ArticleEndoscopy international open2025
Patient- and endoscopist-related risk factors and etiological categorization of post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer.
Article in Endoscopy international open, 2025. 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.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and study aims: Colonoscopy is considered to be the gold standard for detecting colorectal cancer. However, this technique is not flawless and post-colonoscopy colorectal cancers (PCCRCs) can occur. Therefore, we investigated the association between patient- and endoscopist-related risk factors and occurrence of PCCRC. Patients and methods: A matched case-control study design was employed. Data from the national colorectal cancer screening program, along with medical records, were used to identify patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer from 2012 until 2022 who had a negative colonoscopy in the 4 years preceding the diagnosis. Patients with colorectal cancer (cases) were matched in a 1:2 ratio with patients without colorectal cancer (controls) based on the date of the negative index colonoscopy of the cases. Analyses at the patient and endoscopist level were conducted to assess factors associated with PCCRC occurrence. Root cause analysis, using the World Endoscopy Organization categorization, was performed to identify possible PCCRC causes. Results: Of 72,975 colonoscopies, 61 PCCRC cases (62% male, mean age 77 years) were found, resulting in an incidence of 22 per 100,000 patient years. Root cause analysis showed that over 75% of PCCRCs could be classified as a possibly missed lesion during index colonoscopy. Endoscopists with a higher mean number of adenomas per colonoscopy had significantly lower PCCRC incidence. Conclusions: Endoscopists detecting more adenomas had a substantially lower PCCRC incidence in their patients. Therefore, endoscopist performance is a crucial marker of PCCRC and may serve as a quality control measure for colonoscopy.
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.