Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Colonoscopy: The Current King of the Hill in the USA

  • Review
  • Published:
Digestive Diseases and Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Colonoscopy is the dominant colorectal cancer screening strategy in the USA. There are no randomized controlled trials completed of screening colonoscopy, but multiple lines of evidence establish that colonoscopy reduces colorectal cancer incidence in both the proximal and distal colon. Colonoscopy is highly operator dependent, but systematic efforts to measure and improve quality are impacting performance. Colonoscopy holds a substantial advantage over other strategies for detection of serrated lesions, and a recent case–control study suggests that once-only colonoscopy or colonoscopy at 20-year intervals, by a high-level detector, could ensure lifetime protection from colorectal cancer for many patients.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Neugut AI, Forde KA. Screening colonoscopy: has the time come? Am J Gastroenterol. 1988;83:295–297.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Rex D, Lehman G, Hawes R, et al. Screening colonoscopy in asymptomatic average-risk persons with negative fecal occult blood tests. Gastroenterology. 1991;100:64–67.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Johnson DA, Gurney MS, Volpe RJ, et al. A prospective study of the prevalence of colonic neoplasms in asymptomatic patients with an age-related risk. Am J Gastroenterol. 1990;85:969–974.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Lieberman DA, Smith FW. Screening for colon malignancy with colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol. 1991;86:946–951.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Foutch PG, Mai H, Pardy K, et al. Flexible sigmoidoscopy may be ineffective for secondary prevention of colorectal cancer in asymptomatic, average-risk men. Dig Dis Sci. 1991;36:924–928.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Rex D, Sledge G, Harper P, et al. Colonic neoplasia in asymptomatic persons with negative fecal occult blood tests: influence of age, gender, and family history. Am J Gastroenterol. 1993;88:825–831.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Lieberman DA, Weiss DG, Bond JH, et al. Use of colonoscopy to screen asymptomatic adults for colorectal cancer. Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study Group 380. N Engl J Med. 2000;343:162–168.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Imperiale T, Wagner D, Lin C, et al. Risk of advanced proximal neoplasms in asymptomatic adults according to the distal colorectal findings. N Engl J Med. 2000;343:169–174.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Quintero E, Castells A, Bujanda L, et al. Colonoscopy versus fecal immunochemical testing in colorectal-cancer screening. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:697–706.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Bianco M, Cipolletta L, Rotondano G, Buffoli F. The cooperative flat lesions Italian network (FLIN): prevalence of non-polypoid colorectal neoplasia. A multicentre observational study. Endoscopy. 2010;42:279–285.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Rex DK, Ahnen DJ, Baron JA, et al. Serrated lesions of the colorectum: review and recommendations from an expert panel. Am J Gastroenterol. 2012;107:1315–1329.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Tadepalli US, Feihel D, Miller KM, et al. A morphologic analysis of sessile serrated polyps observed during routine colonoscopy (with video). Gastrointest Endosc. 2011;74:1360–1368.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Hazewinkel Y, Lopez-Ceron M, East JE, et al. Endoscopic features of sessile serrated adenomas: validation by international experts using high-resolution white-light endoscopy and narrow-band imaging. Gastrointest Endosc. 2013;77:916–924.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hetzel J, Huang CS, Coukos JA, et al. Variation in the detection of serrated polyps in an average risk colorectal cancer screening cohort. Am J Gastroenterol. 2010;105:2656–2664.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Kahi CJ, Hewett DG, Norton DL, et al. Prevalence and variable detection of proximal colon serrated polyps during screening colonoscopy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2011;9:42–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Mandel JS, Bond JH, Church TR, et al. Reducing mortality from colorectal cancer by screening for fecal occult blood. Minnesota Colon Cancer Control Study. N Engl J Med. 1993;328:1365–1371.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Mandel JS, Church TR, Bond JH, et al. The effect of fecal occult-blood screening on the incidence of colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2000;343:1603–1607.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Atkin WS, Edwards R, Kralj-Hans I, et al. Once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy screening in prevention of colorectal cancer: a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2010;375:1624–1633.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Schoen RE, Pinsky PF, Weissfeld JL, et al. Colorectal-cancer incidence and mortality with screening flexible sigmoidoscopy. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:2345–2357.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Ho MN, et al. Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. The National Polyp Study Workgroup. N Engl J Med. 1993;329:1977–1981.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Winawer S, Zauber A, Ho M, et al. Randomized comparison of surveillance intervals after colonoscopic removal of newly diagnosed adenomatous polyps. N Engl J Med. 1993;328:901–906.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Zauber AG, Winawer SJ, O’Brien MJ, et al. Colonoscopic polypectomy and long-term prevention of colorectal-cancer deaths. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:687–696.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Singh H, Nugent Z, Demers AA, et al. The reduction in colorectal cancer mortality after colonoscopy varies by site of the cancer. Gastroenterology. 2010;139:1128–1137.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Rabeneck L, Paszat LF, Saskin R. Endoscopist specialty is associated with incident colorectal cancer after a negative colonoscopy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010;8:275–279.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Rex DK, Rahmani EY, Haseman JH, et al. Relative sensitivity of colonoscopy and barium enema for detection of colorectal cancer in clinical practice. Gastroenterology. 1997;112:17–23.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Baxter NN, Warren JL, Barrett MJ, et al. Association between colonoscopy and colorectal cancer mortality in a US cohort according to site of cancer and colonoscopist specialty. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:2664–2669.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Hassan C, Rex DK, Zullo A, et al. Loss of efficacy and cost-effectiveness when screening colonoscopy is performed by nongastroenterologists. Cancer. 2012;118:4404–4411.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Kahi CJ, Imperiale TF, Juliar BE, et al. Effect of screening colonoscopy on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009;7:770–775.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Brenner H, Chang-Claude J, Seiler CM, et al. Protection from colorectal cancer after colonoscopy: a population-based, case–control study. Ann Intern Med. 2011;154:22–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Doubeni CA, Weinmann S, Adams K, et al. Screening colonoscopy and risk for incident late-stage colorectal cancer diagnosis in average-risk adults: a nested case–control study. Ann Intern Med. 2013;158:312–320.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Brenner H, Chang-Claude J, Jansen L, et al. Reduced risk of colorectal cancer up to 10 years after screening, surveillance, or diagnostic colonoscopy. Gastroenterology. 2014;146:709–717.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Baxter NN, Goldwasser MA, Paszat LF, et al. Association of colonoscopy and death from colorectal cancer. Ann Intern Med. 2009;150:1–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Mulder SA, van Soest EM, Dieleman JP, et al. Exposure to colorectal examinations before a colorectal cancer diagnosis: a case–control study. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010;22:437–443.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Nishihara R, Wu K, Lochhead P, et al. Long-term colorectal-cancer incidence and mortality after lower endoscopy. N Engl J Med. 2013;369:1095–1105.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Barclay RL, Vicari JJ, Doughty AS, et al. Colonoscopic withdrawal times and adenoma detection during screening colonoscopy. N Engl J Med. 2006;355:2533–2541.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Chen SC, Rex DK. Endoscopist can be more powerful than age and male gender in predicting adenoma detection at colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2007;102:856–861.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Imperiale TF, Glowinski EA, Juliar BE, et al. Variation in polyp detection rates at screening colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009;69:1288–1295.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Shaukat A, Oancea C, Bond JH, et al. Variation in detection of adenomas and polyps by colonoscopy and change over time with a performance improvement program. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009;7:1335–1340.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Kaminski MF, Regula J, Kraszewska E, et al. Quality indicators for colonoscopy and the risk of interval cancer. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:1795–1803.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Corley D, Jensen CD, Marks AR, et al. Adenoma detection rate and risk of colorectal cancer and death. N Engl J Med. 2014;370:1298–1306.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Edwards BK, Ward E, Kohler BA, et al. Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975–2006, featuring colorectal cancer trends and impact of interventions (risk factors, screening, and treatment) to reduce future rates. Cancer. 2010;116:544–573.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Siegel R, Desantis C, Jemal A. Colorectal cancer statistics, 2014. CA Cancer J Clin. 2014;64:104–117.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Zubarik R, Ganguly E, Benway D, et al. Procedure-related abdominal discomfort in patients undergoing colorectal cancer screening: a comparison of colonoscopy and flexible sigmoidoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2002;97:3056–3061.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Pickhardt PJ, Choi JR, Hwang I, et al. Nonadenomatous polyps at CT colonography: prevalence, size distribution, and detection rates. Radiology. 2004;232:784–790.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Zalis ME, Blake MA, Cai W, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of laxative-free computed tomographic colonography for detection of adenomatous polyps in asymptomatic adults: a prospective evaluation. Ann Intern Med. 2012;156:692–702.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Imperiale TF, Ransohoff DF, Itzkowitz SH, et al. Multitarget stool DNA testing for colorectal-cancer screening. N Engl J Med. 2014;370:1287–1297.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Levin B, Lieberman DA, McFarland B, 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;134:1570–1595.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Selby JV, Friedman GD, Quesenberry CP Jr, et al. A case–control study of screening sigmoidoscopy and mortality from colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 1992;326:653–657.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Newcomb PA, Norfleet RG, Storer BE, et al. Screening sigmoidoscopy and colorectal cancer mortality. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1992;84:1572–1575.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Brenner H, Chang-Claude J, Seiler CM, et al. Long-term risk of colorectal cancer after negative colonoscopy. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:3761–3767.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Nicholson FB, Korman MG. Acceptance of flexible sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy for screening and surveillance in colorectal cancer prevention. J Med Screen. 2005;12:89–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Ketover SR. Bundled payment for colonoscopy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2013;11:454–457.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Telford JJ, Levy AR, Sambrook JC, et al. The cost-effectiveness of screening for colorectal cancer. CMAJ. 2010;182:1307–1313.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Yabroff KR, Mariotto AB, Feuer E, et al. Projections of the costs associated with colorectal cancer care in the United States, 2000–2020. Health Econ. 2008;17:947–959.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Barclay RL, Vicari JJ, Greenlaw RL. Effect of a time-dependent colonoscopic withdrawal protocol on adenoma detection during screening colonoscopy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2008;6:1091–1098.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Coe SG, Crook JE, Diehl NN, et al. An endoscopic quality improvement program improves detection of colorectal adenomas. Am J Gastroenterol. 2013;108:219–226.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Buchner AM, Shahid MW, Heckman MG, et al. High-definition colonoscopy detects colorectal polyps at a higher rate than standard white-light colonoscopy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010;8:364–370.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Gurudu SR, Ramirez FC, Harrison ME, et al. Increased adenoma detection rate with system-wide implementation of a split-dose preparation for colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012;76:603–608.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Pohl J, Lotterer E, Balzer C, et al. Computed virtual chromoendoscopy versus standard colonoscopy with targeted indigocarmine chromoscopy: a randomised multicentre trial. Gut. 2009;58:73–78.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Adler A, Pohl H, Papanikolaou IS, et al. A prospective randomised study on narrow-band imaging versus conventional colonoscopy for adenoma detection: does narrow-band imaging induce a learning effect? Gut. 2008;57:59–64.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Rex DK, Bond JH, Winawer S, et al. Quality in the technical performance of colonoscopy and the continuous quality improvement process for colonoscopy: recommendations of the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Am J Gastroenterol. 2002;97:1296–1308.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Rex DK, Petrini JL, Baron TH, et al. Quality indicators for colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006;63:S16–S28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Ko CW, Dominitz JA, Green P, et al. Specialty differences in polyp detection, removal, and biopsy during colonoscopy. Am J Med. 2010;123:528–535.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Goodwin JS, Singh A, Reddy N, et al. Overuse of screening colonoscopy in the Medicare population. Arch Intern Med. 2011;171:1335–1343.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Hewett DG, Rex DK. Improving colonoscopy quality through health-care payment reform. Am J Gastroenterol. 2010;105:1925–1933.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Lieberman DA, Rex DK, Winawer SJ, et al. Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after screening and polypectomy: a consensus update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Gastroenterology. 2012;143:844–857.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Laiyemo AO, Murphy G, Albert PS, et al. Postpolypectomy colonoscopy surveillance guidelines: predictive accuracy for advanced adenoma at 4 years. Ann Intern Med. 2008;148:419–426.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Vemulapalli KC, Rex DK. Risk of advanced lesions at first follow-up colonoscopy in high-risk groups as defined by the United Kingdom post-polypectomy surveillance guideline: data from a single U.S. center. Gastrointest Endosc. 2014. doi:10.1016/j.gie.2014.02.1029.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

Dr. Rex receives consulting fees from Olympus Corp, America; Endochoice Ltd; and Boston Scientific. He receives research support from Olympus Corp, America.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Gastroenterology/Hepatology, Department of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, 550 N. University Boulevard, Indiana University Hospital #4100, Indianapolis, IN, 46202, USA

    Douglas K. Rex

Authors
  1. Douglas K. Rex
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Douglas K. Rex.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rex, D.K. Colonoscopy: The Current King of the Hill in the USA. Dig Dis Sci 60, 639–646 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-014-3448-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-014-3448-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation