胃肠道医师结肠镜检查中锯齿状息肉的检出率。

IF 3 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Therapeutic Advances in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.1177/26317745221136775
Matthew Heckroth, Michael Eiswerth, Mohamed Elmasry, Khushboo Gala, Wenjing Cai, Scott Diamond, Amal Shine, David Liu, Nanlong Liu, Sudaraka Tholkage, Maiying Kong, Dipendra Parajuli
{"title":"胃肠道医师结肠镜检查中锯齿状息肉的检出率。","authors":"Matthew Heckroth,&nbsp;Michael Eiswerth,&nbsp;Mohamed Elmasry,&nbsp;Khushboo Gala,&nbsp;Wenjing Cai,&nbsp;Scott Diamond,&nbsp;Amal Shine,&nbsp;David Liu,&nbsp;Nanlong Liu,&nbsp;Sudaraka Tholkage,&nbsp;Maiying Kong,&nbsp;Dipendra Parajuli","doi":"10.1177/26317745221136775","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Clinically significant serrated polyp detection rate (CSSDR) and proximal serrated polyp detection rate (PSDR) have been suggested as the potential quality benchmarks for colonoscopy (CSSDR = 7% and PSDR = 11%) in comparison to the established benchmark adenoma detection rate (ADR). Another emerging milestone is the detection rate of lateral spreading lesions (LSLs).</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate CSSDR, PSDR, ADR, and LSL detection rates among gastrointestinal (GI) fellows performing a colonoscopy. A secondary aim was to evaluate patient factors associated with the detection rates of these lesions.</p><p><strong>Design and methods: </strong>A retrospective review of 799 colonoscopy reports was performed. GI fellow details, demographic data, and pathology found on colonoscopy were collected. Multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the factors associated with CSSDR, PSDR, ADR, and LSL detection rates. A <i>p</i> value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For our patient population, the median age was 58 years; 396 (49.8%) were male and 386 (48.6%) were African American. The 15 GI fellows ranged from first (F1), second (F2), or third (F3) year of training. We found an overall CSSDR of 4.4%, PSDR of 10.5%, ADR of 42.1%, and LSL detection rate of 3.2%. Female gender was associated with CSSDR, while only age was associated with PSDR. GI fellow level of training was associated with LSL detection rate, with the odds of detecting them expected to be four times higher in F2/F3s than F1s.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although GI fellows demonstrated an above-recommended ADR and nearly reached target PSDR, they failed to achieve target CSSDR. Future studies investigating a benchmark for LSL detection rate are needed to quantify if GI fellows are detecting these lesions at adequate rates.</p>","PeriodicalId":40947,"journal":{"name":"Therapeutic Advances in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy","volume":"15 ","pages":"26317745221136775"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/9f/4c/10.1177_26317745221136775.PMC9749503.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Serrated polyp detection rate in colonoscopies performed by gastrointestinal fellows.\",\"authors\":\"Matthew Heckroth,&nbsp;Michael Eiswerth,&nbsp;Mohamed Elmasry,&nbsp;Khushboo Gala,&nbsp;Wenjing Cai,&nbsp;Scott Diamond,&nbsp;Amal Shine,&nbsp;David Liu,&nbsp;Nanlong Liu,&nbsp;Sudaraka Tholkage,&nbsp;Maiying Kong,&nbsp;Dipendra Parajuli\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/26317745221136775\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Clinically significant serrated polyp detection rate (CSSDR) and proximal serrated polyp detection rate (PSDR) have been suggested as the potential quality benchmarks for colonoscopy (CSSDR = 7% and PSDR = 11%) in comparison to the established benchmark adenoma detection rate (ADR). Another emerging milestone is the detection rate of lateral spreading lesions (LSLs).</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate CSSDR, PSDR, ADR, and LSL detection rates among gastrointestinal (GI) fellows performing a colonoscopy. A secondary aim was to evaluate patient factors associated with the detection rates of these lesions.</p><p><strong>Design and methods: </strong>A retrospective review of 799 colonoscopy reports was performed. GI fellow details, demographic data, and pathology found on colonoscopy were collected. Multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the factors associated with CSSDR, PSDR, ADR, and LSL detection rates. A <i>p</i> value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For our patient population, the median age was 58 years; 396 (49.8%) were male and 386 (48.6%) were African American. The 15 GI fellows ranged from first (F1), second (F2), or third (F3) year of training. We found an overall CSSDR of 4.4%, PSDR of 10.5%, ADR of 42.1%, and LSL detection rate of 3.2%. Female gender was associated with CSSDR, while only age was associated with PSDR. GI fellow level of training was associated with LSL detection rate, with the odds of detecting them expected to be four times higher in F2/F3s than F1s.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although GI fellows demonstrated an above-recommended ADR and nearly reached target PSDR, they failed to achieve target CSSDR. Future studies investigating a benchmark for LSL detection rate are needed to quantify if GI fellows are detecting these lesions at adequate rates.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":40947,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Therapeutic Advances in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy\",\"volume\":\"15 \",\"pages\":\"26317745221136775\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/9f/4c/10.1177_26317745221136775.PMC9749503.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Therapeutic Advances in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/26317745221136775\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Therapeutic Advances in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/26317745221136775","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:临床显著锯齿状息肉检出率(CSSDR)和近端锯齿状息肉检出率(PSDR)已被建议作为结肠镜检查的潜在质量基准(CSSDR = 7%和PSDR = 11%),与已建立的基准腺瘤检出率(ADR)进行比较。另一个新出现的里程碑是横向扩散病变(LSLs)的检出率。目的:本研究旨在评估胃肠道(GI)患者进行结肠镜检查时CSSDR、PSDR、ADR和LSL的检出率。第二个目的是评估与这些病变检出率相关的患者因素。设计和方法:对799例结肠镜检查报告进行回顾性分析。收集GI同伴的详细信息、人口统计数据和结肠镜检查发现的病理。采用多元logistic回归分析,确定与CSSDR、PSDR、ADR和LSL检出率相关的因素。p值< 0.05认为有统计学意义。结果:在我们的患者群体中,中位年龄为58岁;其中男性396例(49.8%),非裔386例(48.6%)。15名GI研究员的培训时间为第一年(F1)、第二年(F2)或第三年(F3)。总体CSSDR为4.4%,PSDR为10.5%,ADR为42.1%,LSL检出率为3.2%。女性与CSSDR相关,而年龄与PSDR相关。GI同伴的训练水平与LSL检出率相关,F2/ f3组的LSL检出率是f15组的4倍。结论:虽然GI患者表现出上述推荐的ADR,并接近达到目标PSDR,但他们未能达到目标CSSDR。未来的研究需要调查LSL检出率的基准,以量化GI研究员是否以足够的率检测到这些病变。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Serrated polyp detection rate in colonoscopies performed by gastrointestinal fellows.

Background: Clinically significant serrated polyp detection rate (CSSDR) and proximal serrated polyp detection rate (PSDR) have been suggested as the potential quality benchmarks for colonoscopy (CSSDR = 7% and PSDR = 11%) in comparison to the established benchmark adenoma detection rate (ADR). Another emerging milestone is the detection rate of lateral spreading lesions (LSLs).

Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate CSSDR, PSDR, ADR, and LSL detection rates among gastrointestinal (GI) fellows performing a colonoscopy. A secondary aim was to evaluate patient factors associated with the detection rates of these lesions.

Design and methods: A retrospective review of 799 colonoscopy reports was performed. GI fellow details, demographic data, and pathology found on colonoscopy were collected. Multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the factors associated with CSSDR, PSDR, ADR, and LSL detection rates. A p value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results: For our patient population, the median age was 58 years; 396 (49.8%) were male and 386 (48.6%) were African American. The 15 GI fellows ranged from first (F1), second (F2), or third (F3) year of training. We found an overall CSSDR of 4.4%, PSDR of 10.5%, ADR of 42.1%, and LSL detection rate of 3.2%. Female gender was associated with CSSDR, while only age was associated with PSDR. GI fellow level of training was associated with LSL detection rate, with the odds of detecting them expected to be four times higher in F2/F3s than F1s.

Conclusion: Although GI fellows demonstrated an above-recommended ADR and nearly reached target PSDR, they failed to achieve target CSSDR. Future studies investigating a benchmark for LSL detection rate are needed to quantify if GI fellows are detecting these lesions at adequate rates.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊最新文献
Endoscopic ultrasound-guided placement of lumen-apposing metal stent for transgastric drainage of loculated malignant ascites. Effectiveness of endoscopic ultrasound-guided simple puncture-aspiration (non-stenting) in the management of abdominal collections. Causes of intraprocedural discomfort in colonoscopy: a review and practical tips. Retrograde colon imaging through colonic transendoscopic enteral tubing helps to confirm the cause of difficult colonoscopy: a case report. Total mesorectal excision after rectal-sparing approach in locally advanced rectal cancer patients after neoadjuvant treatment: a high volume center experience.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1