Cargando…

Quality of endoscopy reporting at index colonoscopy significantly impacts outcome of subsequent EMR in patients with > 20 mm colon polyps

Background and study aims  Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is safe and cost-effective in management of patients with colon polyps. However, very little is known about the actions of the referring endoscopist following identification of these lesions at index colonoscopy, and the impact of those a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Raju, Gottumukkala, Lum, Phillip, Ross, William, Thirumurthi, Selvi, Miller, Ethan, Lynch, Patrick, Lee, Jeffrey, Bhutani, Manoop S., Shafi, Mehnaz A., Weston, Brian, Blechacz, Boris, Chang, George J, Hagan, Katherine, Rashid, Asif, Davila, Marta, Stroehlein, John
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: © Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2019
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6395098/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30834295
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-0746-3520
_version_ 1783399023465463808
author Raju, Gottumukkala
Lum, Phillip
Ross, William
Thirumurthi, Selvi
Miller, Ethan
Lynch, Patrick
Lee, Jeffrey
Bhutani, Manoop S.
Shafi, Mehnaz A.
Weston, Brian
Blechacz, Boris
Chang, George J
Hagan, Katherine
Rashid, Asif
Davila, Marta
Stroehlein, John
author_facet Raju, Gottumukkala
Lum, Phillip
Ross, William
Thirumurthi, Selvi
Miller, Ethan
Lynch, Patrick
Lee, Jeffrey
Bhutani, Manoop S.
Shafi, Mehnaz A.
Weston, Brian
Blechacz, Boris
Chang, George J
Hagan, Katherine
Rashid, Asif
Davila, Marta
Stroehlein, John
author_sort Raju, Gottumukkala
collection PubMed
description Background and study aims  Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is safe and cost-effective in management of patients with colon polyps. However, very little is known about the actions of the referring endoscopist following identification of these lesions at index colonoscopy, and the impact of those actions on the outcome of subsequent referral for EMR. The aim of this study was to identify practices at index colonoscopy that lead to failure of subsequent EMR. Patients and methods  Two hundred and eighty-nine consecutive patients with biopsy-proven non-malignant colon polyps (> 20 mm) referred for EMR were analyzed to identify practices that could be improved from the time of identifying the lesion at index colonoscopy until completion of therapy. Results  EMR was abandoned at colonoscopy at the EMR center in 71 of 289 patients (24.6 %). Reasons for abandoning EMR included diagnosis of invasive carcinoma (n = 9; 12.7 %), tethered lesions (n = 21; 29.6 %) from prior endoscopic interventions, and overly large (n = 22; 31 %) and inaccessible lesions (n = 17; 24 %) for complete and safe resection whose details were not recorded in the referring endoscopy report, or polyposis syndromes (n = 2; 2.8 %) that were not recognized. Conclusions  In our practice, one in four EMR attempts were abandoned as a result of inadequate diagnosis or management by the referring endoscopist, which could be improved by education on optical diagnosis of polyps, comprehensive documentation of the procedure and avoidance of interventions that preclude resection.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6395098
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher © Georg Thieme Verlag KG
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63950982019-03-05 Quality of endoscopy reporting at index colonoscopy significantly impacts outcome of subsequent EMR in patients with > 20 mm colon polyps Raju, Gottumukkala Lum, Phillip Ross, William Thirumurthi, Selvi Miller, Ethan Lynch, Patrick Lee, Jeffrey Bhutani, Manoop S. Shafi, Mehnaz A. Weston, Brian Blechacz, Boris Chang, George J Hagan, Katherine Rashid, Asif Davila, Marta Stroehlein, John Endosc Int Open Background and study aims  Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is safe and cost-effective in management of patients with colon polyps. However, very little is known about the actions of the referring endoscopist following identification of these lesions at index colonoscopy, and the impact of those actions on the outcome of subsequent referral for EMR. The aim of this study was to identify practices at index colonoscopy that lead to failure of subsequent EMR. Patients and methods  Two hundred and eighty-nine consecutive patients with biopsy-proven non-malignant colon polyps (> 20 mm) referred for EMR were analyzed to identify practices that could be improved from the time of identifying the lesion at index colonoscopy until completion of therapy. Results  EMR was abandoned at colonoscopy at the EMR center in 71 of 289 patients (24.6 %). Reasons for abandoning EMR included diagnosis of invasive carcinoma (n = 9; 12.7 %), tethered lesions (n = 21; 29.6 %) from prior endoscopic interventions, and overly large (n = 22; 31 %) and inaccessible lesions (n = 17; 24 %) for complete and safe resection whose details were not recorded in the referring endoscopy report, or polyposis syndromes (n = 2; 2.8 %) that were not recognized. Conclusions  In our practice, one in four EMR attempts were abandoned as a result of inadequate diagnosis or management by the referring endoscopist, which could be improved by education on optical diagnosis of polyps, comprehensive documentation of the procedure and avoidance of interventions that preclude resection. © Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2019-03 2019-02-28 /pmc/articles/PMC6395098/ /pubmed/30834295 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-0746-3520 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License, which permits unrestricted reproduction and distribution, for non-commercial purposes only; and use and reproduction, but not distribution, of adapted material for non-commercial purposes only, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Raju, Gottumukkala
Lum, Phillip
Ross, William
Thirumurthi, Selvi
Miller, Ethan
Lynch, Patrick
Lee, Jeffrey
Bhutani, Manoop S.
Shafi, Mehnaz A.
Weston, Brian
Blechacz, Boris
Chang, George J
Hagan, Katherine
Rashid, Asif
Davila, Marta
Stroehlein, John
Quality of endoscopy reporting at index colonoscopy significantly impacts outcome of subsequent EMR in patients with > 20 mm colon polyps
title Quality of endoscopy reporting at index colonoscopy significantly impacts outcome of subsequent EMR in patients with > 20 mm colon polyps
title_full Quality of endoscopy reporting at index colonoscopy significantly impacts outcome of subsequent EMR in patients with > 20 mm colon polyps
title_fullStr Quality of endoscopy reporting at index colonoscopy significantly impacts outcome of subsequent EMR in patients with > 20 mm colon polyps
title_full_unstemmed Quality of endoscopy reporting at index colonoscopy significantly impacts outcome of subsequent EMR in patients with > 20 mm colon polyps
title_short Quality of endoscopy reporting at index colonoscopy significantly impacts outcome of subsequent EMR in patients with > 20 mm colon polyps
title_sort quality of endoscopy reporting at index colonoscopy significantly impacts outcome of subsequent emr in patients with > 20 mm colon polyps
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6395098/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30834295
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-0746-3520
work_keys_str_mv AT rajugottumukkala qualityofendoscopyreportingatindexcolonoscopysignificantlyimpactsoutcomeofsubsequentemrinpatientswith20mmcolonpolyps
AT lumphillip qualityofendoscopyreportingatindexcolonoscopysignificantlyimpactsoutcomeofsubsequentemrinpatientswith20mmcolonpolyps
AT rosswilliam qualityofendoscopyreportingatindexcolonoscopysignificantlyimpactsoutcomeofsubsequentemrinpatientswith20mmcolonpolyps
AT thirumurthiselvi qualityofendoscopyreportingatindexcolonoscopysignificantlyimpactsoutcomeofsubsequentemrinpatientswith20mmcolonpolyps
AT millerethan qualityofendoscopyreportingatindexcolonoscopysignificantlyimpactsoutcomeofsubsequentemrinpatientswith20mmcolonpolyps
AT lynchpatrick qualityofendoscopyreportingatindexcolonoscopysignificantlyimpactsoutcomeofsubsequentemrinpatientswith20mmcolonpolyps
AT leejeffrey qualityofendoscopyreportingatindexcolonoscopysignificantlyimpactsoutcomeofsubsequentemrinpatientswith20mmcolonpolyps
AT bhutanimanoops qualityofendoscopyreportingatindexcolonoscopysignificantlyimpactsoutcomeofsubsequentemrinpatientswith20mmcolonpolyps
AT shafimehnaza qualityofendoscopyreportingatindexcolonoscopysignificantlyimpactsoutcomeofsubsequentemrinpatientswith20mmcolonpolyps
AT westonbrian qualityofendoscopyreportingatindexcolonoscopysignificantlyimpactsoutcomeofsubsequentemrinpatientswith20mmcolonpolyps
AT blechaczboris qualityofendoscopyreportingatindexcolonoscopysignificantlyimpactsoutcomeofsubsequentemrinpatientswith20mmcolonpolyps
AT changgeorgej qualityofendoscopyreportingatindexcolonoscopysignificantlyimpactsoutcomeofsubsequentemrinpatientswith20mmcolonpolyps
AT hagankatherine qualityofendoscopyreportingatindexcolonoscopysignificantlyimpactsoutcomeofsubsequentemrinpatientswith20mmcolonpolyps
AT rashidasif qualityofendoscopyreportingatindexcolonoscopysignificantlyimpactsoutcomeofsubsequentemrinpatientswith20mmcolonpolyps
AT davilamarta qualityofendoscopyreportingatindexcolonoscopysignificantlyimpactsoutcomeofsubsequentemrinpatientswith20mmcolonpolyps
AT stroehleinjohn qualityofendoscopyreportingatindexcolonoscopysignificantlyimpactsoutcomeofsubsequentemrinpatientswith20mmcolonpolyps