Literature DB >> 11384140

Barium enema and endoscopy for the detection of colorectal neoplasia: sensitivity, specificity, complications and its determinants.

I M de Zwart1, G Griffioen, M P Shaw, C B Lamers, A de Roos.   

Abstract

AIM: To analyse sensitivity, specificity and complication rate of endoscopy, and barium enema for the detection of colorectal neoplasia.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A MEDLINE search was performed (1980-2000) directed at the endoscopic and radiologic literature on barium enema. Articles were selected based on the type of study, availability of sensitivity and specificity values in sizeable patient groups, and reports on complications. Sixty articles were included in the analysis.
RESULTS: Endoscopy proved to have superior sensitivity for polyps in patients at high-risk for colorectal neoplasia. The role of endoscopy and radiology in average-risk screening populations is not known. Sensitivity and specificity rates ranged widely, probably due to bias. For the detection of small polyps endoscopy has superior performance, whereas sensitivity is similar for endoscopy and barium enema for the detection of larger (>1 cm) polyps and tumours. Overall, endoscopy is associated with a higher complication rate.
CONCLUSION: Endoscopy is the preferred detection method in high-risk patients. The role of endoscopy and radiology in a screening setting requires evaluation. This review provides the test characteristics of endoscopy and radiology which are relevant for a cost-effectiveness analysis. Double-contrast barium enema may play an important role for screening purposes, owing to its good sensitivity for detecting larger (>1 cm) polyps and its lack of major complications. de Zwart, I. M.et al. (2001). Clinical Radiology56, 401-409. Copyright 2001 The Royal College of Radiologists.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11384140     DOI: 10.1053/crad.2000.0672

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Radiol        ISSN: 0009-9260            Impact factor:   2.350


  7 in total

Review 1.  Management of colorectal cancers.

Authors:  R Lewis; A Flynn; M E Dean; A Melville; A Eastwood; A Booth
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2004-10

Review 2.  Colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  R Scott Nelson; Alan G Thorson
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 5.075

3.  Colorectal cancer detection: time to abandon barium enema?

Authors:  M K Shariff; K Sheikh; N R Carroll; S Whitley; D Greenberg; M Parkes; E A B Cameron
Journal:  Frontline Gastroenterol       Date:  2011-01-19

4.  Colovaginal and colovesical fistulae: the diagnostic paradigm.

Authors:  D J Holroyd; S Banerjee; M Beavan; R Prentice; V Vijay; S J Warren
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2012-02-14       Impact factor: 3.781

Review 5.  Colorectal cancer: screening.

Authors:  Carmen Lynn Lewis
Journal:  BMJ Clin Evid       Date:  2007-06-01

6.  CT colonography for synchronous colorectal lesions in patients with colorectal cancer: initial experience.

Authors:  D R McArthur; H Mehrzad; R Patel; J Dadds; A Pallan; S S Karandikar; S Roy-Choudhury
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2009-09-02       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  Validation of Urinary Charged Metabolite Profiles in Colorectal Cancer Using Capillary Electrophoresis-Mass Spectrometry.

Authors:  Toru Sakurai; Kenji Katsumata; Ryutaro Udo; Tomoya Tago; Kenta Kasahara; Junichi Mazaki; Hiroshi Kuwabara; Hideaki Kawakita; Masanobu Enomoto; Tetsuo Ishizaki; Yukako Nemoto; Yoshiaki Osaka; Yuichi Nagakawa; Masahiro Sugimoto; Akihiko Tsuchida
Journal:  Metabolites       Date:  2022-01-10
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.