TY - JOUR
T1 - Postcolonoscopy followup recommendations
T2 - Comparison with and without use of polyp pathology
AU - Ratuapli, Shiva K.
AU - Gurudu, Suryakanth R.
AU - Atia, Mary A.
AU - Crowell, Michael D.
AU - Umar, Sarah B.
AU - Harrison, M. Edwyn
AU - Leighton, Jonathan A.
AU - Ramirez, Francisco C.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2014 Shiva K. Ratuapli et al.
PY - 2014
Y1 - 2014
N2 - Background. Appropriate recommendations for a followup exam after an index colonoscopy are an important quality indicator. Lack of knowledge of polyp pathology at the time of colonoscopy may be one reason that followup recommendations are not made. Aim. To describe and compare the accuracy of followup recommendations made at colonoscopy based on the size and number of polyps with recommendations made at a later date based on actual polyp pathology. Methods. All patients who underwent screening and surveillance colonoscopy from March, 2012, to August, 2012, were included. Surveillance recommendations from the endoscopy reports were graded as "accurate" or "not accurate" based on the postpolypectomy surveillance guidelines established by US Multisociety Task Force on Colon Cancer. Polyp pathology was then used to regrade the surveillance recommendations. Results. Followup recommendations were accurate in 759/884 (86%) of the study colonoscopies, based upon size and number of polyps with the assumption that all polyps were adenomatous. After incorporating actual polyp pathology, 717/884 (81%) colonoscopies had accurate recommendations. Conclusion. In our practice, the knowledge of actual polyp pathology does not change the surveillance recommendations made at the time of colonoscopy in the majority of patients.
AB - Background. Appropriate recommendations for a followup exam after an index colonoscopy are an important quality indicator. Lack of knowledge of polyp pathology at the time of colonoscopy may be one reason that followup recommendations are not made. Aim. To describe and compare the accuracy of followup recommendations made at colonoscopy based on the size and number of polyps with recommendations made at a later date based on actual polyp pathology. Methods. All patients who underwent screening and surveillance colonoscopy from March, 2012, to August, 2012, were included. Surveillance recommendations from the endoscopy reports were graded as "accurate" or "not accurate" based on the postpolypectomy surveillance guidelines established by US Multisociety Task Force on Colon Cancer. Polyp pathology was then used to regrade the surveillance recommendations. Results. Followup recommendations were accurate in 759/884 (86%) of the study colonoscopies, based upon size and number of polyps with the assumption that all polyps were adenomatous. After incorporating actual polyp pathology, 717/884 (81%) colonoscopies had accurate recommendations. Conclusion. In our practice, the knowledge of actual polyp pathology does not change the surveillance recommendations made at the time of colonoscopy in the majority of patients.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84923769442&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84923769442&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1155/2014/683491
DO - 10.1155/2014/683491
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84923769442
SN - 1070-3608
VL - 2014
JO - Diagnostic and Therapeutic Endoscopy
JF - Diagnostic and Therapeutic Endoscopy
M1 - 683491
ER -