乙状结肠镜筛查中肠道清洁不足的影响。

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q3 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Kristin Ranheim Randel, Anna Lisa Schult, Edoardo Botteri, Mobina Nawaz, Dung Hong Nguyen, Øyvind Holme, Michael Bretthauer, Geir Hoff, Thomas de Lange
{"title":"乙状结肠镜筛查中肠道清洁不足的影响。","authors":"Kristin Ranheim Randel, Anna Lisa Schult, Edoardo Botteri, Mobina Nawaz, Dung Hong Nguyen, Øyvind Holme, Michael Bretthauer, Geir Hoff, Thomas de Lange","doi":"10.1080/00365521.2024.2364213","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and study aims: </strong>Long-time follow-up of sigmoidoscopy screening trials has shown reduced incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer (CRC), but inadequate bowel cleansing may hamper efficacy. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of bowel cleansing quality in sigmoidoscopy screening.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>Individuals 50 to 74 years old who had a screening sigmoidoscopy in a population-based Norwegian, randomized trial between 2012 and 2019, were included in this cross-sectional study. The bowel cleansing quality was categorised as excellent, good, partly poor, or poor. The effect of bowel cleansing quality on adenoma detection rate (ADR) and referral to colonoscopy was evaluated by fitting multivariable logistic regression models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>35,710 individuals were included. The bowel cleansing at sigmoidoscopy was excellent in 20,934 (58.6%) individuals, good in 6580 (18.4%), partly poor in 7097 (19.9%) and poor in 1099 (3.1%). The corresponding ADRs were 17.0%, 16.6%, 14.5%, and 13.0%. Compared to participants with excellent bowel cleansing, those with poor bowel cleansing had an odds ratio for adenoma detection of 0.66 (95% confidence interval 0.55-0.79). We found substantial differences in the assessment of bowel cleansing quality among endoscopists.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Inadequate bowel cleansing reduces the efficacy of sigmoidoscopy screening, by lowering ADR. A validated rating scale and improved bowel preparation are needed to make sigmoidoscopy an appropriate screening method.</p><p><p><b>Trial registration</b> Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01538550).</p>","PeriodicalId":21461,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology","volume":" ","pages":"1002-1009"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of inadequate bowel cleansing in sigmoidoscopy screening.\",\"authors\":\"Kristin Ranheim Randel, Anna Lisa Schult, Edoardo Botteri, Mobina Nawaz, Dung Hong Nguyen, Øyvind Holme, Michael Bretthauer, Geir Hoff, Thomas de Lange\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00365521.2024.2364213\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and study aims: </strong>Long-time follow-up of sigmoidoscopy screening trials has shown reduced incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer (CRC), but inadequate bowel cleansing may hamper efficacy. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of bowel cleansing quality in sigmoidoscopy screening.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>Individuals 50 to 74 years old who had a screening sigmoidoscopy in a population-based Norwegian, randomized trial between 2012 and 2019, were included in this cross-sectional study. The bowel cleansing quality was categorised as excellent, good, partly poor, or poor. The effect of bowel cleansing quality on adenoma detection rate (ADR) and referral to colonoscopy was evaluated by fitting multivariable logistic regression models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>35,710 individuals were included. The bowel cleansing at sigmoidoscopy was excellent in 20,934 (58.6%) individuals, good in 6580 (18.4%), partly poor in 7097 (19.9%) and poor in 1099 (3.1%). The corresponding ADRs were 17.0%, 16.6%, 14.5%, and 13.0%. Compared to participants with excellent bowel cleansing, those with poor bowel cleansing had an odds ratio for adenoma detection of 0.66 (95% confidence interval 0.55-0.79). We found substantial differences in the assessment of bowel cleansing quality among endoscopists.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Inadequate bowel cleansing reduces the efficacy of sigmoidoscopy screening, by lowering ADR. A validated rating scale and improved bowel preparation are needed to make sigmoidoscopy an appropriate screening method.</p><p><p><b>Trial registration</b> Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01538550).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21461,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1002-1009\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00365521.2024.2364213\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/8 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00365521.2024.2364213","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和研究目的:乙状结肠镜筛查试验的长期随访表明,结直肠癌(CRC)的发病率和死亡率均有所下降,但肠道清洁不充分可能会影响筛查效果。本研究旨在评估肠道清洁质量对乙状结肠镜筛查的影响:这项横断面研究纳入了在2012年至2019年期间接受挪威人口随机试验乙状结肠镜筛查的50至74岁的人群。肠道清洁质量分为优、良、部分差或差。通过拟合多变量逻辑回归模型,评估了肠道清洁质量对腺瘤检出率(ADR)和结肠镜检查转诊的影响:结果:共纳入 35,710 人。在乙状结肠镜检查中,20934 人(58.6%)的肠道清洁度为优,6580 人(18.4%)为良,7097 人(19.9%)为部分差,1099 人(3.1%)为差。相应的 ADR 分别为 17.0%、16.6%、14.5% 和 13.0%。与肠道清洁度良好的参与者相比,肠道清洁度差的参与者腺瘤检出几率比为 0.66(95% 置信区间为 0.55-0.79)。我们发现内镜医师对肠道清洁质量的评估存在很大差异:结论:肠道清洁不充分会降低 ADR,从而降低乙状结肠镜筛查的效果。要使乙状结肠镜检查成为一种合适的筛查方法,需要一个经过验证的评分量表并改进肠道准备工作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Impact of inadequate bowel cleansing in sigmoidoscopy screening.

Background and study aims: Long-time follow-up of sigmoidoscopy screening trials has shown reduced incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer (CRC), but inadequate bowel cleansing may hamper efficacy. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of bowel cleansing quality in sigmoidoscopy screening.

Patients and methods: Individuals 50 to 74 years old who had a screening sigmoidoscopy in a population-based Norwegian, randomized trial between 2012 and 2019, were included in this cross-sectional study. The bowel cleansing quality was categorised as excellent, good, partly poor, or poor. The effect of bowel cleansing quality on adenoma detection rate (ADR) and referral to colonoscopy was evaluated by fitting multivariable logistic regression models.

Results: 35,710 individuals were included. The bowel cleansing at sigmoidoscopy was excellent in 20,934 (58.6%) individuals, good in 6580 (18.4%), partly poor in 7097 (19.9%) and poor in 1099 (3.1%). The corresponding ADRs were 17.0%, 16.6%, 14.5%, and 13.0%. Compared to participants with excellent bowel cleansing, those with poor bowel cleansing had an odds ratio for adenoma detection of 0.66 (95% confidence interval 0.55-0.79). We found substantial differences in the assessment of bowel cleansing quality among endoscopists.

Conclusions: Inadequate bowel cleansing reduces the efficacy of sigmoidoscopy screening, by lowering ADR. A validated rating scale and improved bowel preparation are needed to make sigmoidoscopy an appropriate screening method.

Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01538550).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
5.30%
发文量
222
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology is one of the most important journals for international medical research in gastroenterology and hepatology with international contributors, Editorial Board, and distribution
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信