Experience of Operator May Be More Crucial than Withdrawal Time of Colonoscopy for the Detection of Colonic Neoplasm

Jae Jun Park

doi:10.4166/kjg.2014.64.5.253

Journal List > Korean J Gastroenterol > v.64(5) > 1007293

Go to TopGo to Top Go to BottomGo to Bottom

TOOLS

Park: Experience of Operator May Be More Crucial than Withdrawal Time of Colonoscopy for the Detection of Colonic Neoplasm

Editorial

Korean J Gastroenterol 2014;64(5):253-255.

Published online: 4 October 2014

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4166/kjg.2014.64.5.253

Experience of Operator May Be More Crucial than Withdrawal Time of Colonoscopy for the Detection of Colonic Neoplasm

Jae Jun Park

Department of Internal Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

Correspondence to: Jae Jun Park, Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 211 Eonju-ro, Gangnam-gu, Seoul 135-720, Korea. Tel: +82-2-2019-4371, Fax: +82-2-3463-3882, E-mail: jaejpark@yuhs.ac

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Article

Difference in Adenoma Detection Rates according to Colonoscopic Withdrawal Times and the Level of Expertise

Go to :

References

1. Rex DK, Bond JH, Winawer S, et al. U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Quality in the technical performance of colonoscopy and the continuous quality improvement process for colonoscopy: recommendations of the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Am J Gastroenterol. 2002; 97:1296–1308.

2. Munroe CA, Lee P, Copland A, et al. A tandem colonoscopy study of adenoma miss rates during endoscopic training: a venture into uncharted territory. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012; 75:561–567.

3. Lee TJ, Rees CJ, Blanks RG, et al. Colonoscopic factors associated with adenoma detection in a national colorectal cancer screening program. Endoscopy. 2014; 46:203–211.

4. Barclay RL, Vicari JJ, Doughty AS, Johanson JF, Greenlaw RL. Colonoscopic withdrawal times and adenoma detection during screening colonoscopy. N Engl J Med. 2006; 355:2533–2541.

5. Rex DK, Petrini JL, Baron TH, et al. Quality indicators for colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006; 63(4 Suppl):S16–S28.

6. Lee TJ, Blanks RG, Rees CJ, et al. Longer mean colonoscopy withdrawal time is associated with increased adenoma detection: evidence from the Bowel Cancer Screening Programme in England. Endoscopy. 2013; 45:20–26.

7. Lee TJ, Rutter MD, Blanks RG, et al. Colonoscopy quality meas-ures: experience from the NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme. Gut. 2012; 61:1050–1057.

8. Benson ME, Reichelderfer M, Said A, Gaumnitz EA, Pfau PR. Variation in colonoscopic technique and adenoma detection rates at an academic gastroenterology unit. Dig Dis Sci. 2010; 55:166–171.

9. Overholt BF, Brooks-Belli L, Grace M, et al. Benchmark Colonoscopy Group. Withdrawal times and associated factors in colonoscopy: a quality assurance multicenter assessment. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2010; 44:e80–e86.

10. Barclay RL, Vicari JJ, Greenlaw RL. Effect of a time-dependent colonoscopic withdrawal protocol on adenoma detection during screening colonoscopy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2008; 6:1091–1098.

11. Simmons DT, Harewood GC, Baron TH, et al. Impact of endoscopist withdrawal speed on polyp yield: implications for optimal colonoscopy withdrawal time. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2006; 24:965–971.

12. Sanchez W, Harewood GC, Petersen BT. Evaluation of polyp detection in relation to procedure time of screening or surveillance colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2004; 99:1941–1945.

13. 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; 62:236–241.

14. Moritz V, Bretthauer M, Ruud HK, et al. Withdrawal time as a quality indicator for colonoscopy: a nationwide analysis. Endoscopy. 2012; 44:476–481.

15. Lee RH, Tang RS, Muthusamy VR, et al. Quality of colonoscopy withdrawal technique and variability in adenoma detection rates (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc. 2011; 74:128–134.

16. Gellad ZF, Weiss DG, Ahnen DJ, Lieberman DA, Jackson GL, Provenzale D. Colonoscopy withdrawal time and risk of neoplasia at 5 years: results from VA Cooperative Studies Program 380. Am J Gastroenterol. 2010; 105:1746–1752.

17. Taber A, Romagnuolo J. Effect of simply recording colonoscopy withdrawal time on polyp and adenoma detection rates. Gastrointest Endosc. 2010; 71:782–786.

18. Sawhney MS, Cury MS, Neeman N, et al. Effect of institution- wide policy of colonoscopy withdrawal time > or = 7 minutes on polyp detection. Gastroenterology. 2008; 135:1892–1898.

19. Lin OS, Kozarek RA, Arai A, et al. The effect of periodic monitoring and feedback on screening colonoscopy withdrawal times, polyp detection rates, and patient satisfaction scores. Gastrointest Endosc. 2010; 71:1253–1259.

20. Rex DK. Colonoscopic withdrawal technique is associated with adenoma miss rates. Gastrointest Endosc. 2000; 51:33–36.

21. Kim YD, Bae WK, Choi YH, et al. Difference in adenoma detection rates according to colonoscopic withdrawal times and the level of expertise. Korean J Gastroenterol. 2014; 64:278–283.

Go to :

TOOLS

Similar articles