Journal Mobile Options
Table of Contents
Vol. 76, No. 1, 2007
Issue release date: October 2007

Colorectal Cancer Screening by Colonoscopy – Current Issues

Kaminski M.F. · Regula J.
To view the fulltext, log in and/or choose pay-per-view option

Individual Users: Register with Karger Login Information

Please create your User ID & Password





Contact Information











I have read the Karger Terms and Conditions and agree.

To view the fulltext, please log in

To view the pdf, please log in

Abstract

Of all colorectal cancer screening methods, colonoscopy used as a primary screening tool is both the most promising and the most discussed in the current literature. Several countries have introduced colonoscopic screening on a national scale, but many issues still require further research. The practicality of using colonoscopic screening can be questionable given the huge target population, which requires a great increase in endoscopic resources. Limiting the target population by shifting the use of colonoscopy from low-risk to high-risk groups is a valid option. The quality of colonoscopy related to the individual colonoscopist’s skill has become a surprisingly considerable problem, and it is obvious that continuous quality improvement programs need to be established. The accuracy of detecting important colorectal lesions is also still influenced by the old problem of cleansing the large bowel, and further research would be welcome. Technological improvements in current endoscopic equipment will hopefully increase the diagnostic yield of colonoscopy and eventually strengthen its use in the setting of colorectal cancer screening.



Copyright / Drug Dosage

Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher or, in the case of photocopying, direct payment of a specified fee to the Copyright Clearance Center.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in goverment regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

References

  1. Tables by population, regions, and sex for Western Europe, Northern Europe, Southern Europe, Central and Eastern Europe (except Russian Federation), incidence expressed as number of cases, for males and females for colon and rectum as compared to other cancer sites: the Globocan 2004 database. Lyon, International Agency for Research on Cancer; http://www-dep.iarc.fr.
  2. Zauber AG, Winawer SJ, O’Brien MJ, Shi W, Bayuga S: Significant long term reduction in colorectal cancer mortality with colonoscopic polypectomy: findings of the National Polyp Study. Gastrointest Endosc 2007;65:AB268.
  3. Pox C, Schmiegel W, Classen M: Current status of screening colonoscopy in Europe and in the United States. Endoscopy 2007;39:168–173.
  4. Butruk E, Regula J, Polkowski M, Rupinski M, Przytulski K: National colorectal cancer screening programme in Poland. Endoscopy 2002;34:939–940.
  5. Regula J, Zagorowicz E, Butruk E: Implementation of a national colorectal cancer screening program. Curr Colorectal Cancer Rep 2006;2:25–29.

    External Resources

  6. Regula J, Rupinski M, Kraszewska E, et al: Colonoscopy in colorectal-cancer screening for detection of advanced neoplasia. N Engl J Med 2006;355:1863–1872.
  7. Imperiale TF, Wagner DR, Lin CY, Larkin GN, Rogge JD, Ransohoff DF: Risk of advanced proximal neoplasms in asymptomatic adults according to the distal colorectal findings. N Engl J Med 2000;343:169–174.
  8. Anderson LM, Pasha TM, Leighton JA: Endoscopic perforation of the colon: lessons from a 10-year study. Am J Gastroenterol 2000;95:3418–3422.
  9. Ko CW, Riffle S, Shapiro JA, et al: Incidence of minor complications and time lost from normal activities after screening or surveillance colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2007;65:648–656.
  10. Shah HA, Paszat LF, Saskin R, Stukel TA, Rabeneck L: Factors associated with incomplete colonoscopy: a population based study. Gastroenterology 2007;132:2297–2303.
  11. Singh G, Gerson LB, Wang H, et al: Screening colonoscopy, colorectal cancer and gender: an unfair deal for the fair sex? Gastroenterology 2007;132(suppl 1):81.
  12. Agrawal S, Bhupinderjit A, Bhutani MS, et al: Colorectal cancer in African Americans. Am J Gastroenterol 2005;100:515–523.
  13. Theuer CP, Wagner JL, Taylor TH, et al: Racial and ethnic colorectal cancer patterns affect the cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening in the United States. Gastroenterology 2001;120:848–856.
  14. Rex DK, Khan AM, Shah P, et al: Screening colonoscopy in asymptomatic averege-risk African Americans. Gastrointest Endosc 2000;51:524–527.
  15. Anderson JC, Atam R, Alpern Z, et al: Prevalence of colorectal neoplasia in smokers. Am J Gastroenterol 2003;98:2777–2783.
  16. Lieberman DA, Prindiville S, Weiss DG, Willett W: Risk factors for advanced colonic neoplasia and hyperplastic polyps. JAMA 2003;290:2959–2967.
  17. Latreille M, Anderson JC, Alpern Z, Martin CM, Hubbard-Els P: Smokers as a high risk group for colorectal cancer screening: what is the critical exposure level? Gastroenterology 2007;132(suppl 1):T2115.
  18. Anderson JC, Alpern Z, Gurvinder S, et al: Prevalence and risk of colorectal neoplasia in consumers of alcohol in screening population. Am J Gastroenterol 2005;100:2049–2055.
  19. Yoshida I, Suzuki A, Vallee M, et al: Serum insulin levels and the prevalence of adenomatous and hyperplastic polyps in the proximal colon. Clin Gastro Hepatol 2006;4:1225–1231.
  20. Chiu HM, Lin JT, Shun CT, Liang JT, Lee YC, Huang SP, Wu MS: Association of metabolic syndrome with proximal and synchronous colorectal neoplasm. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2007;5:221–229.
  21. Anderson JC, Messina CR, Dakhllalah F, et al: Body mass index: a marker for significant colorectal neoplasia in a screening population. J Clin Gastroenterol 2007;41:285–290.
  22. Betes M, Munoz-Navas MA, Duque J, et al: Use of colonoscopy as a primary screening test for colorectal cancer in average risk people. Am J Gastroenterol 2003;98:2648–2654.
  23. van Rijn JC, Reitsma JB, Stoker J, Bossuyt PM, van Deventer SJ, Dekker E: Polyp miss rate determined by tandem colonoscopy: a systematic review. Am J Gastroenterol 2006;101:343–350.
  24. Bressler B, Paszat LF, Chen Z, Rothwell DM, Vinden C, Rabeneck L: Rates of new or missed colorectal cancers after colonoscopy and their risk factors: a population based analysis. Gastroenterology 2007;132:96–102.
  25. Sanchez W, Harewood GC, Petersen BT: Evaluation of polyp detection in relation to procedure time of screening or surveillance colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2004;99:1941–1945.
  26. Chen S, Rex DK: Endoscopist is comparable to age and gender as predictor of adenomas at colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2005;100:S393.
  27. Lieberman D, Nadel M, Smith RA, et al: Standardized colonoscopy reporting and data system: report of the Quality Assurance Task Group of the National Colorectal Cancer Roundtable. Gastrointest Endosc 2007;65:757–766.
  28. Sharma VK, Coppola AG, Raufman JP: A survey of credentialing practices of gastrointestinal endoscopy centers in the United States. J Clin Gastroenterol 2005;39:501–507.
  29. Aslinia F, Uradomo L, Steele A, Greenwald BD, Raufman JP: Quality assessment of colonoscopic cecal intubation: an analysis of 6 years of continuous practice at a university hospital. Am J Gastroenterol 2006;101:721–731.
  30. Imperiali G, Minoli G, Meucci GM, et al: Effectiveness of a continuous quality improvement program on colonoscopy practice. Endoscopy 2007;39:314–318.
  31. Barclay RL, Vicari JJ, Doughty AS, Johanson JF, Greenlaw RL: Colonoscopic withdrawal times and adenoma detection during screening colonoscopy. N Engl J Med 2006;355:2533–2541.
  32. De Groen PC, Tavanapong W, Oh J, Wong J: Computer-aided quality control for colonoscopy: automatic documentation of cecal intubation. Gastrointest Endosc 2007;65:AB354.
  33. Froehlich F, Wietlisbach V, Gonvers JJ, et al: Impact of colonic cleansing on quality and diagnostic yield of colonoscopy: The European panel of appropriateness of gastrointestinal endoscopy European multicenter study. Gastrointest Endosc 2005;61:378–384.
  34. Ness RM, Manam R, Hoen H, Chalasani N: Predictors of inadequate bowel preparation for colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2001;96:1797–1782.
  35. Rex DK, Imperiale TF, Latinovich DR, et al: Impact of bowel preparation on efficiency and cost of colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2002;97:1696–1700.
  36. Huppertz-Hauss G, Bretthauer M, Sauar J, et al: Polyethylene glycol versus sodium phosphate in bowel cleansing for colonoscopy: a randomized trial. Endoscopy 2005;37:537–541.
  37. Kastenberg D, Barish C, Burack H, et al: Tolerability and patient acceptance of sodium phosphate tablets compared with 4-L PEG solution in colon cleansing combined results of 2 identically designed, randomized, controlled, parallel group, multicenter phase 3 trials. J Clin Gastroenterol 2007;41:54–61.
  38. Chiu HM, Lin JT, Wang HP, Lee YCh, Wu MS: The impact of colon preparation timing on colonoscopic detection of colorectal neoplasms – a prospective endoscopist-blinded randomized trial. Am J Gastroenterol 2006;101:2719–2725.
  39. Matsushita M, Hajiro K, Okazaki K, Takakuwa H, Tominaga M: Efficacy of total colonoscopy with transparent cap in comparison with colonoscopy without cap. Endoscopy 1998;30:444–447.
  40. Kondo S, Yamaji Y, Watabe H, et al: A randomized controlled trial valuating the usefulness of a transparent hood attached to the tip of the colonoscope. Am J Gastroenterol 2007;102:75–81.
  41. Rex DK, Chadalawada V, Helper DJ: Wide angle colonoscopy with a prototype instrument: impact on miss rates and efficiency as determined by back-to-back colonoscopies. Am J Gastroenterol 2003;98:2000–2005.
  42. Deenadayalu VP, ChadalawadaV, Rex DK: 170 grades wide-angle colonoscope: effect on efficiency and miss rates. Am J Gastroenterol 2004;99:2138–2142.
  43. Triadafilopoulos G, Watts HD, Higgins J, Van Dam J: A novel retrograde-viewing auxiliary imaging device (Third Eye Retroscope) improves the detection of simulated polyps in anatomic models of the colon. Gastrointest Endosc 2007;65:139–144.
  44. Le Rhun M, Coron E, Parlier D, et al: High resolution colonoscopy with chromoscopy versus standard colonoscopy for the detection of colonic neoplasia: a randomized study. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2006;4:349–354.
  45. Johanson JF: Practicality of high-resolution chromoendoscopy during routine screening colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2006;63:829–830.
  46. Su MY, Hsu ChM, Ho YP, Chen PCh, Lin ChJ, Chiu ChT: Comparative study of conventional colonoscopy, chromoendoscopy, and narrow-band imaging systems in differential diagnosis of neoplastic and nonneoplastic colonic polyps. Am J Gastroenterol 2006;101:2711–2716.
  47. Machida H, Sano Y, Hamamoto Y, et al: Narrow-band imaging in the diagnosis of colorectal mucosal lesions: a pilot study. Endoscopy 2004;36:1094–1098.
  48. Chiu HM, Chang CY, Chen CC, et al: A prospective comparative study of narrow-band imaging, chromoendoscopy, and conventional colonoscopy in the diagnosis of colorectal neoplasia. Gut 2007;56:373–379.
  49. East JE, Suzuki N, Stavrinidis M, Palmer N, Guenther P, Saunders BP: Narrow band imaging improves adenoma detection in patients at high risk for adenomas: a randomised trial. Gastrointest Endosc 2007;65:AB95.


Pay-per-View Options
Direct payment This item at the regular price: USD 38.00
Payment from account With a Karger Pay-per-View account (down payment USD 150) you profit from a special rate for this and other single items.
This item at the discounted price: USD 26.50