Objectives Surveillance colonoscopy is thought to prevent colorectal cancer (CRC) in patients with long-standing colonic IBD, but data regarding the frequency of surveillance and the findings thereof are lacking. Our aim was to determine whether consecutive negative surveillance colonoscopies adequately predict low neoplastic risk.
Design A multicentre, multinational database of patients with long-standing IBD colitis without high-risk features and undergoing regular CRC surveillance was constructed. A ‘negative’ surveillance colonoscopy was predefined as a technically adequate procedure having no postinflammatory polyps, no strictures, no endoscopic disease activity and no evidence of neoplasia; a ‘positive’ colonoscopy was a technically adequate procedure that included at least one of these criteria. The primary endpoint was advanced colorectal neoplasia (aCRN), defined as high-grade dysplasia or CRC.
Results Of 775 patients with long-standing IBD colitis, 44% (n=340) had >1 negative colonoscopy. Patients with consecutive negative surveillance colonoscopies were compared with those who had at least one positive colonoscopy. Both groups had similar demographics, disease-related characteristics, number of surveillance colonoscopies and time intervals between colonoscopies. No aCRN occurred in those with consecutive negative surveillance, compared with an incidence rate of 0.29 to 0.76/100 patient-years (P=0.02) in those having >1 positive colonoscopy on follow-up of 6.1 (P25–P75: 4.6–8.2) years after the index procedure.
Conclusion Within this large surveillance cohort of patients with colonic IBD and no additional high-risk features, having two consecutive negative colonoscopies predicted a very low risk of aCRN occurrence on follow-up. Our findings suggest that longer surveillance intervals in this selected population may be safe.
- colorectal cancer
- Crohn’s disease
- ulcerative colitis
Statistics from Altmetric.com
JRH and SCS contributed equally.
Contributors JRtH, SCS: study concept and design, data acquisition, data analysis and interpretation, manuscript writing. SRS, CNB, DC, CP, EM, JE, AK, JG, AAvB, FH, JMJ, MEdJ, NM, AEvdM-dJ, CYP, CJvdW, JT: data acquisition, review of final manuscript. J-FC, TAU, SHI, BO: study concept and design, data interpretation, critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content.
Funding This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests None declared.
Patient consent Not required.
Ethics approval Institutional Review Board at all sites.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
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.