112 102

Cited 0 times in

Clinical Practice of Surveillance Colonoscopy according to the Classification of Colorectal Intraepithelial Neoplasia in Korea: High-grade Dysplasia/Carcinoma In Situ Versus Intramucosal Carcinoma

Authors
 Sung Pil Hong  ;  Tae Il Kim  ;  Hyun Gun Kim  ;  Hyun-Soo Kim  ;  Seong-Eun Kim  ;  Kyu Chan Huh  ;  Jeong Eun Shin  ;  Jae Myung Cha  ;  Suck-Ho Lee 
Citation
 INTESTINAL RESEARCH, Vol.11(4) : 276-282, 2013 
Journal Title
 INTESTINAL RESEARCH 
ISSN
 1598-9100 
Issue Date
2013
Keywords
Colonoscopy ; Colonic polyps ; Carcinoma in situ
Abstract
Background/Aims : Recent guidelines strongly recommend that the interval of surveillance colonoscopy be determined according to the risk stratification obtained at index colonoscopy. However, because of the differences in perception of the classification of colorectal intraepithelial neoplasia between Asian and Western countries, there is some confusion about surveillance colonoscopy. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the clinicopathological characteristics and the interval of surveillance colonoscopy between patients with high-grade dysplasia/carcinoma in situ and those with intramucosal carcinoma. Methods : From January 2003 to June 2010, 727 patients were included from 8 tertiary centers. Four hundred fifteen patients (57.1%) had high-grade dysplasia/carcinoma in situ (group A), and 312 (43.9%) had intramucosal carcinoma (group B). Clinicopathological data were reviewed retrospectively. Results : Group A had a significantly more frequent family history of colorectal cancer (3.1% vs. 0.6%, P<0.001), smaller polyp size (12 mm vs. 15 mm, P=0.001), and more proximal location (31.1% vs. 21.8%, P=0.005) than did group B. Among 727 patients, surveillance colonoscopy was performed within 6 months in 55.8% of patients and within 12 months in 77.8%. Group B had a significantly shorter interval of surveillance colonoscopy than did group A (P<0.001). There was no difference in detection of advanced neoplasia at surveillance colonoscopy between the 2 groups (6.6% vs. 5.4%, P=0.638). Conclusions : The recommended interval of surveillance colonoscopy is not followed in Korea. More education about post-polypectomy surveillance guidelines is required.
Files in This Item:
T201306104.pdf Download
DOI
10.5217/ir.2013.11.4.276
Appears in Collections:
1. College of Medicine (의과대학) > Dept. of Internal Medicine (내과학교실) > 1. Journal Papers
Yonsei Authors
Kim, Tae Il(김태일) ORCID logo https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4807-890X
Hong, Sung Pil(홍성필)
URI
https://ir.ymlib.yonsei.ac.kr/handle/22282913/158430
사서에게 알리기
  feedback

qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Browse

Links