Literature DB >> 12818263

Surveillance after positive and negative colonoscopy examinations: issues, yields, and use.

Robert E Schoen1.   

Abstract

As colorectal cancer screening gains acceptance by the public, the use of colonoscopy will increase. The frequency of surveillance examinations after detection of an adenoma is one of the largest contributors to the cost of colorectal cancer screening. Ten years after the publication of the landmark National Polyp Study, the issue of when to perform surveillance examinations and how often to expect advanced findings remains acute. Current guidelines for surveillance vary across specialty organizations. Individuals with advanced adenomas are at increased risk for recurrent advanced adenomas. The impact of multiple nonadvanced adenomas or a single nonadvanced adenoma on subsequent risk of an advanced adenoma or cancer is less clear. Still less is known about findings on repeat examinations after an initial negative examination, whether after colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy. The yield after a negative examination is an important consideration in determining the recommended interval for screening colonoscopy. For example, the data supporting a 10-yr interval for screening colonoscopy is only indirect. What little we do know about the yield after negative examinations comes from selected, nonrepresentative populations. Of concern, evidence from several polyp prevention trials demonstrates higher yields for subsequent cancer than would be expected, despite a relatively high use of surveillance procedures in follow-up. Further population-based research on the frequency of use and yield of surveillance examinations is needed. Studies that examine the need and the needed timing of subsequent surveillance are essential to containing costs for screening as well as to informing the public better about what endoscopic screening can and cannot accomplish.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12818263     DOI: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2003.07492.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol        ISSN: 0002-9270            Impact factor:   10.864


  7 in total

1.  Colonoscopy surveillance after polypectomy.

Authors:  Kunio Kasugai; Naotaka Ogasawara; Makoto Sasaki
Journal:  Clin J Gastroenterol       Date:  2011-10-16

2.  Flexible sigmoidoscopy in the randomized prostate, lung, colorectal, and ovarian (PLCO) cancer screening trial: added yield from a second screening examination.

Authors:  Joel L Weissfeld; Robert E Schoen; Paul F Pinsky; Robert S Bresalier; V Paul Doria-Rose; Adeyinka O Laiyemo; Timothy Church; Lance A Yokochi; Susan Yurgalevitch; Joshua Rathmell; Gerald L Andriole; Saundra Buys; E David Crawford; Mona Fouad; Claudine Isaacs; Lois Lamerato; Douglas Reding; Philip C Prorok; Christine D Berg
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2012-01-31       Impact factor: 13.506

3.  Using the results of a baseline and a surveillance colonoscopy to predict recurrent adenomas with high-risk characteristics.

Authors:  Douglas J Robertson; Carol A Burke; H Gilbert Welch; Robert W Haile; Robert S Sandler; E Robert Greenberg; Dennis J Ahnen; Robert S Bresalier; Richard I Rothstein; Bernard Cole; Leila A Mott; John A Baron
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2009-07-21       Impact factor: 25.391

4.  Utilization and yield of surveillance colonoscopy in the continued follow-up study of the polyp prevention trial.

Authors:  Adeyinka O Laiyemo; Paul F Pinsky; Pamela M Marcus; Elaine Lanza; Amanda J Cross; Arthur Schatzkin; Robert E Schoen
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2008-12-13       Impact factor: 11.382

5.  Utilization of surveillance colonoscopy in community practice.

Authors:  Robert E Schoen; Paul F Pinsky; Joel L Weissfeld; Lance A Yokochi; Douglas J Reding; Richard B Hayes; Timothy Church; Susan Yurgalevich; V Paul Doria-Rose; Tom Hickey; Thomas Riley; Christine D Berg
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2009-10-08       Impact factor: 22.682

6.  Can calcium chemoprevention of adenoma recurrence substitute or serve as an adjunct for colonoscopic surveillance?

Authors:  Aasma Shaukat; Murtaza Parekh; Joseph Lipscomb; Uri Ladabaum
Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care       Date:  2009-03-31       Impact factor: 2.188

7.  Predictors of colorectal polyp recurrence after the first polypectomy in private practice settings: a cohort study.

Authors:  Jean-François Viel; Jean-Marie Studer; Yves Ottignon; Jean-Pierre Hirsch
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-12-03       Impact factor: 3.240

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.