Literature DB >> 19098863

Estimation of impact of American College of Radiology recommendations on CT colonography reporting for resection of high-risk adenoma findings.

Douglas K Rex1, Andrew J Overhiser, Shawn C Chen, Oscar W Cummings, Thomas M Ulbright.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The American College of Radiology (ACR) recommends that polyps < or =5 mm in size not be reported on computed tomography (CT) colonography studies. Patients with 1 or 2 polyps 6-9 mm in size can be offered "CTC surveillance" in 3 years in lieu of polypectomy. The aim of the study was to determine the impact of ACR recommendations on resection of high-risk adenoma findings using an endoscopic polyp/histology database.
METHODS: Excluding patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and polyposis, 10,034 patients underwent colonoscopy and 10,780 polyps were removed from 5,079 patients over a 5-year interval. High-risk adenoma findings were defined as an advanced adenoma (> or =1 cm in size, high-grade dysplasia (HGD), or villous elements) or 3 or more adenomas of any size, per postpolypectomy surveillance recommendations.
RESULTS: A total of 5,079 patients (51%) had at least 1 polyp, 2,907 (29%) had at least 1 adenoma, and 1,001 (10%) had high-risk adenoma findings, of these, 293 (29%) had either 3 adenomas < or =5 mm in size (n=267) or an advanced adenoma < or =5 mm in size (or both) and no polyp of any histology > or =6 mm in size. There were 774 patients with 1 or 2 polyps 6-9 mm in size and no polyps of any histology > or =10 mm in size. Of these patients 184 (18% of the patients with high-risk adenomas) had either 3 or more adenomas < or =9 mm in size (n=149) or an advanced adenoma < or =9 mm in size (or both findings). There were 2,174 patients age > or =50 years with the primary indication of screening of whom 326 (15%) had high-risk adenoma findings. Of these, 108 (33%) had either > or =3 adenomas < or =5 mm in size or an advanced adenoma < or =5 mm in size and no polyps > or =6 mm in size. An additional 75 (23%) had no polyp > or =10 mm in size, 1 or 2 polyps 6-9 mm in size and > or =3 adenomas < or =9 mm in size or an advanced adenoma < or =9 mm in size.
CONCLUSIONS: If computed tomographic colonography (CTC) rather than colonoscopy were used in this population, assuming 100% sensitivity of CTC for polyps > or =6 mm and ACR interpretation recommendations, then 29% of all patients and 33% of screening patients age > or =50 years with high-risk adenoma findings would be interpreted as normal, and an additional 18-23% of these groups with high-risk adenoma findings, respectively, could have polypectomy delayed at least 3 years.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19098863     DOI: 10.1038/ajg.2008.35

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


  34 in total

1.  Effectiveness of the immunofecal occult blood test for colorectal cancer screening in a large population.

Authors:  Haiyun Yang; Zhizheng Ge; Jun Dai; Xiaobo Li; Yunjie Gao
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2010-05-11       Impact factor: 3.199

Review 2.  Polyp size measurement at CT colonography: what do we know and what do we need to know?

Authors:  Ronald M Summers
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  Colorectal cancer: managing diminutive polyps-what is the optimal approach?

Authors:  David H Kim; Perry J Pickhardt
Journal:  Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 46.802

4.  Canadian guidelines for colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Jennifer J Telford
Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 3.522

Review 5.  CT colonography with computer-aided detection: recognizing the causes of false-positive reader results.

Authors:  Igor Trilisky; Kristen Wroblewski; Michael W Vannier; John M Horne; Abraham H Dachman
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  2014 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 5.333

6.  Accuracy of computer-aided diagnosis based on narrow-band imaging endocytoscopy for diagnosing colorectal lesions: comparison with experts.

Authors:  Masashi Misawa; Shin-Ei Kudo; Yuichi Mori; Kenichi Takeda; Yasuharu Maeda; Shinichi Kataoka; Hiroki Nakamura; Toyoki Kudo; Kunihiko Wakamura; Takemasa Hayashi; Atsushi Katagiri; Toshiyuki Baba; Fumio Ishida; Haruhiro Inoue; Yukitaka Nimura; Msahiro Oda; Kensaku Mori
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2017-02-28       Impact factor: 2.924

7.  Five year colorectal cancer outcomes in a large negative CT colonography screening cohort.

Authors:  David H Kim; B Dustin Pooler; Jennifer M Weiss; Perry J Pickhardt
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2011-12-31       Impact factor: 5.315

8.  Comparative efficacy of cold polypectomy techniques for diminutive colorectal polyps: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yoon Suk Jung; Chan Hyuk Park; Eunwoo Nam; Chang Soo Eun; Dong Il Park; Dong Soo Han
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-08-15       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  Risk of Metachronous Advanced Neoplasia in Patients With Multiple Diminutive Adenomas.

Authors:  Jung Yoon Kim; Tae Jun Kim; Sun-Young Baek; Soohyun Ahn; Eun Ran Kim; Sung Noh Hong; Dong Kyung Chang; Young-Ho Kim
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2018-08-03       Impact factor: 10.864

10.  Advances in colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Hongha T Vu; Carol A Burke
Journal:  Curr Gastroenterol Rep       Date:  2009-10
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.