Article Text

PWE-015 Can a negative fit test avoid the need for a routine surveillance colonoscopy?
  1. J Digby,
  2. S Cleary,
  3. P Datt,
  4. L Grey,
  5. K Johnston,
  6. D Goudie,
  7. B Steele,
  8. A Humphries,
  9. J Strachan,
  10. C Mowat


Introduction Faecal Immunochemical Tests for haemoglobin (FIT) detect haemoglobin in stool (FHb). FIT has been advocated as a good ‘rule-out’ test for significant bowel disease in the symptomatic population (1). In this pilot study, we examined whether FIT may have a similar role in subjects enrolled in surveillance colonoscopy.

Method Between 1stJune 2014 and Sept 30th 2016, 15 consecutive months of surveillance patients were approached at Ninewells Hospital, and 3 consecutive months were approached at St Marks Hospital. Subjects were invited to complete a FIT test prior to their colonoscopy. FHb was measured by Blood Sciences, Ninewells Hospital using an OC-Sensor iO analyser (Eiken Chemical Co., Tokyo, Japan) with an analytic range of <10 to>200 µg Hb/g of faeces. Colonoscopy results were recorded and the diagnostic accuracy of the FIT test was examined.

Results Of the 1103 patients approached, 643 returned a FIT kit. Four patients had known IBD and were excluded, leaving 639 (58%) in the study; age range 25–90 years (median 64 years, IQR 55–71) 54% were male. Indications for colonoscopy were: adenoma surveillance 312 (48.8%), genetic surveillance 152 (23.8%), other family history 84 (13.1%), cancer follow-up 72 (11.3%), other 19 (3.0%). Of the 639 patients, 46 were excluded from analysis of FIT test performance; 19 patients did not respond to or cancelled colonoscopy appointment, 8 did not attend colonoscopy, 3 patients were not fit to attend, 3 no valid FIT result, 1 cancelled by nurse, 1 had CT colonoscopy, 2 colonoscopy incomplete, 9 colonoscopies not complete by end of study. Of 593 patients who returned a FIT and completed colonoscopy only 7% had significant neoplasia (4 cancers (0.7%), 37 HRA (6.3%)) and 0.8% had IBD. 227/593 patients (38%) had undetectable FIT of whom 2.2% had significant neoplasia (one cancer (0.4%), 4 HRA (1.8%)) and 0.4% had IBD. 366/593 patients (62%) had detectable FIT of whom 9.9% had significant neoplasia (3 cancers (0.8%), 33 HRA (9.0%)) and 1.1% had IBD. Using a FIT cut off level of ‘not detectable’, gave a NPV of 99.6% for CRC and 97.8% for CRC+HRA. 36/41 cases of advanced neoplasia would have been detected. One CRC and 4 HRA would have been missed.

Conclusion The yield of significant neoplasia at surveillance colonoscopy was low. A negative FIT was recorded in over one third of subjects and could be used as a ‘rule-out’ test to avoid unnecessary surveillance colonoscopy, at the expense of missing a very small proportion of significant neoplasia.


  1. . Mowat C, J Digby, Strachan JA, et al. Faecal haemoglobin and faecal calprotectin as indicators of bowel disease in patients presenting to primary care with bowel symptoms. Gut2016 Sept;65(9):1463–9.

Disclosure of Interest None Declared

  • colonoscopy
  • Surveillance

Statistics from

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.