Susan G. Coe

An Endoscopic Quality Improvement Program Improves Detection of Colorectal Adenomas

OBJECTIVES:Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is a key measure of quality in colonoscopy. Low ADRs are associated with development of interval cancer after “negative” colonoscopy. Uncontrolled studies mandating longer withdrawal time, and other incentives, have not significantly improved ADR. We hypothesized that an endoscopist training program would increase ADRs.METHODS:Our Endoscopic Quality Improvement Program (EQUIP) was an educational intervention for staff endoscopists. We measured ADRs for a baseline period, then randomly assigned half of the 15 endoscopists to undergo EQUIP training. We then examined baseline and post-training study ADRs for all endoscopists (trained and un-trained) to evaluate the impact of training. A total of 1,200 procedures were completed in each of the two study phases.RESULTS:Patient characteristics were similar between randomization groups and between study phases. The overall ADR in baseline phase was 36% for both groups of endoscopists. In the post-training phase, the group of endoscopists randomized to EQUIP training had an increase in ADR to 47%, whereas the ADR for the group of endoscopists who were not trained remained unchanged at 35%. The effect of training on the endoscopist-specific ADRs was estimated with an odds ratio of 1.73 (95% confidence interval 1.24–2.41, P=0.0013).CONCLUSIONS:Our results indicate that ADRs can be improved considerably through simple educational efforts. Ultimately, a trial involving a larger number of endoscopists is needed to validate the utility of our training methods and determine whether improvements in ADRs lead to reduced colorectal cancer.

An evaluation of risk factors for inadequate cytology in EUS-guided FNA of pancreatic tumors and lymph nodes

BACKGROUND The factors associated with maximizing the cytological adequacy of EUS-guided FNA (EUS-FNA) in pancreatic tumor evaluation are not well-known. OBJECTIVE To examine associations of physician and procedural factors with the endpoint: the presence of an adequate cytological specimen found by using EUS-FNA in patients with pancreatic tumors and lymph nodes. DESIGN Retrospective cohort study. SETTING A U.S. tertiary care center. PATIENTS Patients undergoing EUS-FNA of pancreatic masses and lymph nodes. INTERVENTIONS Analysis of EUS-FNA procedures performed in our institution from 1997 to 2007. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS Associations were evaluated between the primary endpoint of cytological adequacy and factors including the endoscopist, needle gauge, the number of needle passes attempted, the pathologist, and the presence of an onsite cytotechnologist to confirm an adequate specimen. EUS-FNA adequacy was determined by a pathologist based on the presence of definite benign or malignant tissue. RESULTS EUS-FNA was performed in 247 pancreatic masses and 276 lymph nodes. An adequate cytological sample was obtained in 240 (97%) pancreatic tumors (95% CI, 94%-99%) and 252 (91%) lymph nodes (95% CI, 87%-94%). For pancreatic tumors, there was no evidence of any associations between factors and cytological adequacy. For lymph nodes, cytological adequacy was improved when an onsite cytotechnologist was present (96% vs 84%, P = .002); no other factors showed statistically significant associations with cytological adequacy. LIMITATIONS Retrospective study, low power to detect associations. CONCLUSIONS The presence of an onsite cytotechnologist is an important factor in achieving successful EUS-FNA of suspicious lymph nodes in patients with pancreatic masses.

Stability of increased adenoma detection at colonoscopy. Follow-up of an endoscopic quality improvement program-EQUIP-II

OBJECTIVES:We recently completed a randomized controlled trial of an endoscopic quality improvement program (EQUIP) that demonstrated an improved adenoma detection rate (ADR) through simple educational interventions. The aim of this study (phase III) is to examine whether the improvement in ADR in the trained endoscopists remained stable with further follow-up.METHODS:We prospectively followed up 15 staff endoscopists who had previously been randomized to a quality improvement intervention. In the current study, we examined an additional 1,200 colonoscopy procedures conducted over a 5-month time period following the original study, referred to as phase III. During this time, all physicians received quarterly ADR and other quality metric feedback, and the previous control group was offered the educational intervention voluntarily. ADRs and adenoma per patient (APP) rates were estimated in the endoscopists who were and were not randomized to EQUIP training and compared with those obtained in phases I and II of the original study. The study was conducted in a tertiary care Academic Medical Center. The study sample comprised 1200 patients undergoing routine colonoscopy. The main outcome measurement was adenoma detection rate.RESULTS:The previously observed increase in ADR in the trained group from 36% in phase I to 47% in phase II was maintained into phase III (46%). The ADR of the untrained group remained unchanged from phase I (36%) to phase II (35%); it was increased only marginally in phase III to 39%, which was still lower than the 46% ADR in the trained group. The trained group had an increase in APP, from 0.72 in Phase I to 0.87 in Phase II and 0.98 in Phase III. For the previously untrained group, there was no change in APP from phase I (0.68) to phase II (0.68), but there was possibly a small increase (to 0.74) in Phase III.CONCLUSIONS:This study provides evidence that improvements in ADR obtained through the endoscopic quality-training program can persist for at least 5 months after completion of the program. It further suggests that a focus on ADR does not lead to a “one and done” phenomenon. The limitations of this study were as follows: single-center setting, and lack of sessile polyp information/standardization.

Accuracy of in vivo colorectal polyp discrimination by using dual-focus high-definition narrow-band imaging colonoscopy

BACKGROUND Discriminating neoplastic from non-neoplastic polyps can significantly reduce the cost of colonoscopy. The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) recently set threshold levels for optical diagnostic accuracy to be acceptable for clinical use. OBJECTIVE In this study, we compare a novel colonoscope capable of dual-focus imaging with standard colonoscopy with respect to the ASGE guidelines. SETTING An academic medical center ambulatory surgical center. PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS Patients at average risk were randomized to standard colonoscopy (Olympus CF-H180 and Exera II 180 colonoscopes, Olympus America, Center Valley, Pa) or dual-focus colonoscopy (Olympus CF-HQ190 and Exera III 190 colonoscopes, Olympus America). All polyps were given an optical diagnosis and compared with histology. RESULTS A total of 600 patients were consented and 522 completed all aspects of the procedure. A total of 927 polyps were analyzed. Optical diagnostic accuracy was 79% (95% confidence interval, 74%-83%) for the 190 and 77% (95% confidence interval, 73%-81%) for the 180 colonoscope. Adenoma detection rates were also similar between the 2 groups (50% for the 190 vs 52% for the 180 colonoscope). For small distal rectosigmoid polyps with a high confidence diagnosis, the negative predictive value for adenoma was 96% (range 89%-99%) for the 180 in the narrow-band imaging (NBI) mode and 97% (range 88%-99%) for the 190 colonoscope in NBI mode. Agreement of surveillance intervals by using optical diagnosis was 94% to 95% for all modalities (180 and 190 colonoscopes, white light imaging, NBI). LIMITATIONS Our study evaluated the accuracy of the 180 and 190 colonoscopes at a center with already-established expertise in endoscopic imaging. CONCLUSIONS Both traditional and new dual-focus colonoscopes provide highly accurate optical polyp discrimination. There was no difference between the 2 systems in terms of discrimination or adenoma detection. Both systems are consistent with ASGE guidelines for optical diagnosis of selected colorectal polyps without histological confirmation.

Assessment of adenoma detection rate benchmarks in women versus men

BACKGROUND Current guidelines suggest screening adenoma detection rates (ADRs) of 15% for average-risk women and 25% for average-risk men. OBJECTIVE Determine average-risk screening ADRs and the prevalence of adenomas by location, size, shape, and degree of dysplasia in each sex. DESIGN Post hoc analysis of prospectively collected data. SETTING Academic center, ambulatory center. PATIENTS A total of 864 average-risk patients. INTERVENTION Screening colonoscopy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS By using a prospectively collected colonoscopy database, we determined the ADRs for each sex and compared them to current medical society guidelines. In patients with adenomas detected, we compared the percentage of proximally located, large, and advanced-pathology adenomas between sexes. RESULTS The overall average-risk screening ADR was 33.7% for both sexes combined. Average risks for women and men were significantly higher than guidelines (women: 25.4% vs 15%; P = .0003; men: 41.2% vs 25%; P < .0001). The ADR remained significantly higher for men versus women (P < .0001). Overall advanced-pathology adenoma detection was 12.2% for both sexes combined. There was a significantly higher advanced-pathology ADR for men (15.3%) versus women (8.7%) (P = .003). There was no significant difference between the sexes when age was considered in both advanced-pathology and average-risk ADRs. LIMITATIONS Data from the study focused on improving ADRs in an academic setting. CONCLUSION The ADR in our study was higher than current benchmarks for both sexes. In patients with at least one adenoma, advanced-pathology adenomas were detected equally among men and women. Although the benefits of achieving supra-benchmark ADRs are unknown, high ADRs may lead to more effective colonoscopy.

THE EFFECT OF POLYP LOCATION AND PATIENT GENDER ON THE PRESENCE OF DYSPLASIA IN COLONIC POLYPS

OBJECTIVE:There is increasing evidence of significant clinical and biological differences between proximal and distal colorectal polyps, as well as possible differences based on patient gender. There is a need to optimize and individualize screening strategies. We studied the potential influence of gender and of polyp location on the presence of dysplasia in colon polyps.METHODS:We used a prospective database on adenoma detection to identify patients. The primary outcome was the presence of dysplasia in colonic polyps. Covariates include age, gender, race, lesion size and site, and use of aspirin. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to analyze the relationship between the primary outcome and covariates. Results were reported as odds ratios (ORs), 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and P-values.RESULTS:A total of 2,400 patients (50.5% females and 49.5% males) completed colonoscopy for various indications. A total of 3,045 polyps were removed in 1,237 patients. Of those polyps, 54% (n=1,636) were on the right compared with 46% (n=1,409) in the left colon. The proportion of adenomas was significantly greater on the right colon when compared with the left: 69.4% vs. 39.3% (P=<0.0001). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the right colon did have a significant association with dysplasia when controlling for age, gender, polyp size, and use of aspirin (OR=3.1 (95% CI: 2.3–4), P=<0.0001). Female gender was associated with decreased odds of finding dysplasia (OR=0.6 (95% CI: 0.46–0.78), P=0.03).CONCLUSION:Patient characteristics (male gender) as well procedure findings (increase polyp size and right-sided lesions) are associated with increased odds of dysplasia.

Quality in colonoscopy reporting: An assessment of compliance and performance improvement

BACKGROUND An ASGE-ACG task force developed quality indicators (QI) for documenting quality endoscopic procedures. Acceptable compliance rates have not been determined. AIMS To determine our degree of compliance to the intra-procedure colonoscopy QI prior to intervention, design an educational intervention to improve those with low compliance, and to compare the degree of compliance after intervention. METHODS 300 patients undergoing colonoscopy in the pre-intervention time period followed by 300 patients after the educational intervention were reviewed. Endoscopists were instructed on the required QI and provided with their individual baseline compliance results. Dictated endoscopy reports were reviewed for compliance. RESULTS Four QIs; documentation of bowel preparation adequacy, appendiceal orifice, photographs of cecum, and polyp shape, had low pre-intervention achievement (64%, 53%, 20%, and 15% respectively) and significant change was observed (83%, 68%, 63%, and 54% respectively, all p<0.001). Four QIs; documentation of ileocecal valve, polyp size description, polyp location description, and follow up recommendations, had high levels of achievement prior to intervention (92%, 98%, 97% and 81% respectively) and no significant change was observed (all p≥0.16). CONCLUSION This study provides benchmarks for ASGE/QIs in colonoscopy cases in a large group practice model. It demonstrates that a quality improvement intervention can result in improved compliance.

Quality in EUS: an assessment of baseline compliance and performance improvement by using the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy-American College of Gastroenterology quality indicators.

BACKGROUND An American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy-American College of Gastroenterology (ASGE-ACG) task force recently developed quality indicators for the preprocedure, intraprocedure, and postprocedure phases of each endoscopic procedure. Benchmark rates and clinical significance of compliance have not been determined. OBJECTIVES To establish baseline compliance rates to the preprocedure and intraprocedure quality indicators in our EUS cases, identify indicators with the lowest compliance rates, and establish change in compliance rates with a targeted performance improvement plan. METHODS We measured baseline compliance to each of the preprocedure and intraprocedure EUS quality indicators in the EUS procedures performed at Mayo Clinic Jacksonville from March 1996 through August 2006. We developed a performance improvement plan that targeted the 4 indicators with the lowest compliance over the entire time period. Compliance rates in the year after plan implementation were compared with those from January 2004 to August 2006, when adjusting for endoscopist and direct access. RESULTS We demonstrated areas of high quality as well as areas for improvement in compliance with the ASGE-ACG quality metrics in a large cohort of EUS cases. We achieved improvement in all 4 areas targeted for quality improvement, statistically significant at the 5% level for two of the quality indicators. LIMITATIONS Limitations included our retrospective design and the use of unstructured procedure dictations that may limit application of our results. It is also unclear whether compliance was truly synonymous with performance. CONCLUSIONS We established reference levels of compliance rate within our practice and showed that a targeted performance improvement plan that consisted of awareness, individual accountability, and documentation can result in improvement.

Colonoscopy: new approaches to better outcomes.

Purpose of review Prevention of colorectal cancer relies on the detection and removal of colorectal neoplasia. Recent advances in mucosal imaging and inspection techniques have increased the detection of small and diminutive colorectal polyps with unknown clinical impact. The ability to accurately predict whether a polyp is neoplastic may allow for an optical triage approach to polyp management, improving efficiency while reducing the cost and risk of polypectomy. Recent findings High-definition white light colonoscopy, cap-fitted colonoscopy, and dye-based pan-chromoendoscopy have each shown to increase polyp detection. Virtual chromoendoscopy, although not beneficial for polyp detection, allows for accurate in-vivo prediction of polyp pathology. Endoscopists’ behaviors, independent of patient factors, strongly influence adenoma detection. Training methods focused on the techniques of high adenoma detectors also increase adenoma and polyp detection. Summary Advances in mucosal imaging and improvements in inspection technique have allowed us to detect more polyps and to predict their pathology with greater accuracy. An optical triage approach to either ‘diagnose and discard’ or ‘diagnose and leave behind’ has the potential to reduce the risk and cost of polypectomy.

Continuing Medical Education Questions: December 2010

A. Uncontaminated oats are considered safe for most patients with celiac disease. B. A safe amount of gluten intake is <200 mg/day. C. A gluten-free diet is associated with a net increase in benefi cial gut bacteria. D. A gluten-free diet provides adequate daily fi ber. 3. Which one of the following potential treatments has been associated with symptomatic improvement in patients with celiac disease?