Literature DB >> 29588842

Factors associated with the efficacy of polyp detection during routine flexible sigmoidoscopy.

Akash J Maliampurakal1, Donald C McMillan1, John H Anderson2, Paul G Horgan1, David Mansouri1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Flexible sigmoidoscopy reduces the incidence of colonic cancer through the detection and removal of premalignant adenomas. However, the efficacy of the procedure is variable. The aim of the present study was to examine factors associated with the efficacy of detecting polyps during flexible sigmoidoscopy. DESIGN AND PATIENTS: Retrospective observational cohort study of all individuals undergoing routine flexible sigmoidoscopy in NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde from January 2013 to January 2016.
RESULTS: A total of 7713 patients were included. Median age was 52 years and 50% were male. Polyps were detected in 1172 (13%) patients. On multivariate analysis, increasing age (OR 1.020 (1.016-1.023) p<0.001), male sex (OR 1.23 (1.10-1.38) p<0.001) and the use of any bowel preparation (OR 3.55 (1.47-8.57) p<0.001) were associated with increasing numbers of polyps being detected. There was no significant difference in the number of polyps found in patients who had received an oral laxative preparation compared with an enema (OR 3.81 (1.57-9.22) vs 3.45 (1.43-8.34)), or in those who received sedation versus those who had not (OR 1.00 vs 1.04 (0.91-1.17) p=0.591). Furthermore, the highest number of polyps was found when the sigmoidoscope was inserted to the descending colon (OR 1.30 (1.04-1.63)).
CONCLUSIONS: Increasing age, male sex and the utilisation of any bowel preparation were associated with an increased polyp detection rate. However, the use of sedation or oral laxative preparation appears to confer no additional benefit. In addition, the results indicate that insertion to the descending colon optimises the efficacy of flexible sigmoidoscopy polyp detection.

Entities:  

Keywords:  endoscopy

Year:  2017        PMID: 29588842      PMCID: PMC5868444          DOI: 10.1136/flgastro-2017-100849

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Frontline Gastroenterol        ISSN: 2041-4137


  22 in total

1.  The effect of fecal occult-blood screening on the incidence of colorectal cancer.

Authors:  J S Mandel; T R Church; J H Bond; F Ederer; M S Geisser; S J Mongin; D C Snover; L M Schuman
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2000-11-30       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 2.  Cochrane systematic review of colorectal cancer screening using the fecal occult blood test (hemoccult): an update.

Authors:  Paul Hewitson; Paul Glasziou; Eila Watson; Bernie Towler; Les Irwig
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2008-05-13       Impact factor: 10.864

3.  Current management of inflammatory bowel disease and colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Mark C Mattar; Denver Lough; Michael J Pishvaian; Aline Charabaty
Journal:  Gastrointest Cancer Res       Date:  2011-03

Review 4.  Reduced incidence and mortality from colorectal cancer with flexible-sigmoidoscopy screening: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jennifer Shroff; Nirav Thosani; Sachin Batra; Harminder Singh; Sushovan Guha
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-12-28       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 5.  Epidemiology of colorectal adenomas.

Authors:  L A Peipins; R S Sandler
Journal:  Epidemiol Rev       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 6.222

6.  Risk factors for advanced colonic neoplasia and hyperplastic polyps in asymptomatic individuals.

Authors:  David A Lieberman; Sheila Prindiville; David G Weiss; Walter Willett
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2003-12-10       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  Factors associated with improved survival among older colorectal cancer patients in the US: a population-based analysis.

Authors:  Kathleen Lang; Jonathan R Korn; David W Lee; Lisa M Lines; Craig C Earle; Joseph Menzin
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2009-07-13       Impact factor: 4.430

8.  Endoscopic localization of colorectal cancer: study of its accuracy and possible error factors.

Authors:  F Borda; F J Jiménez; A Borda; J Urman; S Goñi; M Ostiz; J M Zozaya
Journal:  Rev Esp Enferm Dig       Date:  2012 Oct-Nov       Impact factor: 2.086

9.  Once-only sigmoidoscopy in colorectal cancer screening: follow-up findings of the Italian Randomized Controlled Trial--SCORE.

Authors:  Nereo Segnan; Paola Armaroli; Luigina Bonelli; Mauro Risio; Stefania Sciallero; Marco Zappa; Bruno Andreoni; Arrigo Arrigoni; Luigi Bisanti; Claudia Casella; Cristiano Crosta; Fabio Falcini; Franco Ferrero; Adriano Giacomin; Orietta Giuliani; Alessandra Santarelli; Carmen Beatriz Visioli; Roberto Zanetti; Wendy S Atkin; Carlo Senore
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2011-08-18       Impact factor: 13.506

10.  Single blind, randomised trial of efficacy and acceptability of oral picolax versus self administered phosphate enema in bowel preparation for flexible sigmoidoscopy screening.

Authors:  W S Atkin; A Hart; R Edwards; C F Cook; J Wardle; P McIntyre; R Aubrey; C Baron; S Sutton; J Cuzick; A Senapati; J M Northover
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-06-03
View more
  2 in total

1.  General populations' preferences for colorectal cancer screening: rationale and protocol for the discrete choice experiment in the SIGMO study.

Authors:  Melanie Brinkmann; Leonie Diedrich; Christian Krauth; Bernt-Peter Robra; Jona Theodor Stahmeyer; Maren Dreier
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2021-01-21       Impact factor: 2.692

2.  Attributes Characterizing Colorectal Cancer Screening Tests That Influence Preferences of Individuals Eligible for Screening in Germany: A Qualitative Study.

Authors:  Melanie Brinkmann; Isabell von Holt; Leonie Diedrich; Christian Krauth; Gabriele Seidel; Maren Dreier
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2022-08-10       Impact factor: 2.314

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.