Literature DB >> 23266193

Computed tomographic colonography in subjects with positive faecal occult blood test refusing optical colonoscopy.

Lapo Sali1, Grazia Grazzini, Leonardo Ventura, Massimo Falchini, Alessandra Borgheresi, Guido Castiglione, Michele Grimaldi, Nicola Ianniciello, Beatrice Mallardi, Marco Zappa, Mario Mascalchi.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Refusal of colonoscopy is a drawback of colorectal cancer screening programmes based on faecal occult blood test. Computed-tomographic-colonography is generally more accepted than colonoscopy. AIM: To compare adherence to computed-tomographic-colonography and second-invitation colonoscopy in subjects with positive faecal test refusing colonoscopy.
METHODS: We performed a prospective study in 198 subjects with positive faecal test who refused first referral to colonoscopy in one endoscopy service of the Florence screening programme. Subjects were randomly invited to computed-tomographic-colonography (n = 100) or re-invited to colonoscopy (n = 98). Mail invitation was followed by a questionnaire administered by phone. Computed-tomographic-colonography findings were verified with colonoscopy.
RESULTS: 32 subjects could not be reached, 71 (35.9%) had undergone colonoscopy on their own; 4 were excluded for contraindications; 30/48 (62.5%) in the computed-tomographic-colonography arm and 11/43 (25.6%) in the colonoscopy arm accepted the proposed examinations (p < 0.001). Four advanced adenomas and 1 cancer were found in the 28 subjects who ultimately underwent computed-tomographic-colonography and 2 advanced adenomas and 2 cancers in the 9 subjects who ultimately underwent second-invitation colonoscopy.
CONCLUSION: Subjects with positive faecal occult blood test refusing colonoscopy show a higher adherence to computed-tomographic-colonography than to second invitation colonoscopy.
Copyright © 2012 Editrice Gastroenterologica Italiana S.r.l. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23266193     DOI: 10.1016/j.dld.2012.11.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dig Liver Dis        ISSN: 1590-8658            Impact factor:   4.088


  11 in total

Review 1.  CT colonography: role in FOBT-based screening programs for colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Lapo Sali; Grazia Grazzini; Mario Mascalchi
Journal:  Clin J Gastroenterol       Date:  2017-04-26

Review 2.  Computed tomography colonography in 2014: an update on technique and indications.

Authors:  Andrea Laghi
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-12-07       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 3.  Role of preoperative CT colonography in patients with colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Lapo Sali; Massimo Falchini; Antonio Taddei; Mario Mascalchi
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-04-14       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 4.  Colorectal cancer screening: 20 years of development and recent progress.

Authors:  Miroslav Zavoral; Stepan Suchanek; Ondrej Majek; Premysl Fric; Petra Minarikova; Marek Minarik; Bohumil Seifert; Ladislav Dusek
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-04-14       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 5.  CT colonography for population screening of colorectal cancer: hints from European trials.

Authors:  Lapo Sali; Daniele Regge
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2016-09-14       Impact factor: 3.039

6.  Clinical indications for computed tomographic colonography: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR) Guideline.

Authors:  Cristiano Spada; Jaap Stoker; Onofre Alarcon; Federico Barbaro; Davide Bellini; Michael Bretthauer; Margriet C De Haan; Jean-Marc Dumonceau; Monika Ferlitsch; Steve Halligan; Emma Helbren; Mikael Hellstrom; Ernst J Kuipers; Philippe Lefere; Thomas Mang; Emanuele Neri; Lucio Petruzziello; Andrew Plumb; Daniele Regge; Stuart A Taylor; Cesare Hassan; Andrea Laghi
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  Preferences for different diagnostic modalities to follow up abnormal colorectal cancer screening results: a hypothetical vignette study.

Authors:  Aradhna Kaushal; Sandro Tiziano Stoffel; Robert Kerrison; Christian von Wagner
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-07-26       Impact factor: 2.692

8.  Barriers to completing colonoscopy after a positive fecal occult blood test.

Authors:  Revital Azulay; Liora Valinsky; Fabienne Hershkowitz; Einat Elran; Natan Lederman; Revital Kariv; Benjamin Braunstein; Anthony Heymann
Journal:  Isr J Health Policy Res       Date:  2021-02-11

Review 9.  Imaging alternatives to colonoscopy: CT colonography and colon capsule. European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR) Guideline - Update 2020.

Authors:  Cristiano Spada; Cesare Hassan; Davide Bellini; David Burling; Giovanni Cappello; Cristina Carretero; Evelien Dekker; Rami Eliakim; Margriet de Haan; Michal F Kaminski; Anastasios Koulaouzidis; Andrea Laghi; Philippe Lefere; Thomas Mang; Sebastian Manuel Milluzzo; Martina Morrin; Deirdre McNamara; Emanuele Neri; Silvia Pecere; Mathieu Pioche; Andrew Plumb; Emanuele Rondonotti; Manon Cw Spaander; Stuart Taylor; Ignacio Fernandez-Urien; Jeanin E van Hooft; Jaap Stoker; Daniele Regge
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2021-05       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 10.  Colorectal Cancer Screening: The Role of Psychological, Social and Background Factors in Decision-making Process.

Authors:  Giulia Cossu; Luca Saba; Luigi Minerba; Mario Mascalchi
Journal:  Clin Pract Epidemiol Ment Health       Date:  2018-03-21
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.