Literature DB >> 19533557

Colonoscopic screening of an average-risk population for colorectal neoplasia.

B Boursi1, A Halak, M Umansky, L Galzan, H Guzner-Gur, N Arber.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: The role of screening colonoscopy in an asymptomatic, average-risk population remains to be determined. Moreover, the value of screening colonoscopy in individuals older than 75 years and for right-sided lesions has recently been questioned. The aims were to assess: (i) the risk of colorectal neoplasia in a large consecutively screened asymptomatic average-risk population, aged 40-85 years; (ii) whether colonoscopy is better than sigmoidoscopy for primary screening; and (iii) the prevalence of right-sided lesions at different ages. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective study, analyzed data from 1563 consecutive, asymptomatic, average-risk individuals, aged 40-85 years, who underwent screening colonoscopy.
RESULTS: Overall, neoplastic lesions were detected in 262 individuals (17% of the study population), of whom 75 had advanced lesions (5% of population) and nine had colorectal cancers (CRC) (0.6% of population). The prevalence of all lesions increased with age, with the highest percentages in the > 75 age group (26.5% with neoplastic and 6 % with advanced lesions). Higher age was also associated with relatively more right-sided lesions. In particular the prevalence of proximal neoplasia, without concurrent distal neoplasia, increased from 5% in those < 50 years to 24% in those > 75 years. Those with distal lesions had a higher overall risk for proximal lesions (odds ratio [OR] 3.2); nevertheless flexible sigmoidoscopy alone would have missed up to 40% of all lesions and up to 3.5% of advanced neoplastic lesions in this patient subgroup.
CONCLUSIONS: Screening colonoscopy in asymptomatic, average-risk individuals is mandatory, as noteworthy numbers of advanced colorectal neoplasias have been detected in all age groups, especially in those aged > 75. Most importantly, many of the detected lesions were proximal and would not be revealed by sigmoidoscopy alone.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19533557     DOI: 10.1055/s-0029-1214757

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


  14 in total

Review 1.  Routine colonoscopy is not required in uncomplicated diverticulitis: a systematic review.

Authors:  H S de Vries; D Boerma; R Timmer; B van Ramshorst; L A Dieleman; H L van Westreenen
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-02-01       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  A Risk Prediction Model for Sporadic CRC Based on Routine Lab Results.

Authors:  Ben Boursi; Ronac Mamtani; Wei-Ting Hwang; Kevin Haynes; Yu-Xiao Yang
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2016-02-19       Impact factor: 3.199

3.  A scoring model for predicting advanced colorectal neoplasia in a screened population of asymptomatic Japanese individuals.

Authors:  Masau Sekiguchi; Yasuo Kakugawa; Minori Matsumoto; Takahisa Matsuda
Journal:  J Gastroenterol       Date:  2018-01-22       Impact factor: 7.527

4.  Cardiac ischaemia and rhythm disturbances during elective colonoscopy.

Authors:  A T George; C Davis; A Rangaraj; C Edwards; V L Chamary; H Khan; M Javed; P G Campbell; M C Allison; K J Swarnkar
Journal:  Frontline Gastroenterol       Date:  2010-09-23

5.  Testing women with endometrial cancer to detect Lynch syndrome.

Authors:  Janice S Kwon; Jenna L Scott; C Blake Gilks; Molly S Daniels; Charlotte C Sun; Karen H Lu
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2011-05-02       Impact factor: 44.544

6.  A Comparative Study Evaluating the Incidence of Colorectal Neoplasia(s) in Candidates for Bariatric Surgery by Screening Colonoscopy, 40-49 Versus 50-65 Years Old: a Preliminary Study.

Authors:  Toygar Toydemir; Görkem Özgen; İsmail Çalıkoğlu; Özdal Ersoy; Mehmet Ali Yerdel
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2019-08       Impact factor: 4.129

7.  Adenoma detection in excellent versus good bowel preparation for colonoscopy.

Authors:  Danielle M Tholey; Corbett E Shelton; Gloria Francis; Archana Anantharaman; Robert A Frankel; Paurush Shah; Amy Coan; Sarah E Hegarty; Benjamin E Leiby; David M Kastenberg
Journal:  J Clin Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 3.062

8.  The potential of imaging techniques as a screening tool for colorectal cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Marjolein J E Greuter; Johannes Berkhof; Remond J A Fijneman; Erhan Demirel; Jie-Bin Lew; Gerrit A Meijer; Jaap Stoker; Veerle M H Coupé
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2016-05-19       Impact factor: 3.039

9.  Prevalence of colorectal neoplasms in young, average risk individuals: A turning tide between East and West.

Authors:  Ari Leshno; Menachem Moshkowitz; Maayan David; Lior Galazan; Alfred I Neugut; Nadir Arber; Erwin Santo
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-08-28       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 10.  Screening for colorectal cancer: possible improvements by risk assessment evaluation?

Authors:  Hans J Nielsen; Karen V Jakobsen; Ib J Christensen; Nils Brünner
Journal:  Scand J Gastroenterol       Date:  2011-08-19       Impact factor: 2.423

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.