Dealing with uncertainty: Surveillance colonoscopy after polypectomy

American Journal of Gastroenterology

Volumn 102, Issue 8, 2007, Pages 1745-1747

  Levin, Theodore R ^a  

^a KAISER PERMANENTE MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADENOMA; CANCER RISK; CLINICAL PRACTICE; COLON PERFORATION; COLONOSCOPY; COLORECTAL CANCER; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; PHYSICIAN ATTITUDE; POLYPECTOMY; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; POSTOPERATIVE HEMORRHAGE; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; RISK FACTOR; SCREENING TEST; SIGMOIDOSCOPY;

ADENOMA; ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; COLONIC NEOPLASMS; COLONIC POLYPS; COLONOSCOPY; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 34547640849     PISSN: 00029270     EISSN: 15720241     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2007.01222.x     Document Type: Review

References (16)

1. Expert says medical practice should be confined to areas with solid scientific basis. Gene Ther Wkly 1999 8 : 16 7.
2. Lieberman DA, Holub J, Eisen G, et al. Utilization of colonoscopy in the United States: Results from a national consortium. Gastrointest Endosc 2005 62 : 875 83.
3. Mysliwiec PA, Brown ML, Klabunde CN, et al. Are physicians doing too much colonoscopy? A national survey of colorectal surveillance after polypectomy. Ann Intern Med 2004 141 : 264 71.
4. Boolchand V, Olds G, Singh J, et al. Colorectal screening after polypectomy: A national survey study of primary care physicians. Ann Intern Med 2006 145 : 654 9.
5. Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Fletcher RH, et al. Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after polypectomy: A consensus update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer and the American Cancer Society. Gastroenterology 2006 130 : 1872 85.
6. Levin TR, Zhao W, Conell C, et al. Complications of colonoscopy in an integrated health care delivery system. Ann Intern Med 2006 145 : 880-6.
7. Ransohoff DF. Colon cancer screening in 2005: Status and challenges. Gastroenterology 2005 128 : 1685 95.
8. Saini SD, Nayak R, Bernard L, et al. Knowledge of colorectal polyp surveillance guidelines and current practices: Results of a national survey. Gastroenterology 2005 128 : A97.
9. Atkin WS, Morson BC, Cuzick J. Long-term risk of colorectal cancer after excision of rectosigmoid adenomas. N Engl J Med 1992 326 : 658 62.
10. Brenner H, Chang-Claude J, Seiler CM, et al. Case control study supports extension of surveillance interval after colonoscopic polypectomy to at least 5 years. Am J Gastroenterol 2007 102 : 1739 44.
11. Brenner H, Chang-Claude J, Seiler CM, et al. Does a negative screening colonoscopy ever need to be repeated? Gut 2006 55 : 1145 50.
12. Rex DK, Bond JH, Winawer S, et al. Quality in the technical performance of colonoscopy and the continuous quality improvement process for colonoscopy: Recommendations of the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Am J Gastroenterol 2002 97 : 1296 308.
13. Singh H, Turner D, Xue L, et al. Risk of developing colorectal cancer following a negative colonoscopy examination: Evidence for a 10-year interval between colonoscopies. JAMA 2006 295 : 2366 73.
14. Robertson DJ, Greenberg ER, Beach M, et al. Colorectal cancer in patients under close colonoscopic surveillance. Gastroenterology 2005 129 : 34 41.
15. 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 9.
16. Ghosh AK. On the challenges of using evidence-based information: The role of clinical uncertainty. J Lab Clin Med 2004 144 : 60 4.