Cargando…

Low Colon Capsule Endoscopy (CCE) False Negative Rate for Polyps Excluding Reader Error

Background: CCE is a diagnostic tool lacking clinical data on false negative rates. We aimed to assess this rate and the reader/technical error breakdown. Methods: False negative CCEs were identified after comparing to a colonoscopy database. Missed pathology characteristics and study indications/qu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Semenov, Serhiy, Costigan, Conor, Ismail, Mohd Syafiq, McNamara, Deirdre
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9818729/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36611348
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13010056
_version_ 1784865057902952448
author Semenov, Serhiy
Costigan, Conor
Ismail, Mohd Syafiq
McNamara, Deirdre
author_facet Semenov, Serhiy
Costigan, Conor
Ismail, Mohd Syafiq
McNamara, Deirdre
author_sort Semenov, Serhiy
collection PubMed
description Background: CCE is a diagnostic tool lacking clinical data on false negative rates. We aimed to assess this rate and the reader/technical error breakdown. Methods: False negative CCEs were identified after comparing to a colonoscopy database. Missed pathology characteristics and study indications/quality were collated. Cases were re-read by experts and newly identified lesions/pathologies were verified by an expert panel and categorised as reader/technical errors. Results: Of 532 CCEs, 203 had an adequately reported comparative colonoscopy, 45 (22.2%) had missed polyps, and 26/45 (57.8%) reached the colonic section with missed pathology. Of the cases, 22 (84.6%) had adequate bowel preparation. Indications included 13 (50%) polyp surveillance, 12 (46%) GI symptoms, 1 (4%) polyp screening. CCE missed 18 (69.2%) diminutive polyps and 8 (30.8%) polyps ≥ 6 mm, 18/26 (69.2%) of these were adenomas. Excluding incomplete CCE correlates, colonoscopy total and significant polyp yield were 97/184 (52.7%) and 50/97 (51.5%), respectively. CCE total polyp and significant polyp false negative rate was 26.8% (26/97) and 16% (8/50), respectively. Following re-reading, reader and technical error was 20/26 (76.9%) and 6/26 (23.1%). Total and significant missed polyp rates were 20.6% (20/97) and 14% (7/50) for reader error, 6.2% (6/97) and 2% (1/50) for technical error. Conclusions: False negative CCE rate is not insubstantial and should be factored into clinical decision making.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9818729
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98187292023-01-07 Low Colon Capsule Endoscopy (CCE) False Negative Rate for Polyps Excluding Reader Error Semenov, Serhiy Costigan, Conor Ismail, Mohd Syafiq McNamara, Deirdre Diagnostics (Basel) Article Background: CCE is a diagnostic tool lacking clinical data on false negative rates. We aimed to assess this rate and the reader/technical error breakdown. Methods: False negative CCEs were identified after comparing to a colonoscopy database. Missed pathology characteristics and study indications/quality were collated. Cases were re-read by experts and newly identified lesions/pathologies were verified by an expert panel and categorised as reader/technical errors. Results: Of 532 CCEs, 203 had an adequately reported comparative colonoscopy, 45 (22.2%) had missed polyps, and 26/45 (57.8%) reached the colonic section with missed pathology. Of the cases, 22 (84.6%) had adequate bowel preparation. Indications included 13 (50%) polyp surveillance, 12 (46%) GI symptoms, 1 (4%) polyp screening. CCE missed 18 (69.2%) diminutive polyps and 8 (30.8%) polyps ≥ 6 mm, 18/26 (69.2%) of these were adenomas. Excluding incomplete CCE correlates, colonoscopy total and significant polyp yield were 97/184 (52.7%) and 50/97 (51.5%), respectively. CCE total polyp and significant polyp false negative rate was 26.8% (26/97) and 16% (8/50), respectively. Following re-reading, reader and technical error was 20/26 (76.9%) and 6/26 (23.1%). Total and significant missed polyp rates were 20.6% (20/97) and 14% (7/50) for reader error, 6.2% (6/97) and 2% (1/50) for technical error. Conclusions: False negative CCE rate is not insubstantial and should be factored into clinical decision making. MDPI 2022-12-25 /pmc/articles/PMC9818729/ /pubmed/36611348 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13010056 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Semenov, Serhiy
Costigan, Conor
Ismail, Mohd Syafiq
McNamara, Deirdre
Low Colon Capsule Endoscopy (CCE) False Negative Rate for Polyps Excluding Reader Error
title Low Colon Capsule Endoscopy (CCE) False Negative Rate for Polyps Excluding Reader Error
title_full Low Colon Capsule Endoscopy (CCE) False Negative Rate for Polyps Excluding Reader Error
title_fullStr Low Colon Capsule Endoscopy (CCE) False Negative Rate for Polyps Excluding Reader Error
title_full_unstemmed Low Colon Capsule Endoscopy (CCE) False Negative Rate for Polyps Excluding Reader Error
title_short Low Colon Capsule Endoscopy (CCE) False Negative Rate for Polyps Excluding Reader Error
title_sort low colon capsule endoscopy (cce) false negative rate for polyps excluding reader error
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9818729/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36611348
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13010056
work_keys_str_mv AT semenovserhiy lowcoloncapsuleendoscopyccefalsenegativerateforpolypsexcludingreadererror
AT costiganconor lowcoloncapsuleendoscopyccefalsenegativerateforpolypsexcludingreadererror
AT ismailmohdsyafiq lowcoloncapsuleendoscopyccefalsenegativerateforpolypsexcludingreadererror
AT mcnamaradeirdre lowcoloncapsuleendoscopyccefalsenegativerateforpolypsexcludingreadererror