GASTROENTEROLOGICAL ENDOSCOPY
Online ISSN : 1884-5738
Print ISSN : 0387-1207
ISSN-L : 0387-1207
“ENDOSCOPIC” ADENOMA DETECTION RATE AS A QUALITY INDICATOR OF COLONOSCOPY: FIRST REPORT FROM THE J-SCOUT STUDY
Takuji KAWAMURAMasau SEKIGUCHIHiroyuki TAKAMARUYasuhiko MIZUGUCHIGo HORIGUCHIMasayuki KATOKiyonori KOBAYASHIMiwa SADAYasushi ODAAkira YOKOYAMATakahiro UTSUMIYosuke TSUJIDaisuke OHKIYoji TAKEUCHISatoki SHICHIJOHiroaki IKEMATSUKoji MATSUDASatoshi TERAMUKAINozomu KOBAYASHITakahisa MATSUDAYutaka SAITOKiyohito TANAKA
Author information
JOURNAL FREE ACCESS FULL-TEXT HTML
Supplementary material

2024 Volume 66 Issue 7 Pages 1503-1513

Details
Abstract

Objectives: To examine whether reasonable detection rate of endoscopically diagnosed lesions as adenoma (“endoscopic” adenoma detection rate [ADR]) could be calculated with a database generated from colonoscopy reports and whether it could be used as a surrogate colonoscopy quality indicator of “pathological” ADR.

Methods: A lesion-by-lesion database of colonoscopies performed between 2010 and 2020 at eight Japanese endoscopy centers and corresponding pathology database were integrated. Differences in numbers of detected polyps, “endoscopic” and “pathological” adenomas, and what these differences could be attributed to were examined. Polyp detection rate (PDR), “endoscopic” and “pathological” ADRs, and correlation coefficients between “pathological” ADR and PDR or “endoscopic” ADR by each endoscopist were calculated.

Results: Overall, 129,065 colonoscopy reports were analyzed. Among a total of 146,854 polyps, more “endoscopic” adenomas (n = 117,359) were observed than “pathological” adenomas (n = 70,076), primarily because adenomas were not resected on site, rather than because of a misdiagnosis. In all patients analyzed, PDR, “endoscopic” and “pathological” ADRs were 56.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] 56.2-56.7), 48.0% (95% CI 47.7-48.3), and 32.7% (95% CI 32.5-33.0), respectively. “Endoscopic” and “pathological” ADRs from each endoscopist showed a high correlation in hospitals where adenomas were usually resected at the time of examination.

Conclusions: By appropriately describing endoscopically diagnosed lesions as “adenomas” in endoscopy reports, “endoscopic” ADR might be used as a surrogate colonoscopy quality indicator of “pathological” ADR (UMIN000040690).

Content from these authors
© 2024 Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society
Previous article Next article
feedback
Top