Meta-analysis highlights a significant decline in post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer prevalence, indicating improving endoscopy quality may reduce incidence.
Objective: The global burden of colorectal cancer (CRC) is projected to increase by 60% by 2030. Colonoscopy plays a crucial role in CRC screening, reducing incidence and mortality. However, its limitation is the occurrence of post-colonoscopy colorectal cancers (PCCRC). This meta-analysis aimed to determine the pooled prevalence of PCCRC-3y (CRCs diagnosed within 6 to 36 mo of colonoscopy) and emphasize the importance of enhancing endoscopy quality metrics to mitigate the burden of PCCRC-3y effectively. Methods: A systematic literature search through June 2024 identified single-center, multi-center, or population-based studies reporting PCCRC-3y prevalence. Pooled prevalence was estimated using methodologies recommended by the World Endoscopy Organization with a quantitative assessment of endoscopy quality measures. Results: Seventeen studies reporting on 25,504 PCCRCs were included. The pooled PCCRC-3y prevalence was 5.5% (95% CI: 4.9-6.2%). The likelihood of these cancers developing in the proximal colon was 1.9 times higher (8.7%; 95% CI: 7.8-9.8%) than in the distal colon (4.6%; 95% CI: 3.9-5.4%). The prevalence of PCCRC-3y declined significantly from 6.7% (95% CI: 5.7-7.8%) in 1992 to 2015 to 4.0% (95% CI: 2.9-5.6%) in 2005 to 2021 ( P =0.01). Additionally, several endoscopy quality indicators impacting PCCRC were identified. Conclusions: This meta-analysis found that the pooled PCCRC-3y prevalence was 4.0% (95% CI: 2.9-5.6%) from 2005 to 2021, reflecting a significant decline from previous years. Despite high heterogeneity among studies, the pooled prevalence serves as a useful benchmark for healthcare institutions in detecting and preventing CRC, as well as improving colonoscopy quality. The endoscopy quality indicators provide clear guidance for improving colonoscopy standards.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhang et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: