Clinical—Alimentary TractBleeding and Perforation After Outpatient Colonoscopy and Their Risk Factors in Usual Clinical Practice
Section snippets
Study Design
The study is a population-based cohort of persons who underwent outpatient colonoscopy in 4 Canadian provinces (British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario, Nova Scotia) during April 1, 2002, to March 31, 2003.
Administrative Data Sources
Data were obtained from the Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI) Discharge Abstract Database, which contains information on every patient discharged from a hospital or same-day surgery unit since 1988 and includes patient demographics, major diagnoses, procedures, and discharge status.
Study Cohort
Between April 1, 2002, and March 31, 2003, we identified 97,091 persons age 50 to 75 years who had an outpatient colonoscopy (Table 1). Ontario had the largest number of colonoscopies (67,632; 69.7%), followed by British Columbia (13,999; 14.4%), Alberta (11,054; 11.4%), and Nova Scotia (4,406; 4.5%). The mean age of the cohort was 60.9 years, 52,641 (54.2%) were women, and 23,623 (24.3%) had a polypectomy performed during the procedure.
Table 2 summarizes the characteristics of the study
Discussion
We report here that the rates of bleeding and perforation requiring hospitalization within 30 days following outpatient colonoscopy are 1.64/1000 and 0.85/1000, respectively, in usual clinical practice. This perforation rate is within the target of ≤1/1000 for all colonoscopies set by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer.6 We also report here a risk of death of 0.074/1000 or approximately 1/14,000 from outpatient colonoscopy. The patient factors associated with
References (20)
- et al.
Screening and surveillance for the early detection of colorectal cancer and adenomatous polyps, 2008: a joint guideline from the American Cancer Society, the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology
Gastroenterology
(2008) - et al.
Quality in the technical performance of colonoscopy and the continuous quality improvement process for colonoscopy: recommendations of the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer
Am J Gastroenterol
(2002) - et al.
Adapting a clinical co-morbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative databases
J Clin Epidemiol
(1992) - et al.
New ICD-10 version of the Charlson comorbidity index predicted in-hospital mortality
J Clin Epidemiol
(2004) - et al.
Rates of new or missed colorectal cancers after colonoscopy and their risk factors: a population-based analysis
Gastroenterology
(2007) - et al.
Endoscopic perforation of the colon: lessons from a 10-year study
Am J Gastroenterol
(2000) - et al.
Procedural success and complications of large-scale screening colonoscopy
Gastrointest Endosc
(2002) Have we defined best colonoscopic polypectomy practice in the United States?
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol
(2007)- et al.
Cancer statistics, 2008
CA Cancer J Clin
(2008) Canadian cancer statistics 2008
(2008)
Cited by (404)
Screening for Colorectal Cancer
2023, Surgical Clinics of North AmericaAssociation Between Endoscopist Specialty and Colonoscopy Quality: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
2022, Clinical Gastroenterology and HepatologyRe: An Estimate of Severe Harms Due to Screening Colonoscopy: A Systematic Review
2024, Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine
The authors disclose the following: Supported by Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR).