Literature DB >> 15452783

Missed diagnoses in patients with upper gastrointestinal cancers.

S Yalamarthi1, P Witherspoon, D McCole, C D Auld.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: A few studies have been published on cancers missed at previous endoscopy, but detailed analyses of the causes for failure were lacking. The aims of our study were to determine the incidence of and causes for failure to detect oesophageal and gastric cancers after referral of patients to a surgical endoscopy unit. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Out of a consecutive series of 305 patients diagnosed with oesophageal and gastric cancers, we retrospectively identified patients who had undergone an endoscopy within 3 years before the diagnosis. The timing of previous endoscopies, indications for endoscopy, endoscopic findings and the number of biopsy specimens taken were recorded. Missed diagnoses were categorized as either definitely or possibly missed and the reasons for failure were documented.
RESULTS: Of the 305 patients, 30 (9.8 %) had undergone a minimum of one endoscopy within the previous 3 years, 20 (67 %) of these within the previous 1 year. Sinister symptoms were present at the time of previous endoscopies in 75 % of patients with oesophageal cancer (n = 16) and in 57.2 % of patients with gastric cancer (n = 14). In 56 % of the patients with oesophageal cancers the initial diagnosis was oesophagitis or benign stricture; in 71.4 % of the patients with gastric cancers the initial diagnosis was gastritis, ulcer or "suspicious lesion". Among those patients with a definitely missed diagnosis (7.2 %), endoscopist errors accounted for the majority of failures (73 %) and the remainder were due to pathologist errors (27 %).
CONCLUSIONS: Missed cancers were a frequent finding in patients with oesophageal and gastric cancer who had undergone previous endoscopy, and errors by the endoscopists accounted for the majority of missed lesions. This study emphasizes the importance of identifying signs of early cancers and of having a low threshold for performing multiple biopsies of any suspicious-looking lesion.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15452783     DOI: 10.1055/s-2004-825853

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Endoscopy        ISSN: 0013-726X            Impact factor:   10.093


  44 in total

Review 1.  Molecular imaging in gastroenterology.

Authors:  Raja Atreya; Martin Goetz
Journal:  Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2013-07-16       Impact factor: 46.802

2.  Optimal number of endoscopic biopsies in diagnosis of advanced gastric and colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Yeowon Choi; Hyo Sun Choi; Woo Kyu Jeon; Byung Ik Kim; Dong Il Park; Yong Kyun Cho; Hong Joo Kim; Jung Ho Park; Chong Il Sohn
Journal:  J Korean Med Sci       Date:  2011-12-19       Impact factor: 2.153

3.  Editorial on quality standards in upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: a position statement of the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons of Great Britain and Ireland (AUGIS).

Authors:  Philip Wai Yan Chiu
Journal:  Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2018-02-28

4.  The impact of pre-resection endoscopic examination time on the rate of synchronous gastric neoplasms missed during endoscopic treatment.

Authors:  Han Hee Lee; Jae Myung Park; Chul-Hyun Lim; Jin Su Kim; Yu Kyung Cho; Myung-Gyu Choi
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-03-07       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Improving quality in endoscopy: are we nearly there yet?

Authors:  Andy Veitch; Matt Rutter
Journal:  Frontline Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-02-13

6.  Application of artificial intelligence using a convolutional neural network for detecting gastric cancer in endoscopic images.

Authors:  Toshiaki Hirasawa; Kazuharu Aoyama; Tetsuya Tanimoto; Soichiro Ishihara; Satoki Shichijo; Tsuyoshi Ozawa; Tatsuya Ohnishi; Mitsuhiro Fujishiro; Keigo Matsuo; Junko Fujisaki; Tomohiro Tada
Journal:  Gastric Cancer       Date:  2018-01-15       Impact factor: 7.370

7.  Variation in preparation for gastroscopy: lessons towards safer and better outcomes.

Authors:  J L Callaghan; J R Neale; P C Boger; A P Sampson; P Patel
Journal:  Frontline Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-03-08

8.  The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Quality Improvement Initiative: developing performance measures.

Authors:  Matthew D Rutter; Carlo Senore; Raf Bisschops; Dirk Domagk; Roland Valori; Michal F Kaminski; Cristiano Spada; Michael Bretthauer; Cathy Bennett; Cristina Bellisario; Silvia Minozzi; Cesare Hassan; Colin Rees; Mário Dinis-Ribeiro; Tomas Hucl; Thierry Ponchon; Lars Aabakken; Paul Fockens
Journal:  United European Gastroenterol J       Date:  2015-12-17       Impact factor: 4.623

9.  Factors Associated with Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Occurrence After Endoscopy that Did Not Diagnose Cancer.

Authors:  Danny Cheung; Shyam Menon; Jonathan Hoare; Anjan Dhar; Nigel Trudgill
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2016-04-29       Impact factor: 3.199

10.  Risk of upper gastrointestinal cancers in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease after a negative screening endoscopy.

Authors:  Mohammad H Shakhatreh; Zhigang Duan; Nathaniel Avila; Aanand D Naik; Jennifer R Kramer; Marilyn Hinojosa-Lindsey; John Chen; Hashem B El-Serag
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2014-07-05       Impact factor: 11.382

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.