The Korean guideline for colorectal cancer screening

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer in Korea; it is the second most common cancer in men and the third most common in women. The incidence rate in Korea has continuously increased since 1999 when the National Cancer Registry statistics began. Currently; there are several screening modalities; that have been recommended by expert societies, including fecal occult blood test, colonoscopy, computed tomographic colonography The annual fecal immunochemical test (FIT) has been used in adults aged 50 and older as part of the National Cancer Screening Program in Korea since 2004. Although several study results from regional or national colorectal cancer screening programs in other countries have been reported, the National Cancer Screening Program in Korea has not yet been evaluated with evidence-based methods. Herein report the consensus statements on the National Screening Guideline for colorectal cancer developed by a multi-society expert committee in Korea, as follows: 1) We recommend annual or biennial FIT for screening for colorectal cancer in asymptomatic adults, beginning at 45 years of age and continuing until 80 years (recommendation B). 2) There is no evidence for the risks or benefits of FIT in adults older than 80 years (recommendation I). 3) Selective use of colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening is recommended, taking into consideration individual preference and the risk of colorectal cancer (recommendation C). 4) There is no evidence for the risks or benefits of double-contrast barium enema for colorectal cancer screening in asymptomatic adults (recommendation I). 5) There is no evidence for the risks or benefits of computed tomographic colonography for colorectal cancer screening in asymptomatic adults (recommendation I).

Biofeedback Therapy Before Ileostomy Closure in Patients Undergoing Sphincter-Saving Surgery for Rectal Cancer: A Pilot Study

PURPOSE: This study prospectively investigated the effects of biofeedback therapy on objective anorectal function and subjective bowel function in patients after sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer. METHODS: Sixteen patients who underwent an ileostomy were randomized into two groups, one receiving conservative management with the Kegel maneuver and the other receiving active biofeedback before ileostomy closure. Among them, 12 patients (mean age, 57.5 years; range, 38 to 69 years; 6 patients in each group) completed the study. Conservative management included lifestyle modifications, Kegel exercises, and medication. Patients were evaluated at baseline and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after ileostomy closure by using anal manometry, modified Wexner Incontinence Scores (WISs), and fecal incontinence quality of life (FI-QoL) scores. RESULTS: Before the ileostomy closure, the groups did not differ in baseline clinical characteristics or resting manometric parameters. After 12 months of follow-up, the biofeedback group demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in the mean maximum squeezing pressure (from 146.3 to 178.9, P = 0.002). However, no beneficial effect on the WIS was noted for biofeedback compared to conservative management alone. Overall, the FI-QoL scores were increased significantly in both groups after ileostomy closure (P = 0.006), but did not differ significantly between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Although the biofeedback therapy group demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in the maximum squeezing pressure, significant improvements in the WISs and the FI-QoL scores over time were noted in both groups. The study was terminated early because no therapeutic benefit of biofeedback had been demonstrated.