Rapid Communication
Copyright ©2008 The WJG Press and Baishideng. All rights reserved.
World J Gastroenterol. Nov 14, 2008; 14(42): 6503-6505
Published online Nov 14, 2008. doi: 10.3748/wjg.14.6503
Routine rectal retroflexion during colonoscopy has a low yield for neoplasia
Abdo Saad, Douglas Kevin Rex
Abdo Saad, Douglas Kevin Rex, Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology/Hepatology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN 46202, United States
Author contributions: Rex DK designed research; Rex DK performed colonoscopies; Saad A collected data; Saad A, Rex Dk analyzed data; Saad A, Rex DK wrote the paper.
Correspondence to: Douglas Kevin Rex, MD, Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, Indiana University School of Medicine, 550 N; University Boulevard UH 4100, Indianapolis, IN 46202, United States. drex@iupui.edu
Telephone: +1-317-278-8741 Fax: +1-317-274-5449
Received: July 14, 2008
Revised: October 9, 2008
Accepted: October 16, 2008
Published online: November 14, 2008
Abstract

AIM: To investigate the value of retroflexion in detecting neoplasia in the distal rectum.

METHODS: This was a prospective observational study performed in an academic endoscopy unit. Consecutive patients undergoing colonoscopy had careful forward viewing of the distal rectum by retroflexion. Of 1502 procedures, 1076 (72%) procedures were performed with a 140° angle of view colonoscope and 426 (28%) were performed with a 170° angle of view colonoscope. The outcome measurement was the yield of neoplasia in the distal rectum detected by forward viewing vs retroflexion.

RESULTS: A total of 1502 patients, including 767 (51%) females and 735 (49%) males, with mean age of 58.8 ± 12.5 years were enrolled. Retroflexion was successful in 1411 (93.9%) patients, unsuccessful or not performed because the rectum appeared narrow in 91 (6.1%). Forty patients had a polyp detected in the distal rectal mucosa. Thirty-three were visible in both the forward and retroflexed view (25 hyperplastic, 8 adenomatous). Seven polyps were visualized only by retroflexion (6 hyperplastic sessile polyps, one 4 mm sessile tubular adenoma). There was no significant difference in information added by retroflexion with 140° vs 170° angle of view instrument.

CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the largest reported evaluation of retroflexion in the rectum. Routine rectal retroflexion did not detect clinically important neoplasia after a careful forward examination of the rectum to the dentate line. Since retroflexion has risks and may cause discomfort, the use of routine retroflexion should be at the discretion of the endoscopist.

Keywords: Colonoscopy; Colorectal polyps; Retroflexion; Rectum