Debate: diminutive polyps noted at CT colonography need not be reported.
ABSTRACT Colorectal polyps less than 6 mm in size pose a negligible risk to the development of colorectal carcinoma. The sensitivity and specificity for detection of diminutive lesions on all available examinations including CT colonography (CTC) and optical colonoscopy (OC) is relatively low. In the context of regular screening, the low clinical significance and slow to negligible growth of diminutive polyps, as well as the low detection performance of CTC and OC for these lesions, would contribute to wasted health care resource and excess morbidity if each diminutive polyp were referred for potential resection. Respect for patient safety, attention to proper use of resources, and appropriate focus on larger, clinically significant polyps lead the authors to the conclusion that colonic polyps of less than 6 mm should not be separately reported.
- SourceAvailable from: Poong-Lyul Rhee
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "While the clinical implications and optimal management of small polyps are controversial [23,24], several lines of evidence indicate that detection of small polyps may result in long-term benefits for patients [12,25]. In a close follow-up of 30 polyps during 2 years, the mean tubular adenoma growth rate was 0.58 mm/year and 3 tubular adenomas had growth rates >2 mm/year . "
ABSTRACT: Information on the impact of cecal insertion time on colorectal neoplasm detection is limited. Our objective was to determine the association between cecal insertion time and colorectal neoplasm detection rate in colonoscopy screening. We performed a cross-sectional study of 12,679 consecutive subjects aged 40--79 years undergoing screening colonoscopy in routine health check-ups at the Center for Health Promotion of the Samsung Medical Center from December 2007 to June 2009. Fixed effects logistic regression conditioning on colonoscopist was used to eliminate confounding due to differences in technical ability and other characteristics across colonoscopists. The mean cecal insertion time was 5.9 (SD, 4.4 minutes). We identified 4,249 (33.5%) participants with colorectal neoplasms, of whom 1,956 had small single adenomas (<5 mm), 595 had medium single adenomas (5--9 mm), and 1,699 had multiple adenomas or advanced colorectal neoplasms. The overall rates of colorectal neoplasm detection by quartiles of cecal insertion time were 36.8%, 33.4%, 32.7%, and 31.0%, respectively (p trend <0.001).The odds for small single colorectal adenoma detection was 16% lower (adjusted OR 0.84; 95% CI 0.71 to 0.99) in the fourth compared to the first quartile of insertion time (p trend 0.005). Insertion time was not associated with the detection rate of single adenomas >=5 mm, multiple adenomas or advanced colorectal neoplasms. Shorter insertion times were associated with increased rates of detection of small colorectal adenomas <5 mm. Cecal insertion time may be clinically relevant as missed small colorectal adenomas may progress to more advanced lesions.BMC Gastroenterology 08/2013; 13(1):124. DOI:10.1186/1471-230X-13-124 · 2.11 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The majority of recent cost-effectiveness reviews concluded that computerised tomographic colonography (CTC) is not a cost-effective colorectal cancer (CRC) screening strategy yet. The objective of this review is to examine cost-effectiveness of CTC versus optical colonoscopy (COL) for CRC screening and identify the main drivers influencing cost-effectiveness due to the emergence of new research. A systematic review was conducted for cost-effectiveness studies comparing CTC and COL as a screening tool and providing outcomes in life-years saved, published between January 2006 and November 2012. Nine studies were included in the review. There was considerable heterogeneity in modelling complexity and methodology. Different model assumptions and inputs had large effects on resulting cost-effectiveness of CTC and COL. CTC was found to be dominant or cost-effective in three studies, assuming the most favourable scenario. COL was found to be not cost effective in one study. CTC has the potential to be a cost-effective CRC screening strategy when compared to COL. The most important assumptions that influenced the cost-effectiveness of CTC and COL were related to CTC threshold-based reporting of polyps, CTC cost, CTC sensitivity for large polyps, natural history of adenoma transition to cancer, AAA parameters and importantly, adherence. There is a strong need for a differential consideration of patient adherence and compliance to CTC and COL. Recent research shows that laxative-free CTC screening has the potential to become a good alternative screening method for CRC as it can improve patient uptake of screening.European journal of radiology 08/2013; 82(11). DOI:10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.07.019 · 2.16 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Purpose To determine the postoperative incidence of adenomatous neoplasia in the colon proximal to an occlusive colorectal cancer where preoperative computed tomographic (CT) colonography findings were normal. Materials and Methods Institutional review board approval, with a waiver of informed consent, was obtained. This observational study included patients with occlusive colorectal cancer who underwent preoperative CT colonography between April 2007 and March 2010 that revealed normal findings (ie, no lesions ≥ 6 mm) in the proximal colon and who underwent postoperative colonoscopy. The primary outcome was postoperative colonoscopic discovery of clinically relevant lesions (ie, nondiminutive [≥6 mm] adenomas, advanced adenomas, or cancers) in the proximal colon. The cumulative incidence of clinically relevant lesions in preoperatively normal proximal colon over the postsurgical follow-up time was analyzed by using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results The final cohort included 204 patients (102 men and 102 women; mean age, 57.3 years ± 11.3 [standard deviation]). At a total of 435 postoperative colonoscopies performed over a median follow-up of 29 months (range, 1-74 months), clinically relevant lesions were detected in the proximal colon in 30 patients: Nonadvanced adenomas were detected in 23 patients, and advanced adenomas were detected in seven patients. The cumulative incidence of clinically relevant adenomatous lesions in the preoperatively normal proximal colon 12 and 18 months after preoperative CT colonography was 8.1% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.9%, 12.2%) and 9.6% (95% CI: 5%, 14%), respectively. Clinically relevant adenomatous lesions found in the proximal colon within 18 months of preoperative CT colonography were nonadvanced adenomas in 10 of 15 patients. Conclusion When the portion of the colon proximal to an occlusive cancer is devoid of nondiminutive lesions at preoperative CT colonography, colonoscopy of the proximal colon following cancer resection rarely finds clinically relevant lesions and is unlikely to reveal any lesions requiring immediate removal until routine 1-year postsurgical follow-up. © RSNA, 2014 Online supplemental material is available for this article .Radiology 06/2014; 273(1):132844. DOI:10.1148/radiol.14132844 · 6.21 Impact Factor