Literature DB >> 27830330

Risk factors of nonadherence to colonoscopy surveillance after polypectomy and its impact on clinical outcomes: a KASID multicenter study.

Chung Hyun Tae1, Chang Mo Moon2, Seong-Eun Kim3, Sung-Ae Jung3, Chang Soo Eun4, Jae Jun Park5, Geom Seog Seo6, Jae Myung Cha7, Sung Chul Park8, Jaeyoung Chun9, Hyun Jung Lee10, Yunho Jung11, Jin Oh Kim12, Young-Eun Joo13, Dong Il Park14.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: An optimal surveillance program is important to prevent advanced colorectal neoplasm. In this context, we have evaluated the cumulative risk of high-risk adenoma (HRA) or colorectal cancer (CRC) according to surveillance interval time after polypectomy. In addition, we assessed risk factors for late surveillance to determine whether late surveillance can impact the risk of subsequent advanced colorectal neoplasm.
METHODS: This was a multicenter retrospective cohort study involving 3562 subjects who had undergone removal of at least one adenoma at the index colonoscopy and who subsequently underwent a surveillance colonoscopy. The subjects were classified into an early, appropriate or late group depending on the timing of the surveillance colonoscopy, performed using modified U.S.
RESULTS: With 3% of the study population with LRA and HRA at the index colonoscopy going on to develop HRA or CRC, the estimated surveillance intervals calculated would be 6.3 [95% confidence interval (CI) 5.42-7.10] years and 3.1 (95% CI 2.61-4.45) years, respectively. The predictors of late surveillance were female gender [odd ratio (OR) 1.21; 95% CI 1.04-1.40], having undergone the procedure in small-to-medium-sized cities (OR 1.92; 95% CI 1.36-2.72) and HRA at index colonoscopy (OR 1.37; 95% CI 1.19-1.59). The risk factors for subsequent HRA or CRC were late surveillance (OR 1.34; 95% CI 1.03-1.74), male gender (OR 2.13; 95% CI 1.54-2.95), having undergone the procedure in small-to-medium-sized cities (OR 1.63; 95% CI 1.11-2.40) and HRA at index colonoscopy (OR 2.60; 95% CI 2.04-3.33).
CONCLUSIONS: Women, having undergone the procedure in small-to-medium-sized cities and the presence of an HRA at the index colonoscopy were found to be independent risk factors for late surveillance colonoscopy. Late surveillance is significantly predictive of subsequent HRA or CRC.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Adherence; Colonoscopy; Colorectal cancer

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27830330     DOI: 10.1007/s00535-016-1280-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gastroenterol        ISSN: 0944-1174            Impact factor:   7.527


  43 in total

1.  Predictors of Poor Adherence of US Gastroenterologists with Colonoscopy Screening and Surveillance Guidelines.

Authors:  Heba Iskandar; Yan Yan; Jill Elwing; Dayna Early; Graham A Colditz; Jean S Wang
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2014-11-04       Impact factor: 3.199

2.  Predictors of colorectal neoplasia after polypectomy: based on initial and consecutive findings.

Authors:  C C G van Enckevort; A P J de Graaf; H Hollema; W J Sluiter; J H Kleibeuker; J J Koornstra
Journal:  Neth J Med       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 1.422

3.  Novel risk stratification for recurrence after endoscopic resection of advanced colorectal adenoma.

Authors:  Ji Yeon Seo; Jaeyoung Chun; Changhyun Lee; Kyoung Sup Hong; Jong Pil Im; Sang Gyun Kim; Hyun Chae Jung; Joo Sung Kim
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2014-12-12       Impact factor: 9.427

4.  Effect of comorbid conditions on adherence to colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Dana J Lukin; Lina H Jandorf; Rayhana J Dhulkifl; Linda D Thélémaque; Jennifer A Christie; Steven H Itzkowitz; Katherine N Duhamel
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 2.037

5.  A pooled analysis of advanced colorectal neoplasia diagnoses after colonoscopic polypectomy.

Authors:  María Elena Martínez; John A Baron; David A Lieberman; Arthur Schatzkin; Elaine Lanza; Sidney J Winawer; Ann G Zauber; Ruiyun Jiang; Dennis J Ahnen; John H Bond; Timothy R Church; Douglas J Robertson; Stephanie A Smith-Warner; Elizabeth T Jacobs; David S Alberts; E Robert Greenberg
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2008-12-09       Impact factor: 22.682

6.  Risk related surveillance following colorectal polypectomy.

Authors:  G Nusko; U Mansmann; Th Kirchner; E G Hahn
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 23.059

7.  Potentially inappropriate screening colonoscopy in Medicare patients: variation by physician and geographic region.

Authors:  Kristin M Sheffield; Yimei Han; Yong-Fang Kuo; Taylor S Riall; James S Goodwin
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2013-04-08       Impact factor: 21.873

8.  Adherence to surveillance guidelines after removal of colorectal adenomas: a large, community-based study.

Authors:  Else-Mariëtte B van Heijningen; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; Ewout W Steyerberg; S Lucas Goede; Evelien Dekker; Wilco Lesterhuis; Frank ter Borg; Juda Vecht; Pieter Spoelstra; Leopold Engels; Clemens J M Bolwerk; Robin Timmer; Jan H Kleibeuker; Jan J Koornstra; Harry J de Koning; Ernst J Kuipers; Marjolein van Ballegooijen
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2015-01-13       Impact factor: 23.059

Review 9.  Impact of sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality: an evidence-based review of published prospective and retrospective studies.

Authors:  Otto S Lin; Richard A Kozarek; Jae Myung Cha
Journal:  Intest Res       Date:  2014-10-27

10.  Adherence to physician recommendations for surveillance in opportunistic colorectal cancer screening: the necessity of organized surveillance.

Authors:  Christian Stock; Bernd Holleczek; Michael Hoffmeister; Thomas Stolz; Christa Stegmaier; Hermann Brenner
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-12-06       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  2 in total

1.  The impact of cumulative colorectal cancer screening delays: A simulation study.

Authors:  Carolyn M Rutter; John M Inadomi; Christopher E Maerzluft
Journal:  J Med Screen       Date:  2021-12-13       Impact factor: 1.687

2.  How spatial accessibility to colonoscopy affects diagnostic adherences and adverse intestinal outcomes among the patients with positive preliminary screening findings.

Authors:  Weiyi Chen; WangJian Zhang; Huazhang Liu; Yingru Liang; Qin Zhou; Yan Li; Jing Gu
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2020-04-21       Impact factor: 4.452

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.