The use of high definition colonoscopy versus standard definition: does it affect polyp detection rate?

2Citations
Citations of this article
12Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Background: Polyp detection rate (PDR) during lower gastrointestinal endoscopy (LGIE) is of clinical importance. Detecting adenomatous polyps early in the adenoma–carcinoma sequence can halt disease progression, enabling treatment at a favourable stage. High definition colonoscopy (HDC) has been used in our hospital alongside standard definition equipment since 2011. We aim to determine what affect the use of HDC has on PDR. Methods: Post-hoc analysis of a prospectively maintained database on all patients undergoing LGIE was performed (01/01/2012–31/12/2015), n = 15,448. Analysis tested the primary outcome of HD’s effect on PDR across LGIE and secondary outcome stratified this by endoscopist group (Physician (PE), Surgeon (SE) and Nurse Endoscopist (NE)). Results: Of 15,448 patients, 1353 underwent HDC. Unmatched analysis showed PDR increased by 5.3% in this group (p < 0.001). Matched analysis considered 2288 patients from the total cohort (1144 HDC) and showed an increase of 1% in PDR with HDC (p = 0.578). Further unmatched analysis stratified by endoscopist groups showed a PDR increase of 1.8% (p = 0.375), 5.4% (p = 0.008) and 4.6% (p = 0.021) by PE, SE and NE respectively. Matched analysis demonstrated an increase of 1% (p = 0.734) and 1.5% (p = 0.701) amongst PE and NE, with a decrease of 0.6% (p = 0.883) by SE. Conclusion: The introduction of HDC increased PDR across all LGIE in our hospital, though this was not clinically significant. This marginal benefit was present across all endoscopist groups with no group benefiting over another in matched analysis.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Richardson, J., Thaventhiran, A., Mackenzie, H., & Stubbs, B. (2018). The use of high definition colonoscopy versus standard definition: does it affect polyp detection rate? Surgical Endoscopy, 32(6), 2676–2682. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-017-5962-6

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free