ArticleSurgical endoscopy2024
Improving the management and outcomes of complex non-pedunculated colorectal polyps at a regional hospital in British Columbia.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundColorectal cancer arises from precancerous lesions, primarily adenomatous and serrated polyps. Some polyps pose significant technical endoscopic challenges due to their size, location, and/or morphology. A standardized protocol for documentation and management of these polyps can optimize clinical outcomes.
methodsA Quality Improvement project compared patients with a complex polyp (non-pedunculated, > 2 cm), for 12 months prior and 12 months after protocol introduction. Documentation and polyp management details were compared pre- and post-implementation using the Chi-square test.
results69 patients were diagnosed with complex polyps prior to the protocol introduction and 72 after. 79% (112/141) of patients underwent endoscopic mucosal resections (EMR) locally, and 14.9% (21/141) underwent surgery locally. After protocol introduction, there was significant improvement in documentation of suspicious appearing polyps (21.7% to 47.2%, P = 0.001), luminal circumference (14.5% to 34.7%, P = 0.005), and management plans (87.0% to 97.2%, P = 0.023); other elements of documentation were similar. The number of patients reviewed at multidisciplinary conference (MDC) increased from 1 to 61% (P < 0.005). Patients rebooked in a 1 h endoscopy time slot increased from 19 to 58% (P < 0.005), as did specific consent for EMR from 22 to 57% (P < 0.005). Among patients with polyps 3 cm or greater (23 pre, 36 post), MDC review increased from 4 to 67% (P < 0.005), primary polypectomy decreased from 72 to 23% (P = 0.001), patients rebooked in a double endoscopy slot increased from 33 to 75% (P = 0.005), and specific consent increased from 39 to 75% (P = 0.014). There were less polyp recurrences (12/42 pre and 1/50 post) among the post-protocol cohort (P < 0.001).
conclusionsThe introduction of a formalized protocol for complex polyp adjudication and management has led to improved documentation, multidisciplinary discussion, and optimal complex polyp management with dedicated time for EMR, particularly for polyps over 3 cm. There is room for improvement, and this can be approached in a collaborative manner.
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.