Literature DB >> 19280531

Appropriateness of colonoscopy in Europe (EPAGE II). Screening for colorectal cancer.

C Arditi1, I Peytremann-Bridevaux, B Burnand, V F Eckardt, P Bytzer, L Agréus, R W Dubois, J-P Vader, F Froehlich, V Pittet, S Schusselé Filliettaz, P Juillerat, J-J Gonvers.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: To summarize the published literature on assessment of appropriateness of colonoscopy for screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) in asymptomatic individuals without personal history of CRC or polyps, and report appropriateness criteria developed by an expert panel, the 2008 European Panel on the Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, EPAGE II.
METHODS: A systematic search of guidelines, systematic reviews, and primary studies regarding colonoscopy for screening for colorectal cancer was performed. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method was applied to develop appropriateness criteria for colonoscopy in these circumstances.
RESULTS: Available evidence for CRC screening comes from small case-controlled studies, with heterogeneous results, and from indirect evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on fecal occult blood test (FOBT) screening and studies on flexible sigmoidoscopy screening. Most guidelines recommend screening colonoscopy every 10 years starting at age 50 in average-risk individuals. In individuals with a higher risk of CRC due to family history, there is a consensus that it is appropriate to offer screening colonoscopy at < 50 years. EPAGE II considered screening colonoscopy appropriate above 50 years in average-risk individuals. Panelists deemed screening colonoscopy appropriate for younger patients, with shorter surveillance intervals, where family or personal risk of colorectal cancer is higher. A positive FOBT or the discovery of adenomas at sigmoidoscopy are considered appropriate indications.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite the lack of evidence based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs), colonoscopy is recommended by most published guidelines and EPAGE II criteria available online (http://www.epage.ch), as a screening option for CRC in individuals at average risk of CRC, and undisputedly as the main screening tool for CRC in individuals at moderate and high risk of CRC.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19280531     DOI: 10.1055/s-0028-1119626

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


  24 in total

1.  How can the over-use of surveillance colonoscopy after polypectomy be modified?

Authors:  Sung Pil Hong; Won Ho Kim
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 3.199

2.  Nuclear Division Index may Predict Neoplastic Colorectal Lesions.

Authors:  Mirela E Ionescu; Mihai Ciocirlan; Gabriel Becheanu; Tudor Nicolaie; Cristina Ditescu; Adriana G Teiusanu; Serban I Gologan; Tudor Arbanas; Mircea M Diculescu
Journal:  Maedica (Bucur)       Date:  2011-07

3.  Low-volume plus ascorbic acid vs high-volume plus simethicone bowel preparation before colonoscopy.

Authors:  Stefano Pontone; Rita Angelini; Monica Standoli; Gregorio Patrizi; Franco Culasso; Paolo Pontone; Adriano Redler
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2011-11-14       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 4.  Colorectal cancer diagnosis: Pitfalls and opportunities.

Authors:  Pablo Vega; Fátima Valentín; Joaquín Cubiella
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Oncol       Date:  2015-12-15

5.  Difference in Physician- and Patient-Dependent Factors Contributing to Adenoma Detection Rate and Serrated Polyp Detection Rate.

Authors:  Maryan Cavicchi; Gaëlle Tharsis; Pascal Burtin; Philippe Cattan; Franck Venezia; Gilles Tordjman; Agnès Gillet; Joëlle Samama; Karine Nahon-Uzan; David Karsenti
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2019-08-30       Impact factor: 3.199

6.  Do Gastrointestinal Symptoms Affect the Endoscopic Outcome in Anemic Premenopausal Women Due to Iron Deficiency: A Multicenter Study From Basrah-Iraq.

Authors:  Samih A Odhaib; Miaad J Mohammed; Saad S Hammadi
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2021-04-16

7.  Serum matrix metalloproteinase 9 and colorectal neoplasia: a community-based evaluation of a potential diagnostic test.

Authors:  S Wilson; S Damery; D D Stocken; G Dowswell; R Holder; S T Ward; V Redman; M J Wakelam; J James; F D R Hobbs; T Ismail
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2012-03-20       Impact factor: 7.640

8.  Korean guidelines for postpolypectomy colonoscopy surveillance.

Authors:  Dong-Hoon Yang; Sung Noh Hong; Young-Ho Kim; Sung Pil Hong; Sung Jae Shin; Seong-Eun Kim; Bo In Lee; Suck-Ho Lee; Dong Il Park; Hyun-Soo Kim; Suk-Kyun Yang; Hyo Jong Kim; Se Hyung Kim; Hyun Jung Kim
Journal:  Clin Endosc       Date:  2012-03-31

9.  A cross-sectional study of the appropriateness of colonoscopy requests in the Spanish region of Catalonia.

Authors:  Diana Puente; Francesc Xavier Cantero; Maria Llagostera; Pilar Piñeiro; Raquel Nieto; Rosa Saladich; Juanjo Mascort; Mercè Marzo; Jesús Almeda; Manel Segarra
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2012-11-30       Impact factor: 2.692

10.  Digital chromoendoscopy for diagnosis of diminutive colorectal lesions.

Authors:  Carlos Eduardo Oliveira Dos Santos; Daniele Malaman; César Vivian Lopes; Júlio Carlos Pereira-Lima; Artur Adolfo Parada
Journal:  Diagn Ther Endosc       Date:  2012-10-03
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.