Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros








Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Eur J Cancer Prev ; 29(4): 294-302, 2020 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32543806

RESUMO

The adenoma detection rate (ADR) is the primary quality indicator for colonoscopies. The polyp detection rate (PDR) is available from administrative data and does not depend on histology verification. The correlation between PDR and ADR and the ADR/PDR conversion factor in preventive colonoscopies were evaluated. In the prospective study, asymptomatic individuals aged 45-75 years with preventive colonoscopy in 2012-2016 were included. Spearman's correlation coefficient was used to assess PDR/ADR for each endoscopist. Conversion factor predicting ADR from PDR was obtained by linear regression and subsequently compared with adenoma to polyp detection rate quotient. One thousand six hundred fourteen preventive colonoscopies performed by 16 endoscopists in 8 screening colonoscopy centres in the Czech Republic were analysed. Correlation between PDR and ADR in all preventive colonoscopies was high and statistically significant (Rs 0.82; P < 0.001). There was a strong correlation between PDR and ADR in men (Rs 0.74; P = 0.002) and in screening colonoscopies (Rs 0.85; P < 0.001). The conversion factor to convert ADR from PDR was 0.72 in all preventive colonoscopies, 0.76 in FOBT+ colonoscopies and 0.67 in screening colonoscopies. ADR may be replaced by PDR in the assessment of colonoscopy quality. The value of the conversion factor varies according to colonoscopy indication and gender of examined individuals; in this Czech study, it was 0.72 in all preventive colonoscopies. The minimum requested ADR of 25 % corresponds to a PDR of 35 %, when converted with the appropriate conversion factor.


Assuntos
Adenoma/epidemiologia , Pólipos do Colo/epidemiologia , Neoplasias Colorretais/epidemiologia , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/estatística & dados numéricos , Programas de Rastreamento/estatística & dados numéricos , Adenoma/diagnóstico , Adenoma/patologia , Adenoma/prevenção & controle , Demandas Administrativas em Assistência à Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Idoso , Colo/diagnóstico por imagem , Pólipos do Colo/diagnóstico , Pólipos do Colo/patologia , Colonoscopia/estatística & dados numéricos , Neoplasias Colorretais/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Colorretais/patologia , Neoplasias Colorretais/prevenção & controle , República Tcheca/epidemiologia , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/métodos , Feminino , Humanos , Mucosa Intestinal/diagnóstico por imagem , Mucosa Intestinal/patologia , Masculino , Programas de Rastreamento/métodos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Prospectivos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Medição de Risco/métodos , Medição de Risco/estatística & dados numéricos , Fatores Sexuais
2.
Gastroenterol Res Pract ; 2019: 5975438, 2019.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31565052

RESUMO

BACKROUND: Capsule colonoscopy might present an alternative to colonoscopy for colorectal neoplasia screening. AIM: To assess the accuracy of second-generation capsule colonoscopy (CCE2) for colorectal neoplasia detection compared with conventional colonoscopy (CC). METHODS: From 2011-2015, we performed a multicenter, prospective, cross-over study evaluating the use of CCE2 as a possible colorectal cancer (CRC) screening test based on the assessment of the method's characteristics (accuracy) and safety and patient acceptance of the routine. Enrolled participants fulfilled the CRC screening population criteria if they were asymptomatic, were older than 50, and had no personal or familial history of colorectal neoplasia. The primary outcome was accuracy for the detection of polyps ≥ 6 mm. Secondary outcomes were accuracy for all polyps, polyps ≥ 10 mm, adenomas ≥ 10 mm, and cancers, the quality of bowel cleansing, safety, and CCE2 acceptability by the screening population. RESULTS: A total of 236 individuals were examined; 11 patients (5%) were excluded. Therefore, 225 subjects (95%) were considered in the intention-to-screen (ITS) group. A total of 201 patients (89%) completed both examinations successfully (per protocol group). In the ITS group, polyps were diagnosed during CC in 114 subjects (51%); polyps ≥ 6 mm, polyps ≥ 10 mm, and adenomas ≥ 10 mm were diagnosed in 34 (15%), 16 (7%), and 11 (5%) patients, respectively. The sensitivity of CCE2 for polyps ≥ 6 mm, polyps ≥ 10 mm, and adenomas ≥ 10 mm was 79% (95% confidence interval (CI): 62-91%), 88% (95% CI: 62-98%), and 100% (95% CI: 72-100%), respectively. CONCLUSION: Second-generation capsule colonoscopy is a safe, noninvasive, and sensitive method for colorectal neoplasia detection although CC remains the preferred method for considerable proportion of subjects. CCE2 may therefore be accepted as the primary screening test for colorectal cancer screening.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA