ArticleCureus2025
Variation in Proximal Sessile Serrated Lesion Detection Rates During Non-screening Colonoscopies.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsProximal sessile serrated lesions (PSSL) are increasingly recognized as significant precursors of interval colon cancer. We aimed to assess the PSSL detection rates during non-screening colonoscopies and whether there are associations between PSSL detection rate and the established colonoscopy key performance indicators (KPI).
methodsWe retrospectively collected data of all non-screening colonoscopies performed by independent endoscopists at a large teaching hospital between June and December 2019. Data regarding endoscopists' KPIs, including polyp detection rate (PDR), cecal intubation rate (CIR), and colonoscopy withdrawal time (CWT), were retrieved from the national endoscopy database. SSL resected proximal to the splenic flexure were identified by an expert pathologist. Associations between PSSL detection rate and the different KPIs were assessed using Spearman's test.
resultsA total of 2956 colonoscopies performed by 33 endoscopists were included. The mean PSSL detection rate was 0.7% (SD 1.5), the mean PDR was 37.1% (SD 17), the mean CIR was 91.3% (SD 6), and the mean CWT was nine minutes (SD 2). There was marked variability in PSSL detection rates between endoscopists (range 0 - 6.5%). PSSL detection rate positively correlated with CWT (r=0.34, p=0.04) but not with the other KPIs.
conclusionThe wide variability in PSSL detection between endoscopists is concerning of high miss rates and despite achieving the national benchmarks for the established KPIs, many endoscopists still had low PSSL detection rates. Therefore, PSSL detection rate should be considered as an independent KPI.
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.