Laura Carot1,2, Antoni Castells3, Cristina Hernández4, Cristina Alvarez-Urturi1,2, Francesc Balaguer3, Angel Lanas5, Joaquín Cubiella6, Jose D Tasende7, Rodrigo Jover8, Vicent Hernandez9, Fernando Carballo10, Luis Bujanda11, Enrique Quintero12, Montserrat Andreu1,2, Xavier Bessa1,2. 1. Gastroenterology Department, Hospital del Mar, Barcelona, Spain. 2. Hospital del Mar Medical Research Institute (IMIM), Barcelona, Spain. 3. Gastroenterology Department, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Universitat de Barcelona, Spain. 4. Epidemiology and Evaluation Department, Hospital del Mar, Barcelona, Spain. 5. Gastroenterology Department, Hospital Clinico Universitario, Zaragoza, Spain. 6. Gastroenterology Department, Instituto de Investigación Biomédica Galicia Sur, Orense, Spain. 7. Gastroenterology Department, Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain. 8. Gastroenterology Department, Hospital General Universitario, Alicante, Spain. 9. Gastroenterology Department, Complexo Hospitalario Universitario, Vigo, Spain. 10. Unidad de Gestión Clínica de Digestivo, Hospital Universitario Virgen de la Arrixaca, Murcia, Spain. 11. Gastroenterology Department, Donostia Hospital, San Sebastian, Spain. 12. Gastroenterology Department, Hospital Universitario La Laguna, Tenerife, Spain.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The diagnostic yield of the faecal immunochemical test and sigmoidoscopy in detecting proximal serrated polyps in a colorectal cancer screening programme has not been fully assessed. AIM: We determined the detection rate of proximal serrated polyps by simulated sigmoidoscopy and faecal immunochemical test compared with total colonoscopy in a population-based, multicentre, nationwide, randomised controlled trial (ColonPrev study). METHODS: Sigmoidoscopy yield was simulated based on the UK-Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Trial for total colonoscopy referral. Definitions were: proximal serrated polyp (proximal serrated polyp): sessile serrated polyp or hyperplastic polyp of any size and proximal at-risk serrated polyp (at-risk proximal serrated polyp): sessile serrated polyp of any size or hyperplastic polyp ≥ 10 mm, both located proximally to the splenic flexure. RESULTS: A total of 10,611 individuals underwent faecal immunochemical test and 5059 underwent total colonoscopy and were evaluated by simulated sigmoidoscopy. Sigmoidoscopy and faecal immunochemical test were less accurate in detecting proximal serrated polyps (odds ratio: 0.13; 95% confidence interval: 0.10-0.18 and 0.13; 0.09-0.18, p < 0.0001, respectively). Both tests were inferior to colonoscopy in detecting at-risk proximal serrated polyps, and sigmoidoscopy was inferior to faecal immunochemical test in detecting these lesions (odds ratio: 0.17; 95% confidence interval: 0.10-0.30 and 0.25; 0.17-0.37, p < 0.0001, respectively). CONCLUSION: Sigmoidoscopy and faecal immunochemical test are less accurate in detecting proximal serrated polyps than colonoscopy, particularly in women.
BACKGROUND: The diagnostic yield of the faecal immunochemical test and sigmoidoscopy in detecting proximal serrated polyps in a colorectal cancer screening programme has not been fully assessed. AIM: We determined the detection rate of proximal serrated polyps by simulated sigmoidoscopy and faecal immunochemical test compared with total colonoscopy in a population-based, multicentre, nationwide, randomised controlled trial (ColonPrev study). METHODS: Sigmoidoscopy yield was simulated based on the UK-Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Trial for total colonoscopy referral. Definitions were: proximal serrated polyp (proximal serrated polyp): sessile serrated polyp or hyperplastic polyp of any size and proximal at-risk serrated polyp (at-risk proximal serrated polyp): sessile serrated polyp of any size or hyperplastic polyp ≥ 10 mm, both located proximally to the splenic flexure. RESULTS: A total of 10,611 individuals underwent faecal immunochemical test and 5059 underwent total colonoscopy and were evaluated by simulated sigmoidoscopy. Sigmoidoscopy and faecal immunochemical test were less accurate in detecting proximal serrated polyps (odds ratio: 0.13; 95% confidence interval: 0.10-0.18 and 0.13; 0.09-0.18, p < 0.0001, respectively). Both tests were inferior to colonoscopy in detecting at-risk proximal serrated polyps, and sigmoidoscopy was inferior to faecal immunochemical test in detecting these lesions (odds ratio: 0.17; 95% confidence interval: 0.10-0.30 and 0.25; 0.17-0.37, p < 0.0001, respectively). CONCLUSION: Sigmoidoscopy and faecal immunochemical test are less accurate in detecting proximal serrated polyps than colonoscopy, particularly in women.
Entities:
Keywords:
Serrated polyps; colorectal cancer screening; faecal immunochemical test; sigmoidoscopy
Authors: Omer Khalid; Sofyan Radaideh; Oscar W Cummings; Michael J O'Brien; John R Goldblum; Douglas K Rex Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2009-08-14 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Charles J Kahi; David G Hewett; Dustin Lee Norton; George J Eckert; Douglas K Rex Journal: Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2010-10-01 Impact factor: 11.382
Authors: Nancy N Baxter; Rinku Sutradhar; Shawn S Forbes; Lawrence F Paszat; Refik Saskin; Linda Rabeneck Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2010-09-18 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Bernard Levin; David A Lieberman; Beth McFarland; Robert A Smith; Durado Brooks; Kimberly S Andrews; Chiranjeev Dash; Francis M Giardiello; Seth Glick; Theodore R Levin; Perry Pickhardt; Douglas K Rex; Alan Thorson; Sidney J Winawer Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2008-03-05 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Steven J Heitman; Paul E Ronksley; Robert J Hilsden; Braden J Manns; Alaa Rostom; Brenda R Hemmelgarn Journal: Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2009-06-10 Impact factor: 11.382
Authors: Rishad Khan; Joanne Plahouras; Bradley C Johnston; Michael A Scaffidi; Samir C Grover; Catharine M Walsh Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2018-08-17
Authors: Mark S Johnstone; Gillian Miller; Grace Pang; Paul Burton; Georgios Kourounis; Jack Winter; Emilia Crighton; David Mansouri; Paul Witherspoon; Karen Smith; Stephen T McSorley Journal: Ann Clin Biochem Date: 2022-03-03 Impact factor: 2.587