Annals of Coloproctology

Display

Sort by :

Original Articles

Colonoscopy

Analysis of adenoma detection rate of colonoscopy among trainees: Young Min Song, Kyung Su Han, Byung Chang Kim, Chang Won Hong, Bun Kim, Min Chul Kim, Myeong Jae Jin, Dae Kyung Sohn; Ann Coloproctol. 2024;40(6):548-554. Published online August 28, 2024; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2023.00199.0028

4,031 View
94 Download
1 Web of Science
1 Citations

Purpose
To analyze adenoma detection rate (ADR) and related quality indicators of colonoscopy among trainees and make recommendations for appropriate colonoscopy training.
Methods
ADR and related indicators of colonoscopies performed by 3 trainees and 5 colonoscopy experts between March and November 2022 were analyzed. These indicators were analyzed in both the entire patients and the screening/surveillance group. In addition, the training period of the 3 trainees was divided into 3 sections, and the changes in these indicators were examined.
Results
The mean ADR of the 3 trainees was 50.6%. In the screening/surveillance group, the mean ADR of the 3 trainees was 51.8%, showing no significant difference from the experts' ADR (53.4%). When the training period was divided into 3 sections and analyzed in the screening/surveillance group, the mean ADR of the trainees gradually increased to 49.4%, 52.6%, and 53.6%, respectively; however, the difference was insignificant. Analyzing each trainee’s ADR, there was a significant difference among the 3 trainees (58.5% vs. 44.7% vs. 50.2%, P=0.008). However, in the third section of the training period, the 3 trainees’ ADRs were 53.0%, 49.2%, and 57.3%, respectively, showing no significant difference (P=0.606).
Conclusion
In the early stages of training, the ADR was higher than recommended; however, there were variances in ADR between individuals. As the training period passed, the ADR became similar at the expert level, whereas the difference in ADR between trainees decreased. Therefore, efforts to increase ADR should be made actively from the beginning of training and continued during the training period.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Adenoma per polypectomy as a training metric in colonoscopy: a retrospective analysis of trainee progression compared to expert performance
Young Min Song, Kyung Su Han, Byung Chang Kim, Chang Won Hong, Bun Kim, Dae Kyung Sohn
Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research.2025; 109(2): 113. CrossRef

Correlation Between Bowel Preparation and the Adenoma Detection Rate in Screening Colonoscopy: Jung Hun Park, Sang Jin Kim, Jong Hee Hyun, Kyung Su Han, Byung Chang Kim, Chang Won Hong, Sang-Jeon Lee, Dae Kyung Sohn; Ann Coloproctol. 2017;33(3):93-98. Published online June 30, 2017; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2017.33.3.93

12,875 View
108 Download
25 Web of Science
28 Citations

Abstract PDF

Purpose

The adenoma detection rate is commonly used as a measure of the quality of colonoscopy. This study assessed both the association between the adenoma detection rate and the quality of bowel preparation and the risk factors associated with the adenoma detection rate in screening colonoscopy.

Methods

This retrospective analysis involved 1,079 individuals who underwent screening colonoscopy at the National Cancer Center between December 2012 and April 2014. Bowel preparation was classified by using the Aronchick scale. Individuals with inadequate bowel preparations (n = 47, 4.4%) were excluded because additional bowel preparation was needed. The results of 1,032 colonoscopies were included in the analysis.

Results

The subjects' mean age was 53.1 years, and 657 subjects (63.7%) were men. The mean cecal intubation time was 6.7 minutes, and the mean withdrawal time was 8.7 minutes. The adenoma and polyp detection rates were 28.1% and 41.8%, respectively. The polyp, adenoma, and advanced adenoma detection rates did not correlate with the quality of bowel preparation. The multivariate analysis showed age ≥ 60 years (hazard ratio [HR], 1.42; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02–1.97; P = 0.040), body mass index ≥ 25 kg/m² (HR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.17–2.08; P = 0.002) and current smoking (HR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.01–2.06; P = 0.014) to be independent risk factors for adenoma detection.

Conclusion

The adenoma detection rate was unrelated to the quality of bowel preparation for screening colonoscopy. Older age, obesity, and smoking were independent risk factors for adenoma detection.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Age and Sex Adenoma Detection Rates in Colonoscopy and Optimization of Screening Age: A Retrospective Analysis
Burak Sakar, Osman Zekai Oner, Ali Celik, Omer Celik, Turan Can Yıldız, Ugur Dogan, Onur Ilkay Dincer
Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques.2025; 35(8): 596. CrossRef
Efficacy and Safety of L-Menthol During Gastrointestinal Endoscopy—A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials
Dorottya Gergő, Andrea Tóth-Mészáros, Alexander Schulze Wenning, Péter Fehérvári, Uyen Nguyen Do To, Péter Hegyi, Bálint Erőss, Attila Ványolós, Dezső Csupor
Journal of Clinical Medicine.2025; 14(12): 4296. CrossRef
Assessment of Patient‐Reported Outcome Measures in Patients Undergoing Bowel Preparation With Mannitol for Colonoscopy: The SATISFACTION Study
Gian Eugenio Tontini, Cristiano Spada, Peter Uebel, Renato Cannizzaro, Giorgio Ciprandi, Maurizio Vecchi
JGH Open.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Clinical outcomes of bowel preparation education strategies in colonoscopy: An evidence map of systematic reviews
Ningning Li, Mengdan Ye, Qihan Wu, Bingru Li, Yingying Wang, Wen Li
Medicine.2025; 104(39): e44644. CrossRef
Evaluating the Efficacy of Resect-and-Discard and Resect-and-Retrieve Strategies for Diminutive Colonic Polyps
Andrei Lucian Groza, Bogdan Miutescu, Cristian Tefas, Alexandru Popa, Iulia Ratiu, Roxana Sirli, Alina Popescu, Alexandru Catalin Motofelea, Marcel Tantau
Life.2024; 14(4): 532. CrossRef
Split doses versus whole dose bowel preparation using polyethylene glycol for colonoscopy: A multicentric prospective Lebanese randomized trial between 2021 and 2023
Blaybel Sara, Hammoud Ghinwa, Mourda Layla, Hallal Mahmoud, Khalil Ali, Mckey Remy
Health Science Reports.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Overall Polyp Detection Rate as a Surrogate Measure for Screening Efficacy Independent of Histopathology: Evidence from National Endoscopy Database
Mark Aloysius, Hemant Goyal, Tejas Nikumbh, Niraj Shah, Ganesh Aswath, Savio John, Amol Bapaye, Sushovan Guha, Nirav Thosani
Life.2024; 14(6): 654. CrossRef
Application of linaclotide in bowel preparation for colonoscopy in patients with constipation: A prospective randomized controlled study
Haoxin Xu, Zhu He, Yulin Liu, Hong Xu, Pengfei Liu
Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology.2024; 39(12): 2752. CrossRef
Assessment of the Impact of Bowel Preparation Quality on Adenoma Detection Rate in Screening Colonoscopy: A Multicenter Study
Altaf Ahmad, Muhammad Ishaq, Shafaq Farooq, Hafeez Ullah, Muhammad Adil Raza, Asma Abdul Razzak, Syed Kumail Abbas Razvi
Indus Journal of Bioscience Research.2024; 3(2): 478. CrossRef
Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in the Association Between Time of Day and Colonoscopy Quality
Zihua Lu, Lihui Zhang, Liwen Yao, Dexin Gong, Lianlian Wu, Meiqing Xia, Jun Zhang, Wei Zhou, Xu Huang, Chunping He, Huiling Wu, Chenxia Zhang, Xun Li, Honggang Yu
JAMA Network Open.2023; 6(1): e2253840. CrossRef
Correlation between prescribing doctor attributes and intestinal cleanliness in colonoscopy: a study of 22522 patients
Haibin Zhou, Hayat Khizar, Xiaofeng Zhang, Jianfeng Yang
Annals of Medicine.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Enhancing the Quality of Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: Current Indicators and Future Trends
Caesar Ferrari, Micheal Tadros
Gastroenterology Insights.2023; 15(1): 1. CrossRef
Reinforced education by short message service improves the quality of bowel preparation for colonoscopy
Peng Li, Xueqian He, Jie Dong, Youwei Chen, Qin Zhou
International Journal of Colorectal Disease.2022; 37(4): 815. CrossRef
Supplementary education can improve the rate of adequate bowel preparation in outpatients: A systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials
Shicheng Peng, Sixu Liu, Jiaming Lei, Wensen Ren, Lijun Xiao, Xiaolan Liu, Muhan Lü, Kai Zhou, Antonio Z. Gimeno-Garcia
PLOS ONE.2022; 17(4): e0266780. CrossRef
Adenoma Detection Rate in Colonoscopic Screening with Ketamine-based Sedation: A Prospective Observational Study
Mirza KOVACEVIC, Nermina RIZVANOVIC, Adisa SABANOVIC ADILOVIC, Nedim BARUCIJA, Anida ABAZOVIC
Medeniyet Medical Journal.2022; 37(1): 79. CrossRef
Colonic bowel prep and body mass index: does one size fit all? A multi-centre review
Brodie D. Laurie, Mary M. K. Teoh, Alfredo Noches-Garcia, Munyaradzi G. Nyandoro
International Journal of Colorectal Disease.2022; 37(12): 2451. CrossRef
Multimedia based education on bowel preparation improves adenoma detection rate: Systematic review & meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials
Saurabh Chandan, Sumant Arora, Babu P. Mohan, Shahab R. Khan, Ojasvini C. Chandan, Lena L. Kassab, Arvind R. Murali
Digestive Endoscopy.2021; 33(5): 730. CrossRef
Role of Bowel Preparation in Adenoma Detection Rate and Follow-up Recommendations in African American Dominant Patient Population
Hamid-Reza Moein, Eskara Pervez, Salina Faidhalla, Heba Habbal, Hajra Khan, Anshu Wadehra, Mahvish Khalid, Diana Kakos, Paul Naylor, Bashar Mohamad
Cureus.2021;[Epub] CrossRef
The unmet needs for identifying the ideal bowel preparation
Gian E Tontini, Alberto Prada, Sandro Sferrazza, Giorgio Ciprandi, Maurizio Vecchi
JGH Open.2021; 5(10): 1135. CrossRef
When should we perform colonoscopy to increase the adenoma detection rate?
Sang Hoon Kim, Jae Hak Kim
World Journal of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.2021; 13(12): 619. CrossRef
Quality of Preoperative Colonoscopy Affects Missed Postoperative Adenoma Detection in Colorectal Cancer Patients
Jae Ho Park, Hee Seok Moon, In Sun Kwon, Ju Seok Kim, Sun Hyung Kang, Eaum Seok Lee, Seok Hyun Kim, Jae Kyu Sung, Byung Seok Lee, Hyun Yong Jeong
Digestive Diseases and Sciences.2020; 65(7): 2063. CrossRef
Bowel Preparation for Colonoscopy in 2020: A Look at the Past, Present, and Future
Valentine Ongeri Millien, Nabil M. Mansour
Current Gastroenterology Reports.2020;[Epub] CrossRef
Effect of Sending Educational Video Clips via Smartphone Mobile Messenger on Bowel Preparation before Colonoscopy
Sung Chan Jeon, Jae Hyun Kim, Sun Jung Kim, Hye Jung Kwon, Youn Jung Choi, Kyoungwon Jung, Sung Eun Kim, Won Moon, Moo In Park, Seun Ja Park
Clinical Endoscopy.2019; 52(1): 53. CrossRef
Efficacy of 1.2 L polyethylene glycol plus ascorbic acid for bowel preparations
Hiroyuki Tamaki, Teruyo Noda, Masahiro Morita, Akina Omura, Atsushi Kubo, Chikara Ogawa, Toshihiro Matsunaka, Mitsushige Shibatoge
World Journal of Clinical Cases.2019; 7(4): 452. CrossRef
Microbiome and morbid obesity increase pathogenic stimulus diversity
Björn L.D.M. Brücher, Ijaz S. Jamall, Obul R. Bandapalli
4open.2019; 2: 10. CrossRef
Difference in Physician- and Patient-Dependent Factors Contributing to Adenoma Detection Rate and Serrated Polyp Detection Rate
Maryan Cavicchi, Gaëlle Tharsis, Pascal Burtin, Philippe Cattan, Franck Venezia, Gilles Tordjman, Agnès Gillet, Joëlle Samama, Karine Nahon-Uzan, David Karsenti
Digestive Diseases and Sciences.2019; 64(12): 3579. CrossRef
Impact of diet restriction on bowel preparation for colonoscopy
Seung-Joo Nam, Young Jin Kim, Bora Keum, Jae Min Lee, Seung Han Kim, Hyuk Soon Choi, Eun Sun Kim, Yeon Seok Seo, Yoon Tae Jeen, Hong Sik Lee, Hoon Jai Chun, Soon Ho Um, Chang Duck Kim
Medicine.2018; 97(41): e12645. CrossRef
Limitation and Value of Using the Adenoma Detection Rate for Colonoscopy Quality Assurance
Jun Hur, Moo-Jun Baek
Annals of Coloproctology.2017; 33(3): 81. CrossRef

Efficacy of Transparent Cap-attached Colonoscopy: Does It Improve the Quality of Colonoscopy?.: Choi, Dong Hyun , Shin, Hyeon Keun , Lee, Young Chan , Lim, Cheong Ho , Jeong, Seung Kyu , Lee, Suk Hwan , Yang, Hyung Kyu; J Korean Soc Coloproctol. 2010;26(2):116-122.; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/jksc.2010.26.2.116

8,323 View
19 Download
8 Citations

Abstract PDF

PURPOSE
Recently, the use of a transparent cap attached to the tip of the colonoscope has been revealed to be helpful in both detecting colorectal polyps and shortening the intubation time to the cecum. The aim of this study was to examine the usefulness of transparent cap-attached colonoscopy (CAC) as compared with conventional colonoscopy (CC) in terms of the technical ease and efficiency.
METHODS
Colonoscopies from a total of 228 patients between May and October 2008 were prospectively collected. All colonoscopies were performed by single colorectal surgeon whose experience exceeded 3,000 colonoscopies. Patients were assigned to the CAC group (n=114) or to the CC group (n=114). The cecal intubation rate and time, the polyp detection rate, the adenoma detection rate, the withdrawal time, and the visual analogue scale (VAS) of the patient's pain were compared.
RESULTS
There were no significant differences in the age, sex, body mass index, previous history of abdominal operation, diverticulosis, and the degree of bowel preparation between the two groups. The cecal intubation rate was 100% in both groups. The cecal intubation time was significantly shorter in the CAC group than in the CC group overall (5.3+/-4.0 min vs. 7.6+/-4.3 min, P<0.001), as well as for female (6.1+/-2.8 min vs. 9.1+/-4.7 min, P<0.001) patients. There were no statistically significant differences in the total colonoscopy time (13.1+/-6.3 min vs. 14.5+/-5.2 min, P=0.066), the polyp detection rate (38.6% vs. 33.3%, P=0.408), the adenoma detection rate (28.1% vs. 25.4%, P=0.654), and the VAS scale of pain (2.48 vs. 2.74, P=0.353) between the CAC and the CC groups.
CONCLUSION
The transparent cap is effective in shortening the cecal intubation time, especially in female patients.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Cap-assisted endoscopy: Do we have enough evidence?
Thomas Frieling
Endoscopy International Open.2018; 06(10): E1224. CrossRef
Improving the utility of colonoscopy: Recent advances in practice
Crispin J Corte, Rupert W Leong
Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology.2016; 31(1): 32. CrossRef
The Effect of Indigocarmine on Improvement of the Polyp Detection Rate during Colonoscopic Examination with Hood Cap
Sang Chang Kwon, Sung Won Choi, Seong Ho Choi, Hee Seung Park, Seung Heon Lee, Bong Gun Kim, Eun Hee Seo, Mun Jang, Seung Min Ryu, Dong Hyun Kim, Young Hoon Kim, Jun Ouk Ha, Jae Seung Lee
Intestinal Research.2014; 12(1): 60. CrossRef
Image-enhanced, chromo, and cap-assisted colonoscopy for improving adenoma/neoplasia detection rate: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Fumio Omata, Sachiko Ohde, Gautam A. Deshpande, Daiki Kobayashi, Katsunori Masuda, Tsuguya Fukui
Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology.2014; 49(2): 222. CrossRef
Transparent cap colonoscopy versus standard colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Jenna L. Morgan, Kathryn Thomas, Sarah Braungart, Richard L. Nelson
Techniques in Coloproctology.2013; 17(4): 353. CrossRef
Can Cap-Assisted Colonoscopy Be a Savior for Right Side Interval Cancer?
Hyung Hun Kim
Digestive Diseases and Sciences.2013; 58(2): 289. CrossRef
Efficacy of Hood-cap Assisted Colonoscopy; Comparison with Conventional Colonoscopy
Sung Won Choi, Hee Seung Park, Jae Seung Lee, Sang Yon Hwang, Sung Dong Kwak, Seong Ho Choi
Intestinal Research.2012; 10(3): 280. CrossRef
Transparent Cap Colonoscopy versus Standard Colonoscopy to Improve Caecal Intubation
Jenna Morgan, Kathryn Thomas, Heather Lee-Robichaud, Richard L Nelson, Sarah Braungart
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.2012;[Epub] CrossRef

First
Prev
Page of 1
Next
Last

Search