ArticleGastrointestinal endoscopy2024
Endoscopist adenomas-per-colonoscopy detection rates and risk for postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer: data from the New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry.
Article in Gastrointestinal endoscopy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Computer-aided detection with or without mucosal-exposure devices in colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Pooled it
- Oral sulfate solution versus polyethylene glycol for bowel preparation before colonoscopy, meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized clinical trials.Techniques in coloproctology · 2024Pooled it
- Real-Time AI-Assisted Detection of Colonic Lesions Using the iIDEAS Intelligent-C Module: A Prospective Single-Center Validation Study.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026Article
- Higher Sessile Serrated Lesion Detection Rates Calculated Using All Examinations Are Associated With Lower Risk for Postcolonoscopy Colorectal Cancer: Data From the New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry.Clinical and translational gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Quality indicators in colonoscopies performed in digestive endoscopy services in northeast Brazil.Arquivos brasileiros de cirurgia digestiva : ABCD = Brazilian archives of digestive surgery · 2026Article
- Computer-aided polyp detection and characterisation systems to support colonoscopy: a systematic review with results stratified by each individual artificial intelligence system.BMJ digital health & AI · 2026Article
- A novel cloud-based artificial intelligence for real-time detection of colorectal neoplasia - a randomized controlled trial (EAGLE).NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Asia-Pacific consensus on the use of artificial intelligence in colorectal cancer screening and surveillance.iGIE : innovation, investigation and insights · 2025Article
- Combating Post-colonoscopy Colorectal Cancer: Insight from the Trials and Cohort Studies.The Korean journal of gastroenterology = Taehan Sohwagi Hakhoe chi · 2025Review
- Which is the better polyp detection metric: adenomas per colonoscopy or adenoma detection rate? A simulation modeling study.Endoscopy international open · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsAdenomas per colonoscopy (APC) may be a better measure of colonoscopy quality than adenoma detection rate (ADR) because it credits endoscopists for each detected adenoma. There are few data examining the association between APC and postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer (PCCRC) incidence. We used data from the New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry to examine APC and PCCRC risk.
methodsWe included New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry patients with an index examination and at least 1 follow-up event, either a colonoscopy or a colorectal cancer (CRC) diagnosis. Our outcome was PCCRC defined as any CRC diagnosed ≥6 months after an index examination. The exposure variable was endoscopist-specific APC quintiles of .25, .40, .50, and .70. Cox regression was used to model the hazard of PCCRC on APC, controlled for age, sex, year of index examination, index findings, bowel preparation, and having more than 1 surveillance examination.
resultsIn 32,535 patients, a lower hazard for PCCRC (n = 178) was observed for higher APCs as compared to APCs of <.25 (reference): .25 to <.40: hazard ratio (HR), .35; 95% confidence interval (CI), .22-.56; .40 to <.50: HR, .31; 95% CI, .20-.49; .50 to <.70: HR, .20; 95% CI, .11-.36; and ≥.70: HR, .19; 95% CI, .09-.37. When examining endoscopists with an ADR of at least 25%, an APC of <.50 was associated with a significantly higher hazard than an APC of ≥.50 (HR, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.06-2.56). A large proportion of endoscopists-one-fifth (32 of 152; 21.1%)-had an ADR of ≥25% but an APC of <.50.
conclusionsOur novel data demonstrating lower PCCRC risk in examinations performed by endoscopists with higher APCs suggest that APC could be a useful quality measure. Quality improvement programs may identify important deficiencies in endoscopist detection performance by measuring APC for endoscopists with an ADR of ≥25%.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.