Kim Nam Hee, Jung Yoon Suk, Jeong Woo Shin, Yang Hyo-Joon, Park Soo-Kyung, Choi Kyuyong, Park Dong Il
Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kangbuk Samsung Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Intest Res. 2017 Jul;15(3):411-418. doi: 10.5217/ir.2017.15.3.411. Epub 2017 Jun 12.
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Colonoscopic polypectomy is the best diagnostic and therapeutic tool to detect and prevent colorectal neoplasms. However, previous studies have reported that 17% to 28% of colorectal polyps are missed during colonoscopy. We investigated the miss rate of neoplastic polyps and the factors associated with missed polyps from quality-adjusted consecutive colonoscopies.
We reviewed the medical records of patients who were found to have colorectal polyps at a medical examination center of the Kangbuk Samsung Hospital between March 2012 and February 2013. Patients who were referred to a single tertiary academic medical center and underwent colonoscopic polypectomy on the same day were enrolled in our study. The odds ratios (ORs) associated with polyp-related and patient-related factors were evaluated using logistic regression analyses.
A total of 463 patients and 1,294 neoplastic polyps were analyzed. The miss rates for adenomas, advanced adenomas, and carcinomas were 24.1% (312/1,294), 1.2% (15/1,294), and 0% (0/1,294), respectively. Flat/sessile-shaped adenomas (adjusted OR, 3.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.40-5.46) and smaller adenomas (adjusted OR, 5.63; 95% CI, 2.84- 11.15 for ≤5 mm; adjusted OR, 3.18; 95% CI, 1.60-6.30 for 6-9 mm, respectively) were more frequently missed than pedunculated/sub-pedunculated adenomas and larger adenomas. In patients with 2 or more polyps compared with only one detected (adjusted OR, 2.37; 95% CI, 1.55-3.61 for 2-4 polyps; adjusted OR, 11.52; 95% CI, 4.61-28.79 for ≥5 polyps, respectively) during the first endoscopy, the risk of missing an additional polyp was significantly higher.
One-quarter of neoplastic polyps was missed during colonoscopy. We encourage endoscopists to detect smaller and flat or sessile polyps by using the optimal withdrawal technique.
背景/目的:结肠镜息肉切除术是检测和预防结直肠肿瘤的最佳诊断和治疗工具。然而,既往研究报道结肠镜检查期间17%至28%的结直肠息肉会被漏诊。我们通过质量调整后的连续结肠镜检查,调查了肿瘤性息肉的漏诊率以及与漏诊息肉相关的因素。
我们回顾了2012年3月至2013年2月在江北三星医院体检中心被发现患有结直肠息肉的患者的病历。被转诊至单一三级学术医疗中心并于同日接受结肠镜息肉切除术的患者纳入我们的研究。使用逻辑回归分析评估与息肉相关和患者相关因素的比值比(OR)。
共分析了463例患者和1294个肿瘤性息肉。腺瘤、高级别腺瘤和癌的漏诊率分别为24.1%(312/1294)、1.2%(15/1294)和0%(0/1294)。扁平/无蒂型腺瘤(校正OR,3.62;95%置信区间[CI],2.40 - 5.46)和较小的腺瘤(校正OR,5.63;95%CI,≤5mm时为2.84 - 11.15;95%CI,6 - 9mm时为3.18 - 6.30)比有蒂/亚有蒂腺瘤和较大的腺瘤更常被漏诊。在首次内镜检查时,与仅发现1个息肉的患者相比,发现2个或更多息肉的患者(校正OR,2 - 4个息肉时为2.37;95%CI,1.55 - 3.61;≥5个息肉时为11.52;95%CI,4.61 - 28.79)漏诊额外息肉的风险显著更高。
结肠镜检查期间四分之一的肿瘤性息肉被漏诊。我们鼓励内镜医师采用最佳退镜技术检测较小的以及扁平或无蒂息肉。