Adenoma Miss Rate
Conditions
Brief summary
.Studies have demonstrated that the second examination of the proximal colon can significantly increase the proximal ADR.This study aimed to determine the impact of second examination of the proximal colon on AMR compared to conventional examination.Consecutive patients aged 40-75years undergoing colonoscopy for screening.Tandem withdrawal was used in the proximal colon.Patients were randomly assigned to either the second examination(SE) or the conventional examination(CE) group.The primary outcome measure was proximal AMR,defined as the number of proximal adenomas detected in the second pass（CE group）or the third pass（SE group）divided by the total number of proximal adenomas detected during the tandem colonoscopy.
Detailed description
Colonoscopy is routinely performed for detection and removal of colorectal adenomas, thereby preventing colorectal cancer(CRC).The adenoma miss rates(AMR) still ranges between 26%-62%,and missed adenomas may contribute to the development of interval CRC.Therefore, there is currently considerable interest in improving AMR during a colonoscopy.The second examination has recently attracted increasing attention.since it only requires a relatively short procedure time and does not require any specialized equipment.Thus, we performed an randomized controlled trial (RCT) in patients undergoing colonoscopy for screening to determine the impact of second examination of the proximal colon on AMR compared to conventional examination. This study aimed to determine the impact of second examination of the proximal colon on AMR compared to conventional examination.Consecutive patients aged 40-75years undergoing colonoscopy for screening.Patients were excluded if they failed cecal intubation, prior colorectal resection, inadequate bowel preparation quality (Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS)scores \< 2 in any segment of the colon), inflammatory bowel disease or intestinal tuberculosis, familial polyposis syndrome, coagulation dysfunction, or polyp retrieval failure. Consecutive patients aged 40-75years undergoing colonoscopy for screening.Tandem withdrawal was used in the proximal colon.The colonoscope was inserted in a standard manner. After successful insertion in the cecum, the colonoscope was slowly withdrawn to the splenic flexure and the mucosa was carefully observed, the polyps that were found were removed for histopathologic examination(first pass).Once the splenic flexure was reached, the position of splenic flexure was marked by creating a suction mark or taking a small biopsy. Subsequently, the colonoscope was advanced to the cecum again, additional polyps were removed from the proximal colon during the second withdrawal(second pass). When the colonoscope completed the two forward view examination of the proximal colon (defined as proximal to the splenic flexure), patients were randomly assigned to either the second examination(SE) or the conventional examination(CE) group. The randomization sequence was computer-generated and concealed in sequentially numbered sealed opaque envelopes, at this moment, the envelope was opened. For patients in the SE group, the colonoscope was reinserted into the cecum, additional polyps were removed from the proximal colon during the third withdrawall(third pass), and the remainder of the colon from splenic flexure to rectum was examined in a standard manner. For patients in the CE group, the colonoscope was withdrawn directly from the splenic flexure to the rectum, and polyps that were found were removed. Multiple diminutive hyperplastic polyps (≤ 5 mm) in the sigmoid colon and rectum were not subjected to removal, and only one representative polyp biopsy was analyzed. We recorded all adverse events at the time of the colonoscopy and for one week there after The cecal intubation time and withdrawal time were recorded by an assistant with a stopwatch. The time for polypectomy and biopsy were excluded from the withdrawal time. The primary outcome measure was proximal AMR,defined as the number of proximal adenomas detected in the second pass（CE group）or the third pass（SE group）divided by the total number of proximal adenomas detected during the tandem colonoscopy.
Interventions
DIAGNOSTIC_TESTsecond examination of the proximal colon
For patients in the SE group, the colonoscope was reinserted into the cecum, additional polyps were removed from the proximal colon during the third withdrawall(third pass), and the remainder of the colon from splenic flexure to rectum was examined in a standard manner
Sponsors
Third People's Hospital of Jingdezhen City
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Subject)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
40 Years to 75 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
Consecutive patients aged 40-75years undergoing colonoscopy for screening
Exclusion criteria
failed cecal intubation, prior colorectal resection, inadequate bowel preparation quality (Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS)scores \< 2 in any segment of the colon), inflammatory bowel disease or intestinal tuberculosis, familial polyposis syndrome, coagulation dysfunction, or polyp retrieval failure.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| proximal AMR | 2 years | the number of proximal adenomas detected in the second pass（CE group）or the third pass（SE group）divided by the total number of proximal adenomas detected during the tandem colonoscopy. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| proximal polyp miss rate | 2 years | the number of proximal polyps detected in the second pass（CE group）or the third pass（SE group）divided by the total number of proximal polyps detected during the tandem colonoscopy |
| Per-patient proximal AMR or per-patient proximal PMR | 2 years | the number of patients in whom proximal adenomas or polyps were detected only in the second pass（CE group）or the third pass（SE group）divided by the total number of patients with at least one proximal adenoma or polyp detected during the tandem colonoscopy |
| The adenoma detection rate (ADR) or polyp detection rate (PDR) | 2 years | the proportion of patients with at least one adenoma or polyp detected during the tandem colonoscopy |
| Adenoma per colonoscopy (APC) or polyp per colonoscopy (PPC) | 2 years | the total number of adenomas or polyps divided by the total number of patients |
| proximal advanced AMR(AAMR) | 2 years | Advanced adenoma is defined as an adenoma with a size ≥10 mm, with tubulovillous or villous histology, or with high-grade dysplasia. |
Countries
China
Contacts
Primary Contactxiaojia zhu
Outcome results
None listed