, Austria
,
Aleksrandra Szymanska
3   Working Group for Quality Assurance, Austrian Society of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (OEGGH), Vienna, Austria
,
Michael Trauner
3   Working Group for Quality Assurance, Austrian Society of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (OEGGH), Vienna, Austria
2   Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Medical University of Vienna, Wien, Austria (Ringgold ID: RIN27271)
,
Monika Ferlitsch
4   Internal Medicine III, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background and study aims Serrated lesions have been identified as precursor lesions for 20% to 35% of colorectal cancers (CRCs) and may contribute to a significant proportion of interval-cancer. Sessile-serrated-lesions (SSLs), in particular, tend to be flat and located in the proximal colon, making their detection challenging and requiring expertise. It remains unclear whether the detection rate for serrated polyps should be considered as a quality indicator in addition to the adenoma detection rate (ADR). This study sought to assess whether the ADR has an effect on the detection rate for serrated polyps.

atients and methods In this retrospective analysis, prospectively collected data from 212,668 screening colonoscopies performed between 2012 and September 2018 were included. Spearman correlation and Whitney-Mann U-test were used to assess the association of ADR and the detection rate of SSLs with (SDR) and without hyperplastic polyps (SPADRs), the sessile serrated detection rate (SSLDR) as well as the clinically relevant serrated detection rate (CRSDR), including all SSLs and traditional serrated adenoma, hyperplastic polyps (HPs) >10 mm anywhere in the colon or HPs > 5 mm proximal to the sigmoid.

Results The overall mean ADR was 21.78% (standard deviation [SD] 9.27), SDR 21.08% (SD 11.44), SPADR 2.19% (SD 2.49), and CRSDR was 3.81% (3.40). Significant correlations were found between the ADR and the SDR, SPADR, SSLDR, and CRSDR (rho=0.73 vs. rho=0.51 vs. rho=0.51 vs. rho=0.63; all P <0.001). Endoscopists with a mean ADR ≥25% had significantly higher SDR, SPADR, and CRSDR than endoscopists with a mean ADR <25% (all P <0.001; Mann-Whitney U-Test).

Conclusions This study shows that endoscopists with higher ADR detect significantly more serrated lesions than those with a lower ADR.



Publication History

Received: 29 April 2023

Accepted after revision: 03 January 2024

Article published online:
05 April 2024

© 2024. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I. et al. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 2018; 68: 394-424
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Arnold M, Sierra MS, Laversanne M. et al. Global patterns and trends in colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. Gut 2017; 66: 683-691
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Zavoral M, Suchanek S, Zavada F. et al. Colorectal cancer screening in Europe. World J Gastroenterol 2009; 15: 5907-5915
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Baxter NN, Warren JL, Barrett MJ. et al. Association between colonoscopy and colorectal cancer mortality in a US cohort according to site of cancer and colonoscopist specialty. J Clin Oncol 2012; 30: 2664-2669
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 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
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 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
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Corley DA, Levin TR, Doubeni CA. Adenoma detection rate and risk of colorectal cancer and death. N Engl J Med 2014; 370: 2541
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Rex DK, Schoenfeld PS, Cohen J. et al. Quality indicators for colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2015; 110: 72-90
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 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. United European Gastroenterol J 2017; 5: 309-334
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Bosman FT, Carneiro F, Hruban RH. et al. WHO classification of tumours of the digestive system. Geneva. World Health Organization; 2010
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 11 Jass JR. Classification of colorectal cancer based on correlation of clinical, morphological and molecular features. Histopathology 2007; 50: 113-130
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 East JE, Vieth M, Rex DK. Serrated lesions in colorectal cancer screening: detection, resection, pathology and surveillance. Gut 2015; 64: 991-1000
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Arain MA, Sawhney M, Sheikh S. et al. CIMP Status of Interval Colon Cancers: Another Piece to the Puzzle. Am J Gastroenterol 2009; 105: 1189
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Snover DC. Update on the serrated pathway to colorectal carcinoma. Human Pathology 2011; 42: 1-10
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Leggett B, Whitehall V. Role of the serrated pathway in colorectal cancer pathogenesis. Gastroenterology 2010; 138: 2088-2100
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 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: 1315-1330
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Anderson JC. Pathogenesis and management of serrated polyps: Current status and future directions. Gut and Liver 2014; 8: 582-589
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 JEG IJ, Bevan R, Senore C. et al. Detection rate of serrated polyps and serrated polyposis syndrome in colorectal cancer screening cohorts: a European overview. Gut 2017; 66: 1225-1232
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Ferlitsch M, Reinhart K, Pramhas S. et al. Sex-specific prevalence of adenomas, advanced adenomas, and colorectal cancer in individuals undergoing screening colonoscopy. JAMA 2011; 306: 1352-1358
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Gessl I, Waldmann E, Britto-Arias M. et al. Surveillance colonoscopy in Austria: Are we following the guidelines?. Endoscopy 2018; 50: 119-127
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Waldmann E, Gessl I, Sallinger D. et al. Trends in quality of screening colonoscopy in Austria. Endoscopy 2016; 48: 1102-1109
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Anderson JC, Butterly LF, Weiss JE. et al. Providing data for serrated polyp detection rate benchmarks: an analysis of the New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry. Gastrointest Endosc 2017; 85: 1188-1194
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Schramm C, Janhsen K, Hofer JH. et al. Detection of clinically relevant serrated polyps during screening colonoscopy: results from seven cooperating centers within the German colorectal screening program. Endoscopy 2018; 50: 993-1000
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Crockett SD, Gourevitch RA, Morris M. et al. Endoscopist factors that influence serrated polyp detection: a multicenter study. Endoscopy 2018; 50: 984-992
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Liang J, Kalady MF, Appau K. et al. Serrated polyp detection rate during screening colonoscopy. Colorectal Dis 2012; 14: 1323-1327
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Zessner-Spitzenberg J, Waldmann E, Jiricka L. et al. Comparison of adenoma detection rate and proximal serrated polyp detection rate and their effect on post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer mortality in screening patients. Endoscopy 2023; 55: 434-441
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar