| A comparison of optical colonoscopy and CT colonography screening strategies in the detection and recovery of subcentimeter adenomas. | |
| | |
MedLine Citation:
|
PMID: 20842111 Owner: NLM Status: MEDLINE |
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
|
OBJECTIVES: Evidence has shown that computerized tomographic colonography (CTC) and optical colonoscopy (OC) can detect advanced adenomas at an equal rate; however, a comparison of the subcentimeter adenoma detection has not been performed. The objective of this study is to compare CTC and OC screening programs, with a focus on the detection and recovery of subcentimeter adenomas. METHODS: In all, 1,700 screening OC examinations in average-risk patients were compared with 1,307 CTC examinations in similar patients drawn from the same referral pool completed in 2006-2008. The detection rate for adenomas ≤ 5 mm, 6-9 mm, and <10 mm with advanced histology were compared. RESULTS: In the OC group, 23.2% of patients had at least one adenoma removed; in the CTC screening group, 5.9% of patients had at least one adenoma detected and removed, P<0.001. There were significantly more ≤ 5 mm adenomas (detection rate 0.22, 378/1,700) detected by OC than by CTC (detection rate 0.04, 56/1,307), P<0.001. There were significantly more adenomas 6-9 mm (detection rate 0.12, 204/1,700) detected by OC than by CTC (detection rate 0.05, 67/1,307), with 70 patients with polyps of unknown histology in CTC surveillance, P<0.001. The number of advanced lesions <10 mm detected by OC (15/1,700) compared with CTC (4/1,307) were not significantly different, P=0.06. In the OC group, 27.1% of patients had non-adenomatous polyps removed; in the CTC group, 4.1% of patients had non-adenomatous polyps removed, P<0.001. CONCLUSIONS: (i) An OC screening program detects and recovers a significant four and a half fold greater number of non-advanced adenomas compared with a CTC screening program. (ii) The primary difference between screening with OC and CTC is the recovery and management of the subcentimeter adenoma. |
| | |
Authors:
|
Mark Benson; Parul Dureja; Deepak Gopal; Mark Reichelderfer; Patrick R Pfau |
Publication Detail:
|
Type: Comparative Study; Journal Article Date: 2010-09-14 |
Journal Detail:
|
Title: The American journal of gastroenterology Volume: 105 ISSN: 1572-0241 ISO Abbreviation: Am. J. Gastroenterol. Publication Date: 2010 Dec |
Date Detail:
|
Created Date: 2010-12-06 Completed Date: 2011-01-19 Revised Date: - |
Medline Journal Info:
|
Nlm Unique ID: 0421030 Medline TA: Am J Gastroenterol Country: United States |
Other Details:
|
Languages: eng Pagination: 2578-85 Citation Subset: IM |
Affiliation:
|
Department of Medicine, Section of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Wisconsin Medical School, Madison, Wisconsin 53792-5124, USA. |
Export Citation:
|
APA/MLA Format Download EndNote Download BibTex |
| MeSH Terms | |
Descriptor/Qualifier:
|
Adenoma
/
diagnosis*,
pathology,
radiography,
surgery Cathartics / administration & dosage Chi-Square Distribution Colonic Polyps / diagnosis*, pathology, radiography, surgery Colonography, Computed Tomographic / methods* Colonoscopy / methods* Colorectal Neoplasms / diagnosis*, pathology, radiography, surgery Female Humans Male Mass Screening Middle Aged Retrospective Studies |
| Chemical | |
Reg. No./Substance:
|
0/Cathartics |
| Comments/Corrections | |
Comment In:
|
Am J Gastroenterol. 2010 Dec;105(12):2586-7
[PMID:
21131927
]
|
From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine
Previous Document: The gain in quality-adjusted life months by switching to esomeprazole in those with continued reflux...
Next Document: Wilms' tumour 1 can suppress hTERT gene expression and telomerase activity in clear cell renal cell ...