What Is the Value of Computered Tomography Colonography in Patients Screening Positive for Fecal Occult Blood? A Systematic Review and Economic Evaluation

Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology

Volumn 5, Issue 12, 2007, Pages 1439-1446

  Walleser, Silke ^a   Griffiths, Alison ^a   Lord, Sarah J ^a   Howard, Kirsten ^b   Solomon, Michael J ^a   Gebski, Val ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; COLONOSCOPY; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC COLONOGRAPHY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; ECONOMIC EVALUATION; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; OCCULT BLOOD; SCREENING TEST; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW;

COLONOGRAPHY, COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC; COLORECTAL NEOPLASMS; CONFIDENCE INTERVALS; COSTS AND COST ANALYSIS; DIAGNOSIS, DIFFERENTIAL; HUMANS; MASS SCREENING; OCCULT BLOOD; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 36549005924     PISSN: 15423565     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2007.09.003     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Mulhall B.P., Veerappan G.R., Jackson J.L., et al. Meta-analysis: computed tomographic colonography. Ann Intern Med 142 (2005) 635-650
2. Halligan S., Altman D.G., Taylor S.A., et al. CT colonography in the detection of colorectal polyps and cancer: systematic review, meta-analysis, and proposed minimum data set for study level reporting. Radiology 237 (2005) 893-904
3. Winawer S., Fletcher R., Rex D., et al. Gastrointestinal Consortium. Colorectal cancer screening and surveillance: clinical guidelines and rationale-update based on new evidence. Gastroenterology 124 (2003) 544-560
4. Australian Cancer Network Colorectal Cancer Guidelines Revision Committee. Guidelines for the prevention, early detection and management of colorectal cancer. In: The Cancer Council Australia and Australian Cancer Network, ed. 2005.
5. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for colorectal cancer: recommendations and rationale. Ann Intern Med 137 (2002) 129-131
6. Canadian Task Force on Preventive HealthCare. Colorectal cancer screening recommendation statement from the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care. CMAJ 165 (2001) 206-208
7. Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing. National Bowel Cancer Screening Program. 2006.
8. National Health Service Cancer Screening Programmes. NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme. NHS Cancer Screening Programmes, 2006.
9. Hardcastle J.D., Chamberlain J.O., Robinson M.H., et al. Randomised controlled trial of faecal-occult-blood screening for colorectal cancer. Lancet 348 (1996) 1472-1477
10. Kewenter J., Bjork S., Haglind E., et al. Screening and rescreening for colorectal cancer. A controlled trial of fecal occult blood testing in 27,700 subjects. Cancer 62 (1988) 645-651
11. Kronborg O., Fenger C., Olsen J., et al. Randomised study of screening for colorectal cancer with faecal-occult-blood test. Lancet 348 (1996) 1467-1471
12. Mandel J.S., Bond J.H., Church T.R., et al. Reducing mortality from colorectal cancer by screening for fecal occult blood. Minnesota Colon Cancer Control Study. N Engl J Med 328 (1993) 1365-1371
13. Australian Government, Department of Health and Ageing. Australia's Bowel Cancer Screening Pilot and beyond-final evaluation report. In: Bowel Cancer Screening Pilot Monitoring and Evaluation Steering Committee, ed. 2005.
14. Australian Government, Department of Health and Ageing. Outcomes paper-workforce and quality issues in colonoscopy workshop, 5 April 2004. 2005.
15. Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN). Management of colorectal cancer. A national clinical guideline (2003), Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN), Edinburgh, Scotland
16. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE). Computed tomographic colonography (virtual colonoscopy)-interventional procedure guidance 129 (2005), National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE), London, UK
17. Medical Services Advisory Committee (MSAC). Computed tomography colonography. MSAC Application 1095. Assessment report (2006), Australian Department of Health and Ageing, Canberra
18. Whiting P., Rutjes A., Reitsma J., et al. The development of QUADAS: a tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol 3 (2003) 25
19. Zamora J., Muriel A., and Abraira V. Meta_DiSc for Windows: a software package for the meta-analysis of diagnostic tests (2004)
20. DerSimonian R., and Laird N. Meta-Analysis in Clinical Trials. Controlled Clinical Trials 7 (1986) 177-188
21. Egger M., Davey Smith G., et al. Systematic reviews in health care: meta-analysis in context (2001), BMJ Publishing Group, London
22. Medical Services Advisory Committee (MSAC). Faecal occult blood testing for population health screening. MSAC reference 18. Assessment report. Canberra: Australian Department of Health and Ageing.
23. Bond J.H. Polyp guideline: diagnosis, treatment, and surveillance for patients with nonfamilial colorectal polyps. The Practice Parameters Committee of the American College of Gastroenterology. Ann Intern Med 119 (1993) 836-843
24. Loeve F., Brown M.L., Boer R., et al. Endoscopic colorectal cancer screening: a cost-saving analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst 92 (2000) 557-563
25. McLeish J.A., Thursfield V.J., and Giles G.G. Survival from colorectal cancer in Victoria: 10-year follow up of the 1987 management survey. Aust N Z J Surg 72 (2002) 352-356
26. Cotton P.B., Durkalski V.L., Pineau B.C., et al. Computed tomographic colonography (virtual colonoscopy): a multicenter comparison with standard colonoscopy for detection of colorectal neoplasia. JAMA 291 (2004) 1713-1719
27. Rockey D.C., Paulson E., Niedzwiecki D., et al. Analysis of air contrast barium enema, computed tomographic colonography, and colonoscopy: prospective comparison. Lancet 365 (2005) 305-311
28. van Gelder R.E., Nio C.Y., Florie J., et al. Computed tomographic colonography compared with colonoscopy in patients at increased risk for colorectal cancer. Gastroenterology 127 (2004) 41-48
29. Ginnerup P.B., Christiansen T.E., Bjerregaard N.C., et al. Colonoscopy and multidetector-array computed-tomographic colonography: detection rates and feasibility. Endoscopy 35 (2003) 736-742
30. Taylor S.A., Halligan S., Saunders B.P., et al. Use of multidetector-row CT colonography for detection of colorectal neoplasia in patients referred via the Department of Health "2-week-wait" initiative. Clin Radiol 58 (2003) 855-861
31. Liebermann D. Colonoscopy: as good as gold. Ann Intern Med 141 (2004) 401-403
32. Bossuyt P.M., Irwig L., Craig J., et al. Comparative accuracy: assessing new tests against existing diagnostic pathways. BMJ 332 (2006) 1089-1092
33. Song F., Altman D.G., Glenny A.M., et al. Validity of indirect comparison for estimating efficacy of competing interventions: empirical evidence from published meta-analyses. BMJ 326 (2003) 472
34. Pickhardt P.J., Choi J.R., Hwang I., et al. Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy to screen for colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults. N Engl J Med 349 (2003) 2191-2200
35. Soto J.A., Barish M.A., Yee J., et al. Reader training in CT colonography: how much is enough?. Radiology 237 (2005) 26-27
36. McGrath J.S., Ponich T.P., and Gregor J.C. Screening for colorectal cancer: the cost to find an advanced adenoma. Am J Gastroenterol 97 (2002) 2902-2907
37. Tran D.Q., Rosen L., Kim R., et al. Actual colonoscopy: what are the risks of perforation?. Am Surg 67 (2001) 845-847
38. Australian Government, Department of Health and Ageing. Medicare Benefits Schedule Book. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.
39. Australian Government, Department of Health and Ageing. National hospital cost data collection, cost weights for AR-DRG, version 4.2, round 7 (2002-03) (2006), Australian Government, Canberra
40. Bolin T.D., Korman M.G., Stanton R., et al. Positive cost effectiveness of early diagnosis of colorectal cancer. Colorectal Dis 1 (1999) 113-122
41. Armstrong K, O'Connell DL, Leong D, et al. The New South Wales colorectal cancer care survey-part 1 surgical management. The Cancer Council Australian Government, Department of Health and Ageing. Schedule of pharmaceutical benefits for approved pharmacists and medical practitioners. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.
42. Australian Government, Department of Health and Ageing. Schedule of pharmaceutical benefits for approved pharmacists and medical practitioners (2005), Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra, Australia