...
首页> 外文期刊>Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology: the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association >Differences in detection rates of adenomas and serrated polyps in screening versus surveillance colonoscopies, based on the new hampshire Colonoscopy Registry
【24h】

Differences in detection rates of adenomas and serrated polyps in screening versus surveillance colonoscopies, based on the new hampshire Colonoscopy Registry

机译:基于新的Hampshire Colonocy Registry,筛选与监测结肠镜筛选腺瘤和锯齿息肉息肉的差异

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Background & Aims: The adenoma detection rate (ADR) is an important quality indicator originally developed forscreening colonoscopies. However, it is unclear whether the ADR should be calculated using data from screening and surveillance examinations. The recommended benchmark ADR for screening examinations is 20% (15% for women and 25% for men e50 y). There are few data available to compare ADRs from surveillance vs screening colonoscopies. We used a population-based registry to compare ADRs from screening vs surveillance colonoscopies. The serrated polyp detection rate (SDR), a potential new quality indicator, also was examined. Methods: By using data from the statewide New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry, we excluded incomplete and diagnostic colonoscopies, and those performed in patients with inflammatory bowel disease, familial syndromes, or poor bowel preparation. We calculated the ADRand SDR (number of colonoscopies with at least 1 adenoma or serrated polyp detected, respectively, divided by the number of colonoscopies) from 9100 colonoscopies. The ADRand SDR were compared by colonoscopy indication (screening, surveillance), age at colonoscopy (50-64 y, e65 y), and sex. Results: The ADR was significantly higher in surveillance colonoscopies (37%) than screening colonoscopies (25%; P < .001). This difference was observed for both sexes and age groups. There was a smaller difference in the SDR of screening (8%) vs surveillance colonoscopies (10%; P < .001). Conclusions: In a population-based study, we found that addition of data from surveillance colonoscopies increased the ADR but had a smaller effect on the SDR. These findings indicate that when calculating ADR as a quality measure, endoscopists should use screening, rather than surveillance colonoscopy, data.
机译:背景和目的:腺瘤检测率(ADR)是最初开发用于结肠镜检查的重要质量指标。但是,目前尚不清楚ADR是否应使用来自筛选和监测检查的数据来计算。用于筛选考试的推荐基准ADR为20%(女性为15%,男性E50 y为25%)。很少有数据可以从监控VS筛选结肠镜检查中比较ADR。我们使用了一个基于人群的注册表来将ADRS与筛选VS监控结肠镜检查进行比较。检查了锯齿状息肉检测率(SDR),也是潜在的新质量指标。方法:通过使用来自New Hampshire结肠镜检查的数据,我们排除了不完整和诊断的结肠镜检查,以及炎症性肠病,家族性综合征或肠道患者患者进行的。我们计算了Adrand SDR(分别检测到至少1个腺瘤或锯齿膜或锯齿状息肉的数量,除以9100个结肠镜检查的结肠镜检查数。通过结肠镜检查(筛选,监测),结肠镜检查的年龄(50-64 y,e65 y)和性别进行比较。结果:Survillance结肠镜检查的ADR显着高于筛选结肠镜检查(25%; P <.001)。对于性别和年龄组观察到这种差异。筛选SDR差异较小(8%)VS监测结肠镜检查(10%; P <.001)。结论:在一项基于人群的研究中,我们发现从监视结肠镜检查的数据增加了ADR,但对SDR影响较小。这些发现表明,当计算ADR作为质量措施时,内窥镜师应使用筛选,而不是监测结肠镜检查。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号