Open Access
Open access
volume 27 issue 1 pages 33-38

The Appropriateness of Surveillance Colonoscopy Intervals after Polypectomy

Eline Schreuders 1
Jerome Sint Nicolaas 1
Vincent de Jonge 1
Harmke Van Kooten 1
Isaac Soo 2
Daniel Sadowski 2
Clarence Wong 2
Monique E. van Leerdam 1
Ernst J Kuipers 1, 3
Sander Jo Veldhuyzen Van Zanten 2
Publication typeJournal Article
Publication date2013-11-10
SJR
CiteScore
Impact factor
ISSN08357900
PubMed ID:  23378981
General Medicine
Gastroenterology
Abstract

BACKGROUND: Adherence to surveillance colonoscopy guidelines is important to prevent colorectal cancer (CRC) and unnecessary workload.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate how well Canadian gastroenterologists adhere to colonoscopy surveillance guidelines after adenoma removal or treatment for CRC.

METHODS: Patients with a history of adenomas or CRC who had surveillance performed between October 2008 and October 2010 were retrospectively included. Time intervals between index colonoscopy and surveillance were compared with the 2008 guideline recommendations of the American Gastroenterological Association and regarded as appropriate when the surveillance interval was within six months of the recommended time interval.

RESULTS: A total of 265 patients were included (52% men; mean age 58 years). Among patients with a normal index colonoscopy (n=110), 42% received surveillance on time, 38% too early (median difference = 1.2 years too early) and 20% too late (median difference = 1.0 year too late). Among patients with nonadvanced adenomas at index (n=96), 25% underwent surveillance on time, 61% too early (median difference = 1.85) and 14% too late (median difference = 1.1). Among patients with advanced neoplasia at index (n=59), 29% underwent surveillance on time, 34% too early (median difference = 1.86) and 37% later than recommended (median difference = 1.61). No significant difference in adenoma detection rates was observed when too early surveillance versus appropriate surveillance (34% versus 33%; P=0.92) and too late surveillance versus appropriate surveillance (21% versus 33%; P=0.11) were compared.

CONCLUSION: Only a minority of surveillance colonoscopies were performed according to guideline recommendations. Deviation from the guidelines did not improve the adenoma detection rate. Interventions aimed at improving adherence to surveillance guidelines are needed.

Found 

Top-30

Journals

1
2
3
4
Gut
4 publications, 17.39%
Endoscopy
3 publications, 13.04%
American Journal of Gastroenterology
1 publication, 4.35%
CMAJ Open
1 publication, 4.35%
Internal and Emergency Medicine
1 publication, 4.35%
Digestive Diseases and Sciences
1 publication, 4.35%
BMC Family Practice
1 publication, 4.35%
BMC Health Services Research
1 publication, 4.35%
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
1 publication, 4.35%
Bailliere's Best Practice and Research in Clinical Gastroenterology
1 publication, 4.35%
Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice
1 publication, 4.35%
United European Gastroenterology Journal
1 publication, 4.35%
Medical Journal of Australia
1 publication, 4.35%
Endoscopy International Open
1 publication, 4.35%
Health Technology Assessment
1 publication, 4.35%
Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology
1 publication, 4.35%
International Journal of Colorectal Disease
1 publication, 4.35%
Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (Australia)
1 publication, 4.35%
1
2
3
4

Publishers

1
2
3
4
5
6
Springer Nature
6 publications, 26.09%
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
4 publications, 17.39%
BMJ
4 publications, 17.39%
Wiley
3 publications, 13.04%
Elsevier
2 publications, 8.7%
CMA Impact Inc.
1 publication, 4.35%
SAGE
1 publication, 4.35%
National Coordinating Centre for Health Technology Assessment
1 publication, 4.35%
Hindawi Limited
1 publication, 4.35%
1
2
3
4
5
6
  • We do not take into account publications without a DOI.
  • Statistics recalculated weekly.

Are you a researcher?

Create a profile to get free access to personal recommendations for colleagues and new articles.
Metrics
23
Share
Cite this
GOST |
Cite this
GOST Copy
Schreuders E. et al. The Appropriateness of Surveillance Colonoscopy Intervals after Polypectomy // Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology. 2013. Vol. 27. No. 1. pp. 33-38.
GOST all authors (up to 50) Copy
Schreuders E., Nicolaas J. S., de Jonge V., Van Kooten H., Soo I., Sadowski D., Wong C., van Leerdam M. E., Kuipers E. J., Van Zanten S. J. V. The Appropriateness of Surveillance Colonoscopy Intervals after Polypectomy // Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology. 2013. Vol. 27. No. 1. pp. 33-38.
RIS |
Cite this
RIS Copy
TY - JOUR
DO - 10.1155/2013/279897
UR - https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/279897
TI - The Appropriateness of Surveillance Colonoscopy Intervals after Polypectomy
T2 - Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology
AU - Schreuders, Eline
AU - Nicolaas, Jerome Sint
AU - de Jonge, Vincent
AU - Van Kooten, Harmke
AU - Soo, Isaac
AU - Sadowski, Daniel
AU - Wong, Clarence
AU - van Leerdam, Monique E.
AU - Kuipers, Ernst J
AU - Van Zanten, Sander Jo Veldhuyzen
PY - 2013
DA - 2013/11/10
PB - Hindawi Limited
SP - 33-38
IS - 1
VL - 27
PMID - 23378981
SN - 0835-7900
ER -
BibTex |
Cite this
BibTex (up to 50 authors) Copy
@article{2013_Schreuders,
author = {Eline Schreuders and Jerome Sint Nicolaas and Vincent de Jonge and Harmke Van Kooten and Isaac Soo and Daniel Sadowski and Clarence Wong and Monique E. van Leerdam and Ernst J Kuipers and Sander Jo Veldhuyzen Van Zanten},
title = {The Appropriateness of Surveillance Colonoscopy Intervals after Polypectomy},
journal = {Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology},
year = {2013},
volume = {27},
publisher = {Hindawi Limited},
month = {nov},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/279897},
number = {1},
pages = {33--38},
doi = {10.1155/2013/279897}
}
MLA
Cite this
MLA Copy
Schreuders, Eline, et al. “The Appropriateness of Surveillance Colonoscopy Intervals after Polypectomy.” Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology, vol. 27, no. 1, Nov. 2013, pp. 33-38. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/279897.