A109 A SIMPLE METHOD TO CALCULATE ADENOMA DETECTION RATES

Abstract Background The adenoma detection rate (ADR) is a key indicator of the effectiveness of colonoscopy, which remains the gold standard for colorectal cancer detection. Many centers in Canada are increasingly adopting EPIC as their electronic health record system. However, the ADR calculation tool in the EPIC foundation build is not well-suited for Canadian practices, as it fails to account for colonoscopies performed due to positive fecal immunochemical tests (FIT) and relies on synoptic reporting of polyp histology by pathologists. To address this, we developed a straightforward text-based search strategy to identify adenomas in dictated pathology reports. Aims This study aims to compare the accuracy of our new ADR metric against calculations based on manual reviews of pathology reports. Methods We analyzed all screening colonoscopies conducted in Alberta from January to August 2024. For cases with specimens submitted for pathology, we examined the reports using a text string search for the terms “adenoma,” “tubular adenoma,” and “tubulovillous or villous adenoma” in the Final Diagnosis section. Reports were excluded if they contained the phrases “no adenoma,” “history of adenoma,” or “serrated adenoma.” Our reference standard was a manual review of pathology reports performed by trained polyp reconciliation nurses. Results From January to August 2024, a total of 46,364 screening colonoscopies were conducted, with 45% of the patients being female. Manual record reviews revealed that 56% of cases had at least one adenoma, 20% had at least one sessile serrated lesion, 171 cases included at least one traditional serrated adenoma, and 345 cases of colorectal cancer were detected. Using manual chart review as the reference standard, our text-based ADR metric demonstrated a sensitivity of 81% and a specificity of 70%. Conclusions The text search-based ADR metric shows promise in simplifying the calculation of ADR, especially for centers that lack synoptic pathology reporting or the capacity for manual pathology report reviews. Further research is necessary to enhance the accuracy of this metric. Funding Agencies None

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology
Published
2025-02-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/jcag/gwae059.109
Primary Topic
Head and Neck Cancer Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A109 A SIMPLE METHOD TO CALCULATE ADENOMA DETECTION RATES

Daniel Sadowski, Timothy Miller, Aleksey Min, P Byun
Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology
Head and Neck Cancer Studies
article

A109 A SIMPLE METHOD TO CALCULATE ADENOMA DETECTION RATES

Daniel Sadowski, Timothy Miller, Aleksey Min, P Byun
article en

Abstract

Abstract Background The adenoma detection rate (ADR) is a key indicator of the effectiveness of colonoscopy, which remains the gold standard for colorectal cancer detection. Many centers in Canada are increasingly adopting EPIC as their electronic health record system. However, the ADR calculation tool in the EPIC foundation build is not well-suited for Canadian practices, as it fails to account for colonoscopies performed due to positive fecal immunochemical tests (FIT) and relies on synoptic reporting of polyp histology by pathologists. To address this, we developed a straightforward text-based search strategy to identify adenomas in dictated pathology reports. Aims This study aims to compare the accuracy of our new ADR metric against calculations based on manual reviews of pathology reports. Methods We analyzed all screening colonoscopies conducted in Alberta from January to August 2024. For cases with specimens submitted for pathology, we examined the reports using a text string search for the terms “adenoma,” “tubular adenoma,” and “tubulovillous or villous adenoma” in the Final Diagnosis section. Reports were excluded if they contained the phrases “no adenoma,” “history of adenoma,” or “serrated adenoma.” Our reference standard was a manual review of pathology reports performed by trained polyp reconciliation nurses. Results From January to August 2024, a total of 46,364 screening colonoscopies were conducted, with 45% of the patients being female. Manual record reviews revealed that 56% of cases had at least one adenoma, 20% had at least one sessile serrated lesion, 171 cases included at least one traditional serrated adenoma, and 345 cases of colorectal cancer were detected. Using manual chart review as the reference standard, our text-based ADR metric demonstrated a sensitivity of 81% and a specificity of 70%. Conclusions The text search-based ADR metric shows promise in simplifying the calculation of ADR, especially for centers that lack synoptic pathology reporting or the capacity for manual pathology report reviews. Further research is necessary to enhance the accuracy of this metric. Funding Agencies None

Journal of the Canadian Association of GastroenterologyVol. 8(Supplement_1)
Alberta Health Services (CA), University of Alberta (CA)
Openalex Percentile: Top 97%
Head and Neck Cancer Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.