Journals / Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences / 2017 / Cilt: 47 - Sayı: 5

Role of baseline adenoma characteristics for adenoma recurrencein patients with high-risk adenoma

Pages
1416–1424
Publication Date
2022-11-05
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Conclusion: Baseline adenoma characteristics were not associated with the recurrence of adenomas or advanced adenomas in patients with high-risk adenoma.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Background/aim: The present observational study aimed to determine the predictive value of 3-year recurrence adenoma characteristics at baseline conventional colonoscopy in patients with high-risk adenoma.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Materials and methods: A total of 47 patients with high-risk adenoma at baseline colonoscopy were followed up and underwent a surveillance colonoscopy at 3 years.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: Baseline adenoma characteristics were not associated with the recurrence of adenomas or advanced adenomas in patients with high-risk adenoma.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Background/aim: The present observational study aimed to determine the predictive value of 3-year recurrence adenoma characteristics at baseline conventional colonoscopy in patients with high-risk adenoma. Materials and methods: A total of 47 patients with high-risk adenoma at baseline colonoscopy were followed up and underwent a surveillance colonoscopy at 3 years. Correlations between adenoma recurrence and baseline adenoma characteristics (size, number, histological features, and location) were analyzed. Results: Among 135 patients with high-risk adenoma, 47 patients (35%) who underwent surveillance colonoscopy at 3 years following baseline colonoscopy were included in the study. In these 47 patients, at least one new adenoma was detected in 19 (40.4%) patients, and new advanced adenomas were detected in 5 (10.6%) patients during the surveillance colonoscopy. No significant difference was found in patients who had adenoma recurrence versus those who did not in terms of size of adenomas (P = 0.143), number of adenomas (P = 0.562), histological properties of adenomas (P = 0.658), or locations of adenomas (P = 0.567). Conclusion: Baseline adenoma characteristics were not associated with the recurrence of adenomas or advanced adenomas in patients with high-risk adenoma.

🔖

Cite This Article

YÜREKLİ, Ö. T., ERSOY, O., KÖSEOĞLU, H., AKIN, F. E., Tevfik, S., BÜYÜKAŞIK, N. Ş., BOLAT, A. D., SARI, S. Ö. (2022). Role of baseline adenoma characteristics for adenoma recurrencein patients with high-risk adenoma. Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences, Cilt: 47 - Sayı: 5, 1416–1424. https://ajindex.com/articles/610608

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Jemal A, Bray F, Center MM, Ferlay J, Ward E, Forman D. Global cancer statistics. CA-Cancer J Clin 2011; 61: 69-90
  2. Qaseem A, Denberg TD, Hopkins RH Jr, Humphrey LL, Levine J, Sweet DE, Shekelle P. Screening for colorectal cancer: a guidance statement from the American College of Physicians. Ann Intern Med 2012; 156: 378-386
  3. Pendergrass CJ, Edelstein DL, Hylind LM, Phillips BT, Iacobuzio-Donahue C, Romans K, Griffin CA, Cruz-Correa M, Tersmette AC, Offerhaus GJ et al. Occurrence of colorectal adenomas in younger adults: an epidemiologic necropsy study. Clin Gastroenterol H 2008; 6: 1011-1015
  4. Lee CS, Ronan L, O’Morain C, McNamara D. Screening for colorectal cancer: what fits best? Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2012; 6: 301-312
  5. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Vital signs: colorectal cancer screening, incidence, and mortality-United States, 2002-2010. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2011; 60: 884-889
  6. Lieberman DA, Rex DK, Winawer SJ, Giardiello FM, Johnson DA, Levin TR. Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after screening and polypectomy: a consensus update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Gastroenterology 2012; 143: 844-857
  7. Imperiale TF, Wagner DR, Lin CY, Larkin GN, Rogge JD, Ransohoff DF. Results of screening colonoscopy among persons 40 to 49 years of age. New Engl J Med 2002; 346: 1781- 1785
  8. Bond JH. Polyp guideline: diagnosis, treatment, and surveillance for patients with colorectal polyps; Practice Parameters Committee of the American College of Gastroenterology. Am J Gastroenterol 2000; 95: 3053-3063
  9. Fearnhead NS, Wilding JL, Bodmer WF. Genetics of colorectal cancer: hereditary aspects and overview of colorectal tumorigenesis. Brit Med Bull 2002; 64: 27-43
  10. Cummings OW. Pathology of the adenoma-carcinoma sequence: from aberrant crypt focus to invasive carcinoma. Semin Gastrointest Dis 2000; 11: 229-237
  11. Risio M. Reprint of: the natural history of adenomas. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 2010; 24: 397-406. 12. de Jonge V, Sint Nicolaas J, van Leerdam ME, Kuipers EJ, Veldhuyzen van Zanten SJ. Systematic literature review and pooled analyses of risk factors for finding adenomas at surveillance colonoscopy. Endoscopy 2011; 43: 560-572
  12. Martínez ME, Baron JA, Lieberman DA, Schatzkin A, Lanza E, Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Jiang R, Ahnen DJ, Bond JH et al. A pooled analysis of advanced colorectal neoplasia diagnoses after colonoscopic polypectomy. Gastroenterology 2009; 136: 832