Recommendations for Post-Polypectomy Surveillance in Community Practice
- 189 Downloads
After colon cancer screening, large numbers of persons discovered with colon polyps may receive post-polypectomy surveillance with multiple colonoscopy examinations over time. Decisions about surveillance interval are based in part on polyp size, histology, and number.
To learn physicians’ recommendations for post-polypectomy surveillance from physicians’ office charts.
Among 322 physicians performing colonoscopy in 126 practices in N. Carolina, offices of 152 physicians in 55 practices were visited to extract chart data, for each physician, on 125 consecutive persons having colonoscopy in 2003. Subjects included persons with first-time colonoscopy and no positive family history or other indication beyond colonoscopy findings that might affect post-polypectomy surveillance recommendations. Data were extracted about demographics, reason for colonoscopy, family history, symptoms, bowel prep, extent of examination, and features of each polyp including location, size, histology. Recommendations for post-polypectomy surveillance were noted.
Among 10,089 first-time colonoscopy examinations, hyperplastic polyps were found in 4.5% of subjects, in whom follow-up by 4–6 years was recommended in 24%, sooner than recommended in guidelines. Of the 6.6% of persons with only small adenomas, 35% were recommended to return in 1–3 years (sooner than recommended in some guidelines) and 77% by 6 years. Surveillance interval tended to be shorter if colon prep was less than “excellent.” Prep quality was not reported for 32% of examinations.
Surveillance intervals after polypectomy of low-risk polyps may be more aggressive than guidelines recommend. The quality of post-polypectomy surveillance might be improved by increased attention to guidelines, bowel prep, and reporting.
KeywordsColonoscopy screening Colon cancer surveillance Colonoscopy guidelines Colonoscopy quality
- 8.Maguire P. Colonoscopy screening gains momentum, but problems remain. ACP-ASIM Obs. 2002;22:16–17.Google Scholar
- 9.Rosson RS, Spiro HM. Screening for colorectal cancer. Ann Intern Med. 2003;138:356–357; author reply 357.Google Scholar
- 10.Kolata G. 50 and ready for a colonoscopy? Doctors say there is often a wait. New York Times, December 8, 2003. Sect. A1, A23.Google Scholar
- 11.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; quiz 497.Google Scholar
- 15.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. CA Cancer J Clin. 2008;58:130–160.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 19.American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Colonoscopy in the screening and surveillance of individuals at increased risk for colorectal cancer. Manchester, MA 01944; 1997 ASGE Publication No. 1030.Google Scholar
- 22.Bond JH. For the practice parameters committee of the American College of Gastroenterology. Polyp guideline: Diagnosis, treatment, and surveillance for patients with nonfamilial colorectal polyps. The practice parameters committee of the American College of Gastroenterology. Ann Intern Med. 1993;119:836–843.PubMedGoogle Scholar