Longer mean colonoscopy withdrawal time is associated with increased adenoma detection: evidence from the Bowel Cancer Screening Programme in England

Background and study aims: Increasing colonoscopy withdrawal time (CWT) is thought to be associated with increasing adenoma detection rate (ADR). Current English guidelines recommend a minimum CWT of 6 minutes. It is known that in the Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP) in England there is wide variation in CWT. The aim of this observational study was to examine the relationship between CWT and ADR.

Patients and methods: The study examined data from 31 088 colonoscopies by 147 screening program colonoscopists. Colonoscopists were grouped in four levels of mean CWT ( < 7, 7 – 8.9, 9 – 10.9, and ≥ 11 minutes). Univariable and multivariable analysis (binary logistic and negative binomial regression) were used to explore the relationship between CWT, ADR, mean number of adenomas and number of right-sided and advanced adenomas.

Results: In colonoscopists with a mean CWT < 7 minutes, the mean ADR was 42.5 % compared with 47.1 % in the ≥ 11-minute group (P < 0.001). The mean number of adenomas detected per procedure increased from 0.77 to 0.94, respectively (P < 0.001). The increase in adenoma detection was mainly of subcentimeter or proximal adenomas; there was no increase in the detection of advanced adenomas. Regression models showed an increase in ADR from 43 % to 46.5 % for mean CWT times ranging from 6 to 10 minutes.

Conclusions: This study demonstrates that longer mean withdrawal times are associated with increasing adenoma detection, mainly of small or right-sided adenomas. However, beyond 10 minutes the increase in ADR is minimal. Mean withdrawal times longer than 6 minutes are not associated with increased detection of advanced adenomas. Withdrawal time remains an important quality metric of colonoscopy.

• References

• 1 Ferlay J, Shin HR, Bray F et al. GLOBOCAN 2008, Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: IARC CancerBase No. 10. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer Press; 2010 Available from: http://globocan.iarc.fr
• 2 NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme. Available from: http://www.cancerscreening.nhs.uk/bowel/index.html Accessed February 2010
• 3 Lee TJW, Clifford GM, Rajasekhar P et al. High yield of colorectal neoplasia detected by colonoscopy following a positive faecal occult blood test in the NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme. J Med Screen 2011; 18: 82-86
• 4 Barton JR, Corbett S, van der Vleuten CP et al. The validity and reliability of a Direct Observation of Procedural Skills assessment tool: assessing colonoscopic skills of senior endoscopists. Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 75: 591-597
• 5 Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Ho MN et al. Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. N Engl J Med 1993; 329: 1977-1981
• 6 Atkin WS, Edwards R, Kralj-Hans I et al. Once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy screening in prevention of colorectal cancer: a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2010; 375: 1624-1633
• 7 Kaminski MF, Regula J, Krasewska E et al. Quality indicators for colonoscopy and the risk of interval cancer. N Engl J Med 2010; 362: 1795-1803
• 8 Rex DK. Colonoscopic withdrawal technique is associated with adenoma miss rates. Gastrointest Endosc 2000; 51: 33-36
• 9 Barclay RL, Vicari JJ, Doughty AS et al. Colonoscopic withdrawal times and adenoma detection during screening colonoscopy. N Engl J Med 2006; 355: 2533-2541
• 10 Rex DK, Bond JH, Winawer S et al. Quality in the technical performance of colonoscopy and the continuous quality improvement process for colonoscopy: recommendations of the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Am J Gastroenterol 2002; 97: 1296-1308
• 11 Chilton A, Rutter MD. Quality assurance guidelines for colonoscopy. NHS BCSP publication No. 6. 2010 Available from: http://www.cancerscreening.nhs.uk/bowel/publications/index.html
• 12 Moritz V, Bretthauer M, Ruud HK et al. Withdrawal time as a quality indicator for colonoscopy – a nationwide analysis. Endoscopy 2012; 44: 476-481
• 13 Baxter NN, Goldwasser MA, Paszat MF et al. Association of colonoscopy and death from colorectal cancer: a population based case-controlled study. Ann Intern Med 2009; 150: 1-8
• 14 Brenner H, Hoffmeister M, Arndt V et al. Protection from right- and left-sided colorectal neoplasms after colonoscopy: population based study. J Natl Cancer Inst 2010; 102: 89-95
• 15 Lee TJW, Rutter MD, Blanks RG et al. Colonoscopy quality measures: Experience from the NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme. 2012; 61: 1050-1057
• 16 Clayton D, Hills M. Statistical models in epidemiology. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1993
• 17 Lieberman DA, Weiss DG, Lin C et al. Use of colonoscopy to screen asymptomatic adults for colorectal cancer. Veteran Affairs Cooperative Study Group 380. N Engl J Med 2000; 343: 169-174
• 18 Anderson JC, Attam R, Alpern Z et al. Prevalence of colorectal neoplasia in smokers. Am J Gastroenterol 2003; 98: 2777-2783
• 19 Martinez ME, MacPherson RS, Annegers JF et al. Cigarette smoking and alcohol consumption as risk factors for colorectal adenomatous polyps. J Natl Cancer Inst 1995; 87: 274-279
• 20 Barclay RL, Vicari JJ, Greenlaw RL. Effect of a time-dependent colonoscopic withdrawal protocol on adenoma detection during screening colonoscopy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2008; 6: 1091-1098
• 21 Simmons DT, Harewood GC, Baron TH et al. Impact of endoscopist withdrawal speed on polyp yield: implications for optimal colonoscopy withdrawal time. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2006; 24: 965-971
• 22 Tabar A, Romagnuolo J. Effect of simply recording colonoscopy withdrawal time on polyp and adenoma detection rates. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 71: 782-786
• 23 Vicari J. Performing a quality colonoscopy: Just slow down. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 71: 787-788
• 24 Scholefield JH, Moss S, Sufi F et al. Effect of faecal occult blood screening on mortality from colorectal cancer: results from a randomised controlled trial. Gut 2002; 50: 840-844
• 25 Kronborg O, Jorgensen OD, Fenger C et al. Randomised study of biennial screening with a faecal occult blood test: results after nine screening rounds. Scand J Gastroenterol 2004; 39: 846-851
• 26 UK Colorectal Cancer Screening Group. Results of the first round of a demonstration of a pilot of screening for colorectal cancer in the United Kingdom. BMJ 2004; 329: 133-135
• 27 Atkin WS, Saunders BP. Surveillance guidelines after removal of colorectal adenomatous polyps. Gut 2002; 51: v6-v9
• 28 Zauber AG, Winawer SJ, O’Brien MJ et al. Colonoscopic polypectomy and long-term prevention of colorectal-cancer deaths. N Engl J Med 2012; 366: 687-696
• 29 Heldwein W, Dollhopf M, Rösch T et al. The Munich Polypectomy Study (MUPS): prospective analysis of complications and risk factors in 4000 colonic snare polypectomies. Endoscopy 2005; 37: 1116-1122
• 30 Singh H, Turner D, Xue L et al. Risk of developing colorectal cancer following a negative colonoscopy examination: evidence for a 10-year interval between colonoscopies. JAMA 2006; 295: 2366-2373
• 31 Nawa T, Kato J, Kawamoto H et al. Differences between right- and left-sided colon cancer in patient characteristics, cancer morphology and histology. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2008; 23: 418-423
• 32 Arain MA, Sawhney M, Sheikh S et al. CIMP status of interval colon cancers: another piece to the puzzle. Am J Gastroenterol 2010; 105: 1189-1195
• 33 Gellad ZF, Weiss DG, Ahnen DJ et al. Colonoscopy withdrawal time and risk of neoplasia at 5 years: Results from VA Cooperative studies Program 380. Am J Gastroenterol 2010; 105: 1746-1752
• 34 Sawhney MS, Cury MS, Neeman N et al. Effect of institution wide policy of colonoscopy withdrawal time ≥7 minutes on polyp detection. Gastroenterology 2008; 135: 1892-1898