Adenoma detection rate by colonoscopy in real-world population-based studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Autores da FMUP

• Mário Jorge Dinis Ribeiro

  Autor

Participantes de fora da FMUP

• Fernandes C
• Estevinho M
• Marques Cruz M
• Frazzoni L
• Rodrigues PP
• Fuccio L

Unidades de investigação

• Medicina da Comunidade, Informação e Decisão em Saúde

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is a quality indicator set at a minimum of 25% in unselected populations by the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE). Nevertheless, a lack of pooled observational data resembling real-world practice limits support for this threshold. We aimed to perform a systematic review with meta-analysis to evaluate the pooled rates for conventional adenoma detection, polyp detection (PDR), cecal intubation, bowel preparation, and complications in population-based studies. METHODS: The PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched until May 2023 for populational-based studies reporting overall ADR in unselected individuals. A random-effects model was used for meta-analysis. RESULTS: 31 studies were included, comprising 3 644 561 subjects. A high quality of procedures was noticeable, with a high cecal intubation rate and low complication rate. The overall pooled ADR, PDR, and rate of cancer detection were 26.5% (95%CI 23.3% to 29.7%), 38.3% (95%CI 32.5% to 44.1%), and 2.7% (95%CI 1.5% to 3.9%), respectively. ADR varied according to indication: screening 33.3% (95%CI 24.5% to 42.2%), surveillance 42.9% (95%CI 36.9% to 49.0%), and diagnostic 24.7% (95%CI 19.5% to 29.9%), with subgroup analysis revealing rates of 34.4% (95%CI 22.0% to 40.5%) for post-fecal occult blood test and 26.6% (95%CI 22.6% to 30.5%) for primary colonoscopy screening. Diminutive conventional adenomas yielded a pooled rate of 59.9% (95%CI 43.4% to 76.3%). The pooled rate for overall serrated lesion detection was 12.4% (95%CI 8.8% to 16.0%). Male sex and higher age were significantly associated with an ADR above the benchmark. CONCLUSION: This first meta-analysis relying on real-world observational studies supports the ESGE benchmark for ADR, while suggesting that different benchmarks might be used according to indication, sex, and age.

Thieme. All rights reserved.

Keywords

• Adenoma; Colonic Polyps; Colonoscopy; Colorectal Neoplasms; Early Detection of Cancer; Humans; adenoma; benchmarking; cancer diagnosis; cecum; colonoscopy; gastrointestinal endoscopy; human; intestine preparation; intubation; meta analysis; occult blood; occult blood test; perforation; Review; systematic review; colon polyp; colorectal tumor; diagnosis; early cancer diagnosis; procedures