Journal of Crohn's & colitis
Cure8 research brief
Why This Matters
IBD patients undergo regular colonoscopy surveillance to detect precancerous changes.
The study identifies modifiable service and endoscopist factors (regular surveillance experience, extended procedure time, chromoendoscopy use) linked to better mucosal inspection — factors that could affect early lesion detection and care pathways.
Who Should Pay Attention
Adult patients with long-standing IBD under colonoscopic surveillance; gastroenterologists and endoscopy units; healthcare managers and policymakers involved in endoscopy service organization.
Study Snapshot
Story typeResearch paper
Evidence typeResearch paper
Source depthJournal abstract
What To Know
This large UK cohort study used the National Endoscopy Database (NED) to examine quality indicators for IBD surveillance colonoscopy performed in 2024. Of nearly 589,000 colonoscopies, 15,971 (2.7%) were IBD surveillance procedures. Overall cecal intubation rates and withdrawal times were strong, but adequate bowel preparation fell short of targets.
Endoscopists who performed at least one surveillance procedure per month and procedures scheduled with extended time had higher polyp-detection rates; the authors used polyp detection as a surrogate for mucosal inspection quality rather than confirmed dysplasia detection.
What this means For people with IBD, the study highlights that experience with IBD surveillance and allowing extra procedural time (and use/documentation of dye-based chromoendoscopy) were associated with better mucosal inspection as measured by polyp detection.
The study does not report higher rates of histologically confirmed dysplasia — it reports polyp-detection differences, which may not directly translate to cancer-risk outcomes.
Practical takeaway The findings support considering service-level approaches (for example concentration of surveillance to regular practitioners, routine use of chromoendoscopy, and protected longer appointment times) and national performance monitoring to potentially improve surveillance quality.
These are suggested directions for further evaluation rather than established changes in practice.
Keep In Mind
This article reports cohort results from a national endoscopy database and uses polyp-detection as a surrogate marker for mucosal inspection quality rather than reporting histologically confirmed dysplasia or cancer outcomes.
Further research is needed to link these quality measures to dysplasia-related clinical outcomes and to test whether concentrating surveillance or enforcing minimum volumes improves patient-important endpoints.
Source Details
Review the original publication for the complete reporting, methods, and context.
Research paper
Evidence type derived from source or registry metadata.
PublicationJournal of Crohn's & colitis
AuthorsPohl K, Nigam GB, Kent A +13 more
Study typeIm, journal article
Indexed viaEurope PMC
Source typeResearch paper
PublishedOct 1, 2026, 12:00 AM
Content availableJournal abstract
This Cure8 brief is based on source text from the linked article. Cure8 is informational only and is not a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment.
Optimizing symptomatic triage to colonoscopy: evaluation of FIT-centered multivariable selection strategies.
Better triage methods that combine FIT with demographics and blood biomarkers could reduce unnecessary colonoscopies while keeping sensitivity for colorectal cancer and other serious findings, which matters for...
Tumor Characteristics and Survival Predictors in Patients With Colorectal Cancer: A Lebanese Single-Center Experience.
This study highlights factors—tumor location, age, smoking, and having IBD—that were associated with survival and progression in a Lebanese CRC cohort.
How Does Family History of CRC Impact Risk for Patients With IBD? | Gastro Today
Family history of CRC raises an individual’s absolute CRC risk whether or not they have IBD, and people with IBD who have multiple first‑degree relatives with CRC appear to have the largest increase in absolute risk....