Abstract
Background and Aims
Surveillance colonoscopy frequently occurs prior to recommended intervals. Studies delineating the reasons why premature surveillance occurs are limited. We sought to define the frequency in which premature surveillance colonoscopy occurs in the setting of an inadequate bowel preparation or with a provided patient clinical indication versus when premature surveillance colonoscopy occurs without any provided discernible rationale in the setting of adequate bowel preparation.
Methods
A retrospective cross-sectional cohort study of 700 patients undergoing colonoscopy for an indication of “surveillance of polyps” from 2008 to 2014 at two tertiary-care referral centers was carried out. Patients were deemed either “adherent” or “premature” based on US Multi-Society Task Force guideline intervals for surveillance colonoscopy. A documented decision-making rationale for premature surveillance was determined through review of the electronic medical record with assessment of clinical notes and endoscopy order and report.
Results
Premature surveillance occurred in 43.0 % (n = 301) of all surveillance colonoscopies performed. Among the premature cases, rationale was attributed to inadequate bowel preparation in 17.3 % (n = 52) and due to a new clinical indication in 21.6 % (n = 65). Most commonly, in 61.1 % (n = 184) of premature cases, no rationale was documented for the early colonoscopy.
Conclusions
Documented decision-making rationale for premature surveillance colonoscopy is usually absent in premature cases with inadequate bowel preparation and new clinical indications explaining only a minority of the occurrences.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Lieberman DA, De Garmo PL, Fleischer DE, et al. Patterns of endoscopy use in the United States. Gastroenterology. 2000;118:619–624.
Schoen RE, Pinsky PF, Weissfeld JL, et al. Utilization of surveillance colonoscopy in community practice. Gastroenterology. 2010;138:73–81.
Ladabaum U, Song K. Projected national impact of colorectal cancer screening on clinical and economic outcomes and health services demand. Gastroenterology. 2005;129:1151–1162.
Miller J, Mehta N, Feldman M, et al. Findings on serial surveillance colonoscopy in patients with low-risk polyps on initial colonoscopy. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2010;44:e46–e50.
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;7:562–567.
Mysliwiec PA, Brown ML, Klabunde CN, et al. Are physicians doing too much colonoscopy? A national survey of colorectal surveillance after polypectomy. Ann Intern Med. 2004;141:264–271.
Gimeno-Garcia AZ, Quintero E. Colonoscopy appropriateness: really needed or a waste of time? World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2015;7:94–101.
Suriani R, Rizzetto M, Mazzucco D, et al. Appropriateness of colonoscopy in a digestive endoscopy unit: a prospective study using ASGE guidelines. J Eval Clin Pract. 2009;15:41–45.
Morini S, Hassan C, Meucci G, et al. Diagnostic yield of open access colonoscopy according to appropriateness. Gastrointest Endosc. 2001;54:175–179.
American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Appropriate use of gastrointestinal endoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2000;52:831–837.
Rizk MK, Sawhney MS, Cohen J, et al. Quality indicators common to all GI endoscopic procedures. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015;81:3–16.
ASGE Standards of Practice Committee, Chandrasekhara V, Eloubeidi MA, et al. Open access endoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015;81:1326–1329.
Menees SB, Elliott R, Govani S, et al. The impact of bowel cleansing on follow-up recommendations in average-risk patients with a normal colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2014;109:148–154.
Lieberman DA, Rex DK, Winawer SJ, et al. Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after screening and polypectomy: a consensus update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Gastroenterology. 2012;143:844–857.
Clark BT, Rustagi T, Laine L. What level of bowel prep quality requires early repeat colonoscopy: systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of preparation quality on adenoma detection rate. Am J Gastroenterol. 2014;109:1714–1723.
Johnson DA, Barkun AN, Cohen LB, et al. Optimizing adequacy of bowel cleaning for colonoscopy: recommendations from the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Am J Gastroenterol. 2014;109:1528–1545.
Rex DK, Schoenfeld PS, Cohen J, et al. Quality indicators for colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015;81:31–53.
Cairns SR, Scholefield JH, Steele RJ, et al. Guidelines for colorectal cancer screening and surveillance in moderate and high risk groups (update from 2002). Gut. 2010;59:666–689.
Johnson MR, Grubber J, Grambow SC, et al. Physician non-adherence to colonoscopy interval guidelines in the Veterans Affairs Healthcare System. Gastroenterology. 2015;149:938–951.
Chivers K, Basnyat P, Taffinder N. The impact of national guidelines on the waiting list for colonoscopy: a quantitative clinical audit. Colorectal Dis. 2010;12:632–639.
Saini SD, Nayak RS, Kuhn L, et al. Why don’t gastroenterologists follow colon polyp surveillance guidelines? Results of a national survey. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2009;43:554–558.
Fisher D, Grubber JM, Grambow S, et al. Factors associated with non-adherence to colonoscopy interval guidelines in an integrated managed care system. Gastroenterology. 2012;142:S80.
Goodwin JS, Singh A, Reddy N, et al. Overuse of screening colonoscopy in the Medicare population. Arch Intern Med. 2011;171:1335–1343.
Turner BJ, Weiner M, Yang C, et al. Predicting adherence to colonoscopy or flexible sigmoidoscopy on the basis of physician appointment-keeping behavior. Ann Intern Med. 2004;140:528–532.
Green AR, Peters-Lewis A, Percac-Lima S, et al. Barriers to screening colonoscopy for low-income Latino and white patients in an urban community health center. J Gen Intern Med. 2008;23:834–840.
Charles RJ, Chak A, Cooper GS, et al. Use of open access in GI endoscopy at an academic medical center. Gastrointest Endosc. 1999;50:480–485.
Imler TD, Morea J, Imperiale TF. Clinical decision support with natural language processing facilitates determination of colonoscopy surveillance intervals. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2014;12:1130–1136.
Lieberman DA. Colon polyp surveillance: clinical decision tool. Gastroenterology. 2014;146:305–306.
CMS Finalizes Hospital Outpatient and Ambulatory Surgical Centers Quality Reporting Program Changes for 2015. CMS.gov. Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services, 31 October 2014. December 14 2015.
Acknowledgments
Manuscript review by Joel Brill, MD, is gratefully acknowledged.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
Dr. Sussman discloses research with Bankhead-Coley Team Science Program (2BT02), American Cancer Society (IRG-98-277-13), and Olympus America, Inc., and is on the Medical Advisory Board for Exact Sciences. Dr. Melson discloses research with the American Cancer Society (Grant No. 255086) and an investigator-initiated study with Boston Scientific. All other authors have no financial, professional, or personal conflicts of interest to disclose.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Desai, V., Sussman, D.A., Greenspan, M. et al. Most Premature Surveillance Colonoscopy Is Not Attributable to Bowel Preparation or New Clinical Indications. Dig Dis Sci 61, 2496–2504 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-016-4177-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-016-4177-3