ArticleEndoscopy2026
Time trends in post-polypectomy surveillance guideline adherence: analysis of over 90 000 colonoscopies with polypectomy.
Article in Endoscopy, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Previous studies found poor adherence to guidelines on post-polypectomy care. We aimed to investigate adherence to the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) recommendations before and after publication of the updated guideline in 2020, stratified by polyp type. Methods: Participants undergoing screening documented in the Austrian Quality Certificate for Screening Colonoscopy program were included in the study. Piecewise linear regression with one breakpoint was applied to investigate trends in guideline adherence. A mixed-effects logistic regression model was fitted to investigate the associations of screening participant and endoscopist characteristics with guideline adherence. Results: Between August 2020 and November 2024, adherence to the post-polypectomy guideline increased by 49% (95%CI 19%–86%). The strongest improvement in surveillance interval adherence was observed for adenomas (38.4% in 2020 vs. 51.2% in 2024); adherence for serrated polyps only marginally improved (52.4% in 2020 vs. 54.3% in 2024). There was a positive association between endoscopists’ adenoma detection rate (ADR) and the probability of adherence to the ESGE guideline for surveillance of high risk polyps; however, the effect size was only modest (odds ratio 1.01, 95%CI 1.00–1.03). Conclusions: An improvement of up to 49% in ESGE guideline adherence was observed over 4 years after publication of the update, which was mostly driven by improved adherence to the surveillance intervals for adenomas. Endoscopists with higher ADRs were more likely to assign correct follow-up intervals.
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.