[Character disorders in a physically mistreated child].

H. Grabowska

1968-07-01

Psychiatria Polska

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Postoperative Surveillance Adherence in Colorectal Cancer Patients at Urban Medical Center: is it Adequate?

Ahmad Alnasarat,Talin Darian,Awni Shahait,Mohanad Baldawi,Gamal Mostafa

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.05.23.24307790

2024-05-23

Abstract:Aim To examine the adherence rate to surveillance guidelines after curative resection of colorectal cancer (CRC) and the impact of demographic factors. Methods Data was collected retrospectively including demographics, stage at diagnosis, and adherence to surveillance guidelines as recommended by the US Multi-Society Task Force (USMSTF) guidelines, for colorectal cancer (CRC) patients who underwent curative surgical resection between 2005 and 2014 in a tertiary academic medical center. Results A total of 124 patients were included (Male /female, 56.5%/ 43.5%), African American 109 (87.9%), and 70 patients (56.5%) had Medicare/Medicaid insurance. Overall, Appropriate clinical evaluation twice per year for 3 years following surgery was completed in 78 (63%) of patients. A total of 56 (45%) had carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels checked twice a year for 3 years. Surveillance colonoscopy 1 year postoperatively occurred in 64 (51.6%), and 37 (29.8%) had a second colonoscopy 3 years postoperatively. Abdomen/pelvis CT scan was obtained in 90 (72.5%) at 1 year post-operatively. In the entire cohort, strict adherence to post-recession surveillance only occurred in 46 (37.1%). There was no correlation between adherence to surveillance and gender (p=0.184), race (p=0.118), or insurance type (p=0.51). Conclusion Adherence to surveillance after curative resection of CRC was inadequate regardless of socioeconomic, medical insurance, or race. Measures should be taken to identify barriers and improve compliance with guidelines.
Clinician perceptions on barriers and facilitators to 1‐year surveillance colonoscopy completion in survivors of colorectal cancer

C. Natasha Kwendakwema,Talor Hopkins,Ari Bell‐Brown,Vlad V. Simianu,Veena Shankaran,Rachel B. Issaka

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/cam4.70244

IF: 4.711

2024-09-25

Cancer Medicine

Abstract:Introduction Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer deaths in the United States. Surveillance colonoscopy is recommended 1‐year after surgical resection for patients with stage I‐III CRC; however, only 18%–61% of CRC survivors complete this test. This study describes clinician‐identified barriers and facilitators to surveillance colonoscopy among CRC survivors. Methods We conducted semi‐structured interviews with clinicians until thematic saturation was achieved. Interviews were analyzed using the social cognitive theory. Results Thirteen clinicians were interviewed, and all identified health system‐level barriers to surveillance colonoscopy completion; the most common being fragmented care due to patients receiving care across many health systems. Clinicians also identified social determinants of health barriers (e.g., geographical distance between patients and health systems) to 1‐year surveillance colonoscopy completion. Conclusions Clinicians identified several potentially modifiable barriers to 1‐year surveillance colonoscopy completion which, if addressed, could improve post‐treatment care and outcomes among stage I‐III CRC survivors.

oncology
S476 Adherence to Surveillance Colonoscopy and Associated Factors: A Systematic Review

Matthew F. Cohen,Fatima Khan,Aasma Shaukat

DOI: https://doi.org/10.14309/01.ajg.0001031272.41474.f8

2024-10-26

The American Journal of Gastroenterology

Abstract:Colonoscopy surveillance is recommended by clinical practice guidelines following polypectomy. Prior systematic reviews have examined whether physicians have appropriately recommended surveillance colonoscopy at guideline-recommended intervals, but have not examined whether patients actually follow through with these recommendations. The aim of this review was to determine patient adherence to surveillance recommendations over a broad variety of healthcare settings and by patient factors.

gastroenterology & hepatology
Adherence to post-polypectomy surveillance guidelines: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Roupen Djinbachian,Anne-Julie Dubé,Madeleine Durand,Benoit Panzini,Simon Bouchard,Daniel von Renteln,Louopou Rosalie Camara

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1055/a-0865-2082

2019-03-25

Endoscopy

Abstract:Abstract Background Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a major worldwide cause of cancer-related mortality. Colonoscopy programs based on guideline-recommended surveillance intervals have been put in place to reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with CRC. We were interested to evaluate clinical practice adherence to guideline-recommended surveillance intervals, the potential extent of early repeat colonoscopies, and causes of nonadherence to guideline recommendations. Methods We performed a literature search for articles reporting on guideline adherence for surveillance colonoscopies. Exclusion criteria included inflammatory bowel disease and hereditary CRC syndrome cohorts. Primary outcome was correct interval assignment in patients undergoing surveillance colonoscopy. Groups were assessed for adherence according to their respective guideline recommendations (North American or European). Results 16 studies were included in the analysis. The mean colonoscopy surveillance interval adherence rate was 48.8 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 37.3 – 60.4). For North American guidelines, surveillance interval assignments were adherent to guideline recommendations in 44.7 % (95 %CI 24.2 – 66.3) of patients after detection of low risk lesions and in 54.6 % (95 %CI 41.4 – 67.4) after detection of high risk lesions. For European guidelines, surveillance interval assignments were adherent to recommendations in 24.4 % (95 %CI 1.1 – 63.4) of patients after detection of low risk lesions and in 73.6 % (95 %CI 35.5 – 98.8) after detection of high risk lesions. Conclusions The worldwide adherence to surveillance colonoscopy guidelines was low, with more than 50 % of patients undergoing repeat colonoscopies either too early or too late. Early repeat colonoscopies occurred with the highest frequency for patients in whom only hyperplastic polyps or low risk adenomas were found.

gastroenterology & hepatology,surgery
Randomized trial of patient outreach approaches to de-implement outdated colonoscopy surveillance intervals.

Jeffrey K. Lee,Pradeep C. Koripella,Christopher D. Jensen,Sophie A. Merchant,Jeffrey M. Fox,Suyi X. Chang,Christian H. Dang,Fernando S. Velayos,Eshandeep S. Boparai,Nicole S. Evans,Lawrence J. Leung,Jessica M. Badalov,Charles P. Quesenberry,Douglas A. Corley,Theodore R. Levin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cgh.2023.12.027

IF: 13.576

2024-01-08

Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology

Abstract:Background and Aims Guidelines now recommend patients with low-risk adenomas receive colonoscopy surveillance in 7-10 years and those with the previously recommended 5-year interval be reevaluated. We tested three outreach approaches for transitioning patients to the 10-year interval recommendation. Methods Design : 3-arm pragmatic randomized trial comparing telephone, secure messaging, and mailed letter outreach. Setting : Kaiser Permanente Northern California, a large integrated healthcare system. Participants : Patients aged 54-70 years with 1-2 small (<10 mm) tubular adenomas at baseline colonoscopy, due for 5-year surveillance in 2022, without high-risk conditions, and with access to all three outreach modalities. Patients were randomly assigned to outreach arm (telephone [n=200], secure message [n=203], and mailed letter [n=201]) stratified by age, sex, race, and ethnicity. Intervention : Outreach in each arm was performed by trained medical assistants (unblinded) communicating in English with 1 reminder attempt at 2-4 weeks. Participants could change their assigned interval to 10 years or continue their planned 5-year interval. Results 60-day response rates were higher for telephone (64.5%) and secure messaging outreach (51.7%) versus mailed letter (31.3%). Also, more patients adopted the 10-year surveillance interval in the telephone (37.0%) and secure messaging arms (32.0%) compared to mailed letter (18.9%) and rate differences were significant for telephone (18.1%; 97.5% CI: 8.3%, 27.9%) and secure message outreach (13.1%; 97.5% CI: 3.5%, 22.7%) versus mailed letter outreach. Conclusion Telephone and secure messaging were more effective than mailed letter outreach for de-implementing outdated colonoscopy surveillance recommendations among individuals with a history of low-risk adenomas in an integrated healthcare setting.

gastroenterology & hepatology
A Global View of Adherence to Colonoscopy Follow-Up in Cascade Screening of Colorectal Cancer.

Yihui Yang,Junjie Huang,Weimiao Wu,Hung N. Luu,Foong-Ming Moy,Songsong Tan,Jiongxing Fu,Tao Ying,Mellissa Withers,Dang The Hung,Dandan Mao,Sikun Chen,Martin C. S. Wong,Wanghong Xu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ecc.13577

IF: 2.1

2022-01-01

European Journal of Cancer Care

Abstract:Objective To overview the colonoscopy adherence in cascade screening of colorectal cancer (CRC) and evaluate potential influence of the initial tests based on an ecological evaluation. Methods The performance of the initial screening tests and adherence to subsequent colonoscopy were extracted from relevant studies published up to 16 October 2020. The age-standardised incidence (ASRi) of CRC in populations in the year of screening was derived from the Cancer Statistics. Results One hundred sixty-six observational studies and 60 experimental studies were identified. Most studies applied cascade screening with faecal occult blood tests (FOBTs) as an initial test. The adherence to colonoscopy varied greatly across populations by continents, gross national income and type of initial tests, with a median (interquartile range) of 79.8% (63.1%-87.8%) in observational studies and 82.1% (66.7%-90.4%) in randomised trials. The adherence was positively correlated with the ASRi of CRC (r = 0.145, p = 0.023) and positive predictive value (PPV) of the initial tests (r = 0.206, p = 0.002) in observational studies and correlated with ASRi of CRC (r = 0.309, p = 0.002) and sensitivity of the initial tests (r = -0.704, p = 0.003) in experimental studies. Conclusions Adherence to colonoscopy varies greatly across populations and is related with performance of the initial tests, indicating the importance to select appropriate initial tests.
Adherence to Colonoscopy in Cascade Screening of Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis

Weimiao Wu,Junjie Huang,Yihui Yang,Kai Gu,Hung N. Luu,Songsong Tan,Chen Yang,Jiongxing Fu,Pingping Bao,Tao Ying,Mellissa Withers,Dandan Mao,Sikun Chen,Yangming Gong,Martin CS Wong,Wanghong Xu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jgh.15762

2020-01-01

Abstract:AbstractBackground and AimThis study aims to systematically evaluate adherence to colonoscopy and related factors in cascade screening of colorectal cancer (CRC) among average‐risk populations, which is crucial to achieve the effectiveness of CRC screening.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library for studies published in English up to October 16, 2020, and reporting the adherence to colonoscopy following positive results of initial screening tests. A random‐effects meta‐analysis was applied to estimate pooled adherence and 95% confidence intervals. Subgroup analysis and mixed‐effects meta‐regression analysis were performed to evaluate heterogeneous factors for adherence level.ResultsA total of 245 observational and 97 experimental studies were included and generated a pooled adherence to colonoscopy of 76.6% (95% confidence interval: 74.1–78.9) and 80.4% (95% confidence interval: 77.2–83.1), respectively. The adherence varied substantially by calendar year of screening, continents, CRC incidence, socioeconomic status, recruitment methods, and type of initial screening tests, with the initial tests as the most modifiable heterogeneous factor for adherence across both observational (Q = 162.6, P < 0.001) and experimental studies (Q = 23.2, P < 0.001). The adherence to colonoscopy was at the highest level when using flexible sigmoidoscopy as an initial test, followed by using guaiac fecal occult blood test, quantitative or qualitative fecal immunochemical test, and risk assessment. The pooled estimate of adherence was positively associated with specificity and positive predictive value of initial screening tests, but negatively with sensitivity and positivity rate.ConclusionsColonoscopy adherence is at a low level and differs by study‐level characteristics of programs and populations. Initial screening tests with high specificity or positive predictive value may be followed by a high adherence to colonoscopy.
Retrospective analysis of osteoradionecrosis of the mandible: proposing a novel clinical classification and staging system.

Y. He,Zhonglong Liu,Z. Tian,Tianguo Dai,W. Qiu,Zizhen Zhang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2015.04.006

2015-12-01

Abstract:
Evolving concepts of reflux: the ups and downs of the LES.

T. Demeester

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2002/652650

2002-05-01

Abstract:The common denominator for virtually all episodes of gastroesophageal reflux in health and disease is the loss of the barrier that confines the gastric environment to the stomach. Factors important in the function of the barrier are its pressure, length and position. In early reflux disease, overeating, gastric distention, delayed emptying and aerophagia lead to transient losses of the barrier. A permanent loss results from inflammatory injury to the muscle of the barrier with free flow of gastric juice into the esophageal body and its subsequent injury. Corrective therapy requires augmentation or restoration of barrier function.
Performance of Initial Screening Tests for Colorectal Cancer and Subsequent Adherence to Colonoscopy: An Ecological Study

Yihui Yang,Junjie Huang,Weimiao Wu,Hung N. Luu,Foong-Ming Moy,Songsong Tan,Jiongxing Fu,Tao Ying,Mellissa Withers,Dang The Hung,Dandan Mao,Sikun Chen,Martin CS Wong,Wanghong Xu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3537081

2020-01-01

SSRN Electronic Journal

Abstract:Background: Adherence to colonoscopy in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is at a low level and varies greatly across populations. No study has examined the influencing factors of colonoscopy adherence at a population level, and this remains to be an unaddressed knowledge gap. We therefore aimed to analyze the correlation between performance of initial CRC screening tests and subsequent adherence to colonoscopy base on an ecological evaluation. Methods: The sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value (PPV) of initial CRC screening tests and subsequent adherence to colonoscopy in different populations were extracted from relevant studies published in English up to December 31, 2018. The age-standardized incidences (ASR) of CRC across populations in the year of screening were obtained from the Cancer Statistics data. Locally weighted regression smoothing was used to examine the relationship between adherence to colonoscopy and ASR of CRC. Cut-off points of adherence on ASR were identified by Joinpoint Regression and used in Regression Discontinuity as potential thresholds. Spearman’s correlation analysis was used to calculate correlation coefficients. Findings: We identified 192 eligible articles. The median and interquartile range of adherence to colonoscopy was 82·5% (71·8%-90·5%). The adherence was significantly correlated with ASR of CRC in the study populations (r=0·187, p<0·001) and marginally with the PPV of initial screening tests (r=0·105, p=0·077). The change points of the adherence to colonoscopy were identified at the ASR of 32·5 and 142·5/100,000, and the ratio of adherence to colonoscopy at 143/100,000 was 0·900. In countries / areas with a moderate ASR, adherence to colonoscopy was negatively correlated with the sensitivity (r=-0·367, p=0·023) and positively with the PPV (r=0·143, p=0·040), whereas in populations with a high ASR, flexible sigmoidoscopy was more widely used as an initial screening test and achieved a high subsequent adherence to colonoscopy. Interpretation: Adherence to colonoscopy is correlated with the performance of initial screening tests, particularly among populations with moderate CRC incidence. Initial screening tests with high PPV or specificity may help to increase population adherence to colonoscopy, but different strategies should be used in countries / areas with a high or moderate incidence of CRC.Funding Statement: This study was supported by the Local High Level University Construction Project of Shanghai and the Health Commission of the Pudong New Area of Shanghai (PW2019A-5). Declaration of Interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests.Ethics Approval Statement: Not required.
Post-polypectomy follow-up recommendations by practicing academic gastroenterologists—does number of years in practice matter?

Kofi Clarke,Kara DiJoseph,Rachel White,Ibrahim Yaghnam,Roland Lee,Jonathan G. Stine

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-022-04120-y

IF: 2.8

2022-03-08

International Journal of Colorectal Disease

Abstract:AimColorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most deadly and fourth most common cancer worldwide. Early detection, resection, and appropriate surveillance of precursor polyps result in better outcomes. Colonoscopy is a safe, accurate, and effective tool for surveillance and follow-up of premalignant polyps. Recommended surveillance intervals are based on polyp, procedural, and patient-related factors. The United States Multi-Society Task Force (MSTF) on CRC publishes guidelines with periodic updates on surveillance. We sought to evaluate adherence to post-polypectomy surveillance guidelines by academic gastroenterologists at a high-volume center.MethodsOne-year retrospective study evaluating compliance with post-polypectomy recommendations after average risk adult screening colonoscopies. Data was collected on number and size of polyps, quality of bowel prep, initial follow-up recommendations, polyp pathology, and follow-up recommendations. Correlation with the 2012 MSTF guidelines was also evaluated. Endoscopist experience was categorized as greater or less than 10 years of practice experience. Binomial regression was used to model the association between the providers' years of experience (<10 vs. >10) and the likelihood of agreement between initial assessment and post-pathology assessment.ResultsThere was a greater than 85% adherence to post-polypectomy surveillance guidelines, independent of endoscopist experience.ConclusionThere is a high level of adherence to post-polypectomy guidelines by practicing academic gastroenterologists independent of post-fellowship clinical experience.

gastroenterology & hepatology,surgery
Factors associated with adherence to colonoscopy among individuals who were positive in the preliminary screening for colorectal neoplasms

Ji‐Bin Li,Keng‐Jian Ke,Wei‐Li Zhang,Ling‐Yan Wang,Yan‐Ping Wu,Fan Weng,Huan Tian,Zhi‐Yu Qiu,Yin Li,Shi‐Yong Lin,Mei‐Xian Ye,Qing‐Jian Ou,Cheng‐Hua Gong,Zhen‐Hai Lu,Zhi‐Zhong Pan,De‐Sen Wan,Jian‐Hong Peng,Yu‐Jing Fang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/cam4.4730

IF: 4.711

2022-04-20

Cancer Medicine

Abstract:For the participation rate of colonoscopy screening is still disappointingly low in China. We find out the factors associated with colonoscopy adherence among individuals who were positive in the preliminary screening for colorectal neoplasms.ObjectivesThis study aimed to investigate the potential factors associated with adherence to colonoscopy among participants who were preliminarily screened positive in a community‐based colorectal cancer screening program in China.MethodsThis study analyzed data from 1219 out of 6971 community residents who were identified as positive cases by the well‐validated high‐risk factor questionnaire (HRFQ) or fecal immunochemical test (FIT) in the preliminary screening stage for colorectal neoplasms. Patients showing adherence to colonoscopy were defined as those who received positive results in a preliminary screening for colorectal neoplasms and later received a colonoscopy examination as required. The associations of social‐demographic factors, lifestyle behaviors, history of diabetes, body mass index (BMI), and risk factors in the HRFQ with adherence to colonoscopy were evaluated using logistic regression models.ResultsAmong 1219 participants who preliminarily screened positive, the top five risk factors reported by the participants were chronic constipation (25.9%), hematochezia (23.5%), family history of CRC in first‐degree relatives (22.1%), chronic diarrhea (21.8%), and history of polyps (16.6%). Around 14.2% of participants who preliminarily screened positive reported three or more risk factors, and the proportion was 26.2% among participants who were positive according to both HRFQ and FIT. Among all participants who were preliminarily screened positive, the multivariable results showed that those who were married (OR = 1.58, 95% CI: 1.12, 2.25, p = 0.01), had chronic diarrhea (OR = 1.34, 95% CI: 1.00, 1.78, p = 0.047), and had a positive FIT (OR = 1.60, 95% CI: 1.21, 2.10, p

oncology
S368 Rates of Guideline-Directed, Post-Treatment Surveillance Colonoscopy in Early- and Late-Onset Colorectal Cancer Patients

Pakdee Rojanasopondist,Ted Gooley,Cornelia Ulrich,Christopher I. Li,David Shibata,Adetunji Toriola,Doratha Byrd,Jane C. Figueiredo,Biljana Gigic,Sheetal Hardikar,Stacey Cohen,Lyen Huang,Victoria Damerell,Meghana V. Karchi,Elizabeth H. Wood,Ildiko Strehli,William M. Grady

DOI: https://doi.org/10.14309/01.ajg.0001030840.86748.ca

2024-10-26

The American Journal of Gastroenterology

Abstract:Recently, the incidence of early-onset colorectal cancer (eoCRC), diagnosed < 50 years old, has been rising. Current post-treatment surveillance guidelines for sporadic eoCRC and late-onset CRC (loCRC) recommend colonoscopies at intervals of 1- and 3-years (eg at 1- and 4-years after treatment). Given that eoCRC patients often present with advanced stage CRC, undergo more aggressive treatment and can have greater financial toxicity, we investigated if eoCRC patients' compliance with recommended surveillance guidelines differs from loCRC patients.

gastroenterology & hepatology
Post-polypectomy Guideline Adherence: Importance of Belief in Guidelines, Not Guideline Knowledge or Fear of Missed Cancer

Neha Patel,Liyue Tong,Chul Ahn,Amit G. Singal,Samir Gupta

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-015-3685-x

2015-05-07

Digestive Diseases and Sciences

Abstract:BackgroundAdherence to post-polypectomy surveillance guideline recommendations is suboptimal. Surveillance is frequently over- and under-recommend, resulting in strained colonoscopy capacity, potential risks without expected benefits, and missed opportunities for colorectal cancer risk reduction.AimsTo identify factors associated with adherence to post-polypectomy surveillance guidelines.MethodsWe conducted a three-phase study with a retrospective review of usual care post-polypectomy surveillance recommendations through medical chart abstraction (Phase I), prospective online physician survey (Phase II), and analysis of survey-based and other physician-based predictors of usual care surveillance recommendations (Phase III). Subjects included patients who underwent usual care colonoscopy 2011–2012 (Phases I and III) and gastroenterology (GI) attendings and fellows (Phases II and III). We identified rates of recommendations consistent with guideline adherence, surveillance overuse, and surveillance underuse based on usual care medical chart documentation and physician survey, as well as predictors of physician adherence to guidelines.ResultsWe reviewed 640 patient charts for 28 survey respondents. Rates of usual practice recommendations consistent with guideline adherence, surveillance overutilization, and underutilization were 84, 13, and 3 %, respectively. At survey, 82 % of physicians were concerned about missed cancer. Eleven percentage believed that guidelines were not aggressive enough. GI trainees were 2.5 times more likely to issue guideline-adherent recommendations [OR 2.5, 95 % CI (1.5–4.2)]. Disagreement with guideline aggressiveness was independently associated with 40 % lower likelihood of adherence [OR 0.6, 95 % CI (0.4–0.8)].ConclusionsBelief in the appropriate aggressiveness of guidelines and trainee position, but not fear of missed cancer or guideline knowledge, was associated with adherence to post-polypectomy surveillance guidelines.

gastroenterology & hepatology
Post-polypectomy surveillance interval and advanced neoplasia detection rates: a multicenter, retrospective cohort study

Amanda J. Cross,Emma C. Robbins,Kevin Pack,Iain Stenson,Matthew D. Rutter,Andrew M. Veitch,Brian P. Saunders,Stephen W. Duffy,Kate Wooldrage

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1795-4673

2022-04-11

Endoscopy

Abstract:Abstract Background Longer post-polypectomy surveillance intervals are associated with increased colorectal neoplasia detection at surveillance in some studies. We investigated this association to inform optimal surveillance intervals. Methods Patients who underwent colonoscopy and post-polypectomy surveillance at 17 UK hospitals were classified as low/high risk by baseline findings. We compared detection rates of advanced adenomas (≥ 10 mm, tubulovillous/villous, high grade dysplasia), high risk findings (HRFs: ≥ 2 serrated polyps/[adenomas] of which ≥ 1 is ≥ 10 mm or has [high grade] dysplasia; ≥ 5 serrated polyps/adenomas; or ≥ 1 nonpedunculated polyp ≥ 20 mm), or colorectal cancer (CRC) at surveillance colonoscopy by surveillance interval (< 18 months, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 years). Risk ratios (RRs) were estimated using multivariable regression. Results Of 11 214 patients, 7216 (64 %) were low risk and 3998 (36 %) were high risk. Among low risk patients, advanced adenoma, HRF, and CRC detection rates at first surveillance were 7.8 %, 3.7 %, and 1.1 %, respectively. Advanced adenoma detection increased with increasing surveillance interval, reaching 9.8 % with a 6-year interval (P trend < 0.001). Among high risk patients, advanced adenoma, HRF, and CRC detection rates at first surveillance were 15.3 %, 10.0 %, and 1.5 %, respectively. Advanced adenoma and CRC detection rates (P trends < 0.001) increased with increasing surveillance interval; RRs (95 % confidence intervals) for CRC were 1.54 (0.68–3.48), 4.44 (1.95–10.08), and 5.80 (2.51–13.40) with 3-, 4-, and 5-year intervals, respectively, versus an interval of < 18 months. Conclusions Metachronous neoplasia was uncommon among low risk patients, even with long surveillance intervals, supporting recommendations for no surveillance in these patients. For high risk patients, a 3-year surveillance interval would ensure timely CRC detection.

gastroenterology & hepatology,surgery
Adherence to Screening Colonoscopy and Its Influencing Factors in China: a Multicentre Population-Based Cross-Sectional Study

Hong-Da Chen,Ni Li,Jian-Song Ren,Yue-Ming Zhang,Shuang-Mei Zou,Zhao-Xu Zheng,Ju-Fang Shi,Kai Zhang,Jie He,Min Dai

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(17)33160-4

2017-01-01

Abstract:BackgroundScreening for colorectal cancer is effective in reducing the burden of this disease. The measure of adherence is crucial in determining the magnitude of the health impact of screening for colorectal cancer at a population level. We aimed to assess adherence of screening colonoscopy and its influencing factors in a population-based programme of colorectal cancer screening in China.MethodsThis study was done under the framework of Screening Program in Urban China supported by the central government of China. Urban permanent residents of aged 40–69 years were defined as the eligible population for the cancer screening programme. Eligible participants were invited to fill an epidemiological questionnaire survey for assessment of cancer risk based on Harvard Cancer Risk Index, and those who were assessed to be at high risk of colorectal cancer were recommended to take a screening colonoscopy. We collected detailed questionnaires and colonoscopy reports. For this analysis, we used research data for 2012–14. We applied logistic regression to identify potential factors associated with the adherence to screening colonoscopy. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the Cancer Hospital of Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences. Written informed consent was obtained from each participant in the study.FindingsOverall, 97 445 participants were assessed to be potentially at high risk of colorectal cancer in 2012–14. 14 949 (15·3%) of the high-risk population followed the recommendation of undertaking screening colonoscopy. Adherence rates varied greatly across the 12 participating provinces, ranging from 7·9% to 26·2%. We noted a significantly higher adherence rate in 2013–14 (17·0%, 9766 of 57 280 participants) than in 2012–13 (12·9%, 5183 of 40 165 participants). After adjusting potential confounding factors, past positive result of fecal occult blood test (odd ratio 1·40, 95% CI 1·31–1·49), previous polyp detection (1·44, 1·38–1·50), inflammatory bowel disease (1·63, 1·56–1·69), and family history of colorectal cancer (1·59, 1·53–1·66) were found to be associated with the adherence to screening colonoscopy.InterpretationThe adherence rate of screening colonoscopy is low in a population-based screening programme in China. Adoption of effective primary screening modalities to precisely identify high-risk population and carrying out health promotion campaigns would be necessary to improve the adherence to screening colonoscopy in China.FundingThe National Health and Family Plan Committee of China.
Challenges of Surveillance in Implementing Nonoperative Management for Rectal Cancer

Bailey K. Hilty Chu,Anthony Loria,Totadri Dhimal,Xueya Cai,Shan Gao,Yue Li,Larissa K. Temple,Fernando Colugnati,Paula Cupertino,Erika E. Ramsdale,Fergal J. Fleming

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.48682

2024-12-05

JAMA Network Open

Abstract:This cohort study examines adherence rates to National Comprehensive Cancer Network–recommended surveillance in patients undergoing nonoperative management for rectal cancer.

medicine, general & internal
Cancer Biology or Ineffective Surveillance? A Multicentre Retrospective Analysis of Colitis-Associated Post-Colonoscopy Colorectal Cancers

Misha Kabir,Siwan Thomas-Gibson,Ahmir Ahmad,Rawen Kader,Lulia Al-Hillawi,Joshua Mcguire,Lewis David,Krishna Shah,Rohit Rao,Roser Vega,James E East,Omar D Faiz,Ailsa L Hart,Ana Wilson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjad189

2024-05-31

Abstract:Background and aims: Inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] is associated with high rates of post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer [PCCRC], but further in-depth qualitative analyses are required to determine whether they result from inadequate surveillance or aggressive IBD cancer evolution. Methods: All IBD patients who had a colorectal cancer [CRC] diagnosed between January 2015 and July 2019 and a recent [<4 years] surveillance colonoscopy at one of four English hospital trusts underwent root cause analyses as recommended by the World Endoscopy Organisation to identify plausible PCCRC causative factors. Results: In total, 61% [n = 22/36] of the included IBD CRCs were PCCRCs. They developed in patients with high cancer risk factors [77.8%; n = 28/36] requiring annual surveillance, yet 57.1% [n = 20/35] had inappropriately delayed surveillance. Most PCCRCs developed in situations where [i] an endoscopically unresectable lesion was detected [40.9%; n = 9/22], [ii] there was a deviation from the planned management pathway [40.9%; n = 9/22], such as service-, clinician- or patient-related delays in acting on a detected lesion, or [iii] lesions were potentially missed as they were typically located within areas of active inflammation or post-inflammatory change [36.4%; n = 8/22]. Conclusions: IBD PCCRC prevention will require more proactive strategies to reduce endoscopic inflammatory burden, and to improve lesion optical characterization, adherence to recommended surveillance intervals, and patient acceptance of prophylactic colectomy. However, the significant proportion appearing to originate from non-adenomatous-looking mucosa which fail to yield neoplasia on biopsy yet display aggressive cancer evolution highlights the limitations of current surveillance. Emerging molecular biomarkers may play a role in enhancing cancer risk stratification in future clinical practice.
Patient-controlled sedation using propofol during interventional neuroradiologic procedures.

I. Herrick,A. Gelb,P. Tseng,J. Kirkby

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00008506-199707000-00007

1997-07-01

Journal of Neurosurgical Anesthesiology

Abstract:Patient-controlled sedation (PCS) using propofol has been reported to provide safe and effective sedation during a variety of procedures performed under regional or local anesthesia. In a prospective, randomized fashion, this study evaluated propofol PCS compared to anesthesiologist-administered midazolam-fentanyl sedation during interventional neuroradiologic (INR) procedures. Nineteen patients undergoing 24 INR procedures received propofol PCS (PCS dose, 0.5 mg/kg; lockout interval, 3 min) or anesthesiologist-administered midazolam-fentanyl sedation. Study parameters included discomfort, sedation and anxiety visual analogue scores (VAS), cognitive function, patient satisfaction, and complications. No difference was found between the two sedation techniques with respect to the levels of sedation and anxiolysis. Cognitive function was well preserved in both groups. Patient satisfaction was similarly high in both groups. Complications were similar between groups. These included ventilatory depression (two patients in each group) and excessive sedation (two patients in each group). Three patients in the propofol group became excessively restless, resulting in brief interruptions during the respective procedures. Propofol PCS offers a safe sedation technique during INR procedures with a sedation and anxiolysis profile that was not distinguishable from anesthesiologist-administered midazolam-fentanyl sedation.
Predicting the Risk of Recurrent Adenoma and Incident Colorectal Cancer Based on Findings of the Baseline Colonoscopy

Kimberly J Fairley,Jinhong Li,Michael Komar,Nancy Steigerwalt,Porat Erlich

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ctg.2014.11

2014-12-01

Clinical and Translational Gastroenterology

Abstract:OBJECTIVES: The decision tree underlying current practice guidelines for post polypectomy surveillance relies on risk stratification based on predictive attributes gleaned from adenomas removed on screening colonoscopy examination. Our primary aim was to estimate the magnitude of association between baseline adenoma attributes and the risk of adenoma recurrence and invasive colorectal adenocarcinoma (CRC). Our secondary aims were to estimate the adenoma detection rate (ADR) of surveillance compared with screening colonoscopies and describe time trends in preventive colonoscopy utilization.METHODS: We used prospective analyses of retrospectively collected clinical data from electronic health records. A cohort of primary care patients eligible for colorectal cancer screening was assembled encompassing 110,452 subjects, of which 3,300 had adenomas removed on screening examination. Of those patients who had a follow-up surveillance colonoscopy (defined as a patient with a documented adenoma on prior colonoscopy) recorded during the study period, 537 had a recurrent adenoma.RESULTS: Of those recurrent adenomas, 354 had a high-risk attributes. High-risk attributes were described at >3 adenomas, at least one adenoma >10 mm in size, high-grade dysplasia, or villous features. The risk of developing invasive CRC among post polypectomy patients was significantly higher if the baseline adenomas displayed any of the following attributes: more numerous than 3 (4.3-fold higher risk, 95% confidence interval (CI) low, high 1.4, 12.9), larger than 10 mm in size (5.2-fold higher risk, 95% CI low, high 1.8, 15.1), high-grade dysplasia (13.2-fold risk, 95% CI low, high 2.8, 62.1), or villous features (7.4-fold higher risk, 95% CI low, high 2.5, 21.5). These attributes combined added a net value of 22.8% to the probability of correctly predicting CRC. There was a threefold increase in surveillance utilization relative to screening from 2005 to 2011. The ADR of surveillance (34.1%) was 1.5-fold higher than that of screening (23.1%).CONCLUSIONS: These results emphasize the need to mitigate excessive risk by performing timely surveillance colonoscopies in patients with baseline adenomas displaying high-risk attributes as recommended in practice guidelines.

gastroenterology & hepatology

[Character disorders in a physically mistreated child].

Postoperative Surveillance Adherence in Colorectal Cancer Patients at Urban Medical Center: is it Adequate?

Clinician perceptions on barriers and facilitators to 1‐year surveillance colonoscopy completion in survivors of colorectal cancer

S476 Adherence to Surveillance Colonoscopy and Associated Factors: A Systematic Review

Adherence to post-polypectomy surveillance guidelines: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Randomized trial of patient outreach approaches to de-implement outdated colonoscopy surveillance intervals.

A Global View of Adherence to Colonoscopy Follow-Up in Cascade Screening of Colorectal Cancer.

Adherence to Colonoscopy in Cascade Screening of Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis

Retrospective analysis of osteoradionecrosis of the mandible: proposing a novel clinical classification and staging system.

Evolving concepts of reflux: the ups and downs of the LES.

Performance of Initial Screening Tests for Colorectal Cancer and Subsequent Adherence to Colonoscopy: An Ecological Study

Post-polypectomy follow-up recommendations by practicing academic gastroenterologists—does number of years in practice matter?

Factors associated with adherence to colonoscopy among individuals who were positive in the preliminary screening for colorectal neoplasms

S368 Rates of Guideline-Directed, Post-Treatment Surveillance Colonoscopy in Early- and Late-Onset Colorectal Cancer Patients

Post-polypectomy Guideline Adherence: Importance of Belief in Guidelines, Not Guideline Knowledge or Fear of Missed Cancer

Post-polypectomy surveillance interval and advanced neoplasia detection rates: a multicenter, retrospective cohort study

Adherence to Screening Colonoscopy and Its Influencing Factors in China: a Multicentre Population-Based Cross-Sectional Study

Challenges of Surveillance in Implementing Nonoperative Management for Rectal Cancer

Cancer Biology or Ineffective Surveillance? A Multicentre Retrospective Analysis of Colitis-Associated Post-Colonoscopy Colorectal Cancers

Patient-controlled sedation using propofol during interventional neuroradiologic procedures.

Predicting the Risk of Recurrent Adenoma and Incident Colorectal Cancer Based on Findings of the Baseline Colonoscopy