This is an outdated version published on 2021-07-01. Read the most recent version.

Adecuación de la indicación de la colonoscopia según criterios de EPAGE II en un hospital universitario de Uruguay

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.35839/repis.5.3.892

Keywords:

appropriateness, colonoscopy, EPAGE II

Abstract

Background: Prioritization of criteria have been developed to reduce the increased demand. The European Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy developed an online program (EPAGE II). The aim of this study is to evaluate the appropriateness of the colonoscopy indication according to the EPAGE II criteria and correlate it with the endoscopic findings. Materials and Methods: Retrospective and analytical study that included all colonoscopies performed in the period March 2018 - March 2019. Colonoscopies with insufficient preparation and missing data, were excluded. They were categorized into having appropriate, inappropriate and uncertain indication, according to EPAGE II criteria. Sociodemographic data, indication, degree of preparation, and the presence of relevant findings were recorded. Results: 648 studies were included, 64.7% were women, and 51.8% were ordered by gastroenterologists. In 62% the preparation was adequate. In 171 (26.4%) the indication was CCR screening. In 525 (81%) the indication was appropriate, in 79 (12,2%) was not appropriate and in 44 (6,8%) was uncertain. An appropriate indication was significantly associated with age older than 50 years (p≤0.001). An endoscopic relevant diagnosis was observed in 55.2%. There was a significant association between appropriate indication and a relevant endoscopic diagnosis (p <0.01). The sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of EPAGE II for an appropriate indication in relation to a relevant endoscopic finding were 84.92 %, 24.14%, 69.72% and 43.75% respectively. Conclusions: In this group of patients the EPAGE II showed high sensitivity and low specificity for the appropriateness of the indication in relation to the findings.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Carrion S, Marin I, Lorenzo-Zuniga V, et al. [Appropriateness of colonoscopy indications according to the new EPAGE II criteria]. Gastroenterología y hepatología. 2010;33(7):484-489.

Vázquez-Iglesias JL, Alonso Aguirre PA, Duranas Vilas J. Endoscopia Digestiva Diagnóstica y Terapéutica. Colonoscopia. Madrid. Edit. Panamericana; 2009.p.115-147.

Blero D, Devière J. Endoscopic complications--avoidance and management. Nature reviews Gastroenterology & hepatology. 2012;9(3):162-172.

Fisher DA, Maple JT, Ben-Menachem T, et al. Complications of colonoscopy. Gastrointestinal endoscopy. 2011;74(4):745-752.

Vader JP, Froehlich F, Dubois RW, et al. European Panel on the Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (EPAGE): conclusion and WWW site. Endoscopy. 1999:31(8):687-694.

Arditi C, Peytremann-Bridevaux I, Burnand B, et al. Appropriateness of colonoscopy in Europe (EPAGE II). Screening for colorectal cancer. Endoscopy. 2009;41(3):200-208.

Balaguer F, Llach J, Castells A, et al. The European panel on the appropriateness of gastrointestinal endoscopy guidelines colonoscopy in an open-access endoscopy unit: a prospective study. Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics. 2005;21(5):609-613.

Fernández-Esparrach G, Gimeno-García AZ, Llach J, et al. Guidelines for the rational use of endoscopy to improve the detection of relevant lesions in an open-access endoscopy unit: a prospective study. Medicina clínica. 2007;129(6):205-208.

Gimeno-Garcia AZ, Quintero E. Colonoscopy appropriateness: Really needed or a waste of time? World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy. 2015;7(2):94-101.

Iade B, Tchekmedyian AJ, Bianchi C, et al. Recomendaciones de la Sociedad de Gastroenterología del Uruguay para la detección precoz y el seguimiento del cáncer colorrectal. Rev Méd Urug 2003; 19(2):172-177.

Rex DK, Johnson DA, Anderson JC, et al. American College of Gastroenterology guidelines for colorectal cancer screening 2009 [corrected]. The American journal of gastroenterology. 2009;104(3):739-750.

Imperiale TF, Wagner DR, Lin CY, et al. Results of screening colonoscopy among persons 40 to 49 years of age. The New England journal of medicine. 2002; 346(23):1781-1785.

Machado P, Berrueta J, Sangunetti A, et al Prevalencia de cáncer colorrectal en pacientes en valoración preoperatoria de hernia de pared abdominal. Rev Méd Urug 2015; 31(4):259-264.

Gerson LB, Triadafilopoulos G. Is colorectal cancer screening necessary in the preoperative assessment of inguinal herniorrhaphy? A case-control study. The American journal of gastroenterology.2001; 96(6):1914-1917.

Avidan B, Sonnenberg A, Bhatia H, et al. Inguinal hernia is not a sign of colon cancer: results of a prospective screening trial. Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics. 2002; 16(6):1197-201.

Samarakoon, Y., Gunawardena, N., Pathirana, A. et al. “Appropriateness of colonoscopy according to EPAGE II in a low resource setting: a cross sectional study from Sri Lanka”. BMC Gastroenterol. 2018; 18 (72).

Published

2021-07-01

Versions

Issue

Section

Artículos originales

How to Cite

1.
Adecuación de la indicación de la colonoscopia según criterios de EPAGE II en un hospital universitario de Uruguay. Rev Peru Investig Salud [Internet]. 2021 Jul. 1 [cited 2025 Sep. 14];5(3):159-63. Available from: http://revistas.unheval.edu.pe/index.php/repis/article/view/892

Most read articles by the same author(s)

Similar Articles

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.