Yield of the second surveillance colonoscopy based on the results of the index and first surveillance colonoscopies

Background and study aims: The risk of advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACN) after the first surveillance colonoscopy is not well quantified. The aim of the current study was to quantify the risk of ACN on the second surveillance colonoscopy based on previous colonoscopic findings.

Patients and methods: This was a single-site study of patients with index adenomas who underwent two surveillance colonoscopies. ACN was defined as advanced adenoma (≥ 1 cm, villous histology, or high-grade dysplasia) or as “high-risk” findings (advanced adenoma or ≥ 3 non-advanced adenoma [NAA]).

Results: Among 509 patients with low-risk index findings, 61 (12.0 %; 95 % confidence interval [CI], 9.3 % – 15.1 %) had high-risk findings on the first surveillance colonoscopy, 11 of whom (18.0 %; 95 %CI 9.4 % – 30.0 %) had high-risk findings on second surveillance colonoscopy compared with 39 (8.7 %; 95 %CI 6.3 % – 11.7 %) of the remaining 448 patients who had normal or low-risk findings on the first surveillance colonoscopy (relative risk [RR] = 2.07; 95 %CI 1.12 – 3.83). Among 456 patients with high-risk index findings, 91 (20.0 %; 95 %CI 16.3 % – 23.9 %) had high-risk findings on the first surveillance colonoscopy, 20 of whom (22.0 %; 95 %CI 14.0 % – 31.9 %) had high-risk findings on second surveillance colonoscopy compared with 40 (11.0 %; 95 %CI 8.0 % – 146 %) of the remaining 365 patients who had normal or low-risk findings on first surveillance colonoscopy (RR = 2.01; 95 %CI 1.04 – 3.32). Results were similar when only advanced adenomas were considered.

Conclusions: Patients with high-risk findings on index and first surveillance colonoscopies require close surveillance. Those with low-risk findings on index colonoscopy and normal/non-advanced findings on the first surveillance colonoscopy have low subsequent risk of ACN. These and previous data may be useful for generating recommendations for the timing of the second surveillance colonoscopy.

• References

• 1 Rex DK, Johnson DA, Lieberman DA et al. Colorectal cancer prevention 2000: screening recommendations of the American College of Gastroenterology. American College of Gastroenterology. Am J Gastroenterol 2000; 95: 868-877
• 2 Kahi CJ, Imperiale TF, Juliar BE et al. Effect of screening colonoscopy on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2009; 7: 770-775
• 3 Muller AD, Sonnenberg A. Prevention of colorectal cancer by flexible endoscopy and polypectomy. A case–control study of 32,702 veterans. Ann Intern Med 1995; 123: 904-910
• 4 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
• 5 Levin B, Lieberman DA, McFarland B et al. Screening and surveillance for the early detection of colorectal cancer and adenomatous polyps, 2008: a joint guideline from the American Cancer Society, the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology. Gastroenterology 2008; 134: 1570-1595
• 6 Lieberman DA, Weiss DG, Harford WV et al. Five-year colon surveillance after screening colonoscopy. Gastroenterology 2007; 133: 1077-1085
• 7 Laiyemo AO, Pinsky PF, Marcus PM et al. Utilization and yield of surveillance colonoscopy in the continued follow-up study of the polyp prevention trial. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2009; 7: 562-867
• 8 Pinsky PF, Schoen RE, Weissfeld JL et al. The yield of surveillance colonoscopy by adenoma history and time to examination. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2009; 7: 86-92
• 9 Robertson DJ, Burke CA, Welch HG et al. Using the results of a baseline and a surveillance colonoscopy to predict recurrent adenomas with high-risk characteristics. Ann Intern Med 2009; 151: 103-109
• 10 Bond JH. Polyp guideline: diagnosis, treatment, and surveillance for patients with colorectal polyps. Practice Parameters Committee of the American College of Gastroenterology. Am J Gastroenterol 2000; 95: 3053-3063
• 11 Morelli MS, Miller JS, Imperiale TF. Colonoscopy performance in a large private practice: a comparison to quality benchmarks. J Clin Gastroenterol 2010; 44: 152-153
• 12 Stryker SJ, Wolff BG, Culp CE et al. Natural history of untreated colonic polyps. Gastroenterology 1987; 93: 1009-1013
• 13 Brenner H, Hoffmeister M, Stegmaier C et al. Risk of progression of advanced adenomas to colorectal cancer by age and sex: estimates based on 840,149 screening colonoscopies. Gut 2007; 56: 1585-1589
• 14 Cottet V, Jooste V, Fournel I et al. Long-term risk of colorectal cancer after adenoma removal: a population-based cohort study. Gut 2012; 61: 1180-1186
• 15 Lieberman DL, Rex DK, Winawer SJ et al. Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after screening and polypectomy: a consensus update by the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force in Colorectal Cancer. Gastroenterology 2012; 143: 844-857