In this randomized trial involving 84,585 participants in Poland, Norway, and Sweden, the risk of colorectal cancer at 10 years was lower among those invited to undergo screening colonoscopy than ...among those assigned to no screening.
Colorectal Cancer Screening Garborg, Kjetil
The Surgical clinics of North America,
10/2015, Letnik:
95, Številka:
5
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of cancer morbidity and mortality in the Western world. Advances in surgical and medical management have led to improved outcomes; however, the prognosis of ...CRC is often poor when detected at a symptomatic stage. Most cases of CRC develop over years from removable well-defined precursor lesions, and asymptomatic, curable disease may be detected by convenient noninvasive tests. These features make CRC a suitable candidate for screening, and several options are available. This article outlines the evidence for established CRC screening tests along with a discussion on newer tests and ongoing research.
Abstract
The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and United European Gastroenterology present a short list of key performance measures for lower gastrointestinal endoscopy. We recommend ...that endoscopy services across Europe adopt the following seven key performance measures for lower gastrointestinal endoscopy for measurement and evaluation in daily practice at a center and endoscopist level:
1
Rate of adequate bowel preparation (minimum standard 90 %);
2
Cecal intubation rate (minimum standard 90 %);
3
Adenoma detection rate (minimum standard 25 %);
4
Appropriate polypectomy technique (minimum standard 80 %);
5
Complication rate (minimum standard not set);
6
Patient experience (minimum standard not set);
7
Appropriate post-polypectomy surveillance recommendations (minimum standard not set).
Other identified performance measures have been listed as less relevant based on an assessment of their importance, scientific acceptability, feasibility, usability, and comparison to competing measures.
Clostridium difficile
is the leading cause of nosocomial infectious diarrhea. New treatment strategies are needed. In this letter, preliminary data on fecal therapy as primary treatment are assessed.
The effectiveness of screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) by sex and age in randomized trials is uncertain.
To evaluate the 15-year effect of sigmoidoscopy screening on CRC incidence and mortality.
...Pooled analysis of 4 large-scale randomized trials of sigmoidoscopy screening.
Norway, the United States, the United Kingdom, and Italy.
Women and men aged 55 to 64 years at enrollment.
Sigmoidoscopy screening.
Primary end points were cumulative incidence rate ratio (IRR) and mortality rate ratio (MRR) and rate differences after 15 years of follow-up comparing screening versus usual care in intention-to-treat analyses. Stratified analyses were done by sex, cancer site, and age at screening.
Analyses comprised 274 952 persons (50.7% women), 137 493 in the screening and 137 459 in the usual care group. Screening attendance was 58% to 84%. After 15 years, the rate difference for CRC incidence was 0.51 cases (95% CI, 0.40 to 0.63 cases) per 100 persons and the IRR was 0.79 (CI, 0.75 to 0.83). The rate difference for CRC mortality was 0.13 deaths (CI, 0.07 to 0.19 deaths) per 100 persons, and the MRR was 0.80 (CI, 0.72 to 0.88). Women had less benefit from screening than men for CRC incidence (IRR for women, 0.84 CI, 0.77 to 0.91; IRR for men, 0.75 CI, 0.70 to 0.81;
= 0.032 for difference) and mortality (MRR for women, 0.91 CI, 0.77 to 1.17; MRR for men, 0.73 CI, 0.64 to 0.83;
= 0.025 for difference). There was no statistically significant difference in screening effect between persons aged 55 to 59 years and those aged 60 to 64 years.
Data from the U.K. trial were less granular because of privacy regulations.
This pooled analysis of all large randomized trials of sigmoidoscopy screening demonstrates a significant and sustained effect of sigmoidoscopy on CRC incidence and mortality for 15 years.
Health Fund of South-East Norway.
ObjectiveHigh-quality colonoscopy (adequate bowel preparation, whole-colon visualisation and removal of all neoplastic polyps) is a prerequisite to start polyp surveillance, and is ideally achieved ...in one colonoscopy. In a large multinational polyp surveillance trial, we aimed to investigate clinical practice variation in number of colonoscopies needed to enrol patients with low-risk and high-risk adenomas in polyp surveillance.DesignWe retrieved data of all patients with low-risk adenomas (one or two tubular adenomas <10 mm with low-grade dysplasia) and high-risk adenomas (3–10 adenomas, ≥1 adenoma ≥10 mm, high-grade dysplasia or villous components) in the European Polyp Surveillance trials fulfilling certain logistic and methodologic criteria. We analysed variations in number of colonoscopies needed to achieve high-quality colonoscopy and enter polyp surveillance by endoscopy centre, and by endoscopists who enrolled ≥30 patients.ResultsThe study comprised 15 581 patients from 38 endoscopy centres in five European countries; 6794 patients had low-risk and 8787 had high-risk adenomas. 961 patients (6.2%, 95% CI 5.8% to 6.6%) underwent two or more colonoscopies before surveillance began; 101 (1.5%, 95% CI 1.2% to 1.8%) in the low-risk group and 860 (9.8%, 95% CI 9.2% to 10.4%) in the high-risk group. Main reasons were poor bowel preparation (21.3%) or incomplete colonoscopy/polypectomy (14.4%) or planned second procedure (27.8%). Need of repeat colonoscopy varied between study centres ranging from 0% to 11.8% in low-risk adenoma patients and from 0% to 63.9% in high-risk adenoma patients. On the second colonoscopy, the two most common reasons for a repeat (third) colonoscopy were piecemeal resection (26.5%) and unspecified reason (23.9%).ConclusionThere is considerable practice variation in the number of colonoscopies performed to achieve complete polyp removal, indicating need for targeted quality improvement to reduce patient burden.Trial registration number NCT02319928.
Faecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) is an emerging treatment modality, but its current clinical use and organisation are unknown. We aimed to describe the clinical use, conduct, and potential for ...FMT in Europe.
We invited all hospital-based FMT centres within the European Council member states to answer a web-based questionnaire covering their clinical activities, organisation, and regulation of FMT in 2019. Responders were identified from trials registered at clinicaltrials.gov and from the United European Gastroenterology (UEG) working group for stool banking and FMT.
In 2019, 31 FMT centres from 17 countries reported a total of 1,874 (median 25, quartile 10–64) FMT procedures; 1,077 (57%) with Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) as indication, 791 (42%) with experimental indications, and 6 (0•3%) unaccounted for. Adjusted to population size, 0•257 per 100,000 population received FMT for CDI and 0•189 per 100,000 population for experimental indications. With estimated 12,400 (6,100–28,500) annual cases of multiple, recurrent CDI and indication for FMT in Europe, the current European FMT activity covers approximately 10% of the patients with indication. The participating centres demonstrated high safety standards and adherence to international consensus guidelines. Formal or informal regulation from health authorities was present at 21 (68%) centres.
FMT is a widespread routine treatment for multiple, recurrent CDI and an experimental treatment. Embedded within hospital settings, FMT centres operate with high standards across Europe to provide safe FMT. A significant gap in FMT coverage suggests the need to raise clinical awareness and increase the FMT activity in Europe by at least 10-fold to meet the true, indicated need.
NordForsk under the Nordic Council and Innovation Fund Denmark (j.no. 8056–00006B).
The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and United European Gastroenterology present a short list of key performance measures for lower gastrointestinal endoscopy. We recommend that ...endoscopy services across Europe adopt the following seven key performance measures for lower gastrointestinal endoscopy for measurement and evaluation in daily practice at a center and endoscopist level: 1 rate of adequate bowel preparation (minimum standard 90%); 2 cecal intubation rate (minimum standard 90%); 3 adenoma detection rate (minimum standard 25%); 4 appropriate polypectomy technique (minimum standard 80%); 5 complication rate (minimum standard not set); 6 patient experience (minimum standard not set); 7 appropriate post-polypectomy surveillance recommendations (minimum standard not set). Other identified performance measures have been listed as less relevant based on an assessment of their importance, scientific acceptability, feasibility, usability, and comparison to competing measures.
PDF
