Department of Medicine, Boston University Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
The Clinical Outcomes Research Initiative, Portland, Oregon, USA.
Gastrointest Endosc. 2018 Mar;87(3):744-751. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2017.06.012. Epub 2017 Jun 23.
The risks of missed findings after inadequate bowel preparation are not fully characterized in a diverse cohort. We aimed to evaluate the likelihood of missed polyps after an inadequate preparation as assessed by using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS).
In this observational study of prospectively collected data within a large, national, endoscopic consortium, we identified patients aged 50 to 75 years who underwent average-risk screening colonoscopy (C1) followed by a second colonoscopy for any indication within 3 years (C2). We determined the polyp detection rates (PDRs) and advanced PDRs during C2 stratified by C1 BBPS scores.
Among segment pairs without polyps at C1 (N = 601), those with inadequate C1 BBPS segment scores had a higher PDR at C2 (10%) compared with those with adequate bowel preparation at C1 (5%; P = .04). Among segment pairs with polyps at C1 (N = 154), segments with inadequate bowel preparation scores at C1 had higher advanced PDRs at C2 (20%) compared with those with adequate bowel preparation scores at C1 (4%; P = .03). In multivariable analysis, the presence of advanced polyps at C1 (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 3.5; 95% confidence intervals [CIs], 1.1-10.8) but not inadequate BBPS scores at C1 (adjusted OR 1.8; 95% CI, 0.6-5.1) was associated with a significantly increased risk of advanced polyps at C2.
Inadequate BBPS segment scores generally are associated with higher rates of polyps and advanced polyps at subsequent colonoscopy within a short timeframe. The presence of advanced polyps as well as inadequate BBPS segment scores can inform the risk of missed polyps and help triage which patients warrant a timely repeat colonoscopy.
在不同人群中,未充分肠道准备后漏诊的风险尚未得到充分描述。我们旨在通过使用波士顿肠道准备量表(Boston Bowel Preparation Scale,BBPS)评估未充分准备后息肉漏诊的可能性。
在一个大型国家内镜协会中前瞻性收集数据的观察性研究中,我们确定了年龄在 50 至 75 岁之间的患者,他们接受了平均风险筛查性结肠镜检查(C1),然后在 3 年内因任何原因进行第二次结肠镜检查(C2)。我们根据 C1 的 BBPS 评分确定 C2 时的息肉检出率(PDR)和高级 PDR。
在 C1 时无息肉的段对(N=601)中,C1 时 BBPS 评分不足的段 C2 时 PDR 较高(10%),而 C1 时肠道准备充分的段 PDR 较低(5%;P=0.04)。在 C1 时存在息肉的段对(N=154)中,C1 时肠道准备评分不足的段 C2 时高级 PDR 较高(20%),而 C1 时肠道准备评分充分的段 PDR 较低(4%;P=0.03)。多变量分析显示,C1 时存在高级息肉(调整后的优势比[OR]3.5;95%置信区间[CI]1.1-10.8),而不是 C1 时 BBPS 评分不足(调整后的 OR 1.8;95%CI,0.6-5.1)与 C2 时高级息肉的风险显著增加相关。
在短时间内,BBPS 段评分不足通常与结肠镜检查后息肉和高级息肉的发生率较高相关。高级息肉的存在以及 BBPS 段评分不足可以提示漏诊息肉的风险,并有助于确定哪些患者需要及时重复结肠镜检查。