Predictive value of morphologic characteristics in rectosigmoid adenomatous polyps for the probability of synchronous polyps or cancer in the proximal colon.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Sigmoidoscopy is performed more frequently than colonoscopy, especially for screening purposes and searching for colorectal neoplasm. The necessity of colonoscopy in patients with an adenoma ofor=11 mm) polyps. These groups were compared regarding the presence of proximal adenoma and advanced proximal neoplasia (>10 mm adenoma and/or villous histology and/or high grade dysplasia or cancer). Polyps found in the rectum and sigmoid colon were considered as distal polyps and polyps other than these were considered as proximal polyps. RESULTS: In this study, of 1124 consecutive patients who underwent colonoscopy between April 1997 and January 2002, 184 (16%) had 258 adenomatous polyps in the rectosigmoid area. The polyps were diminutive (or=11 mm) in 33 patients. Forty-one of the patients (39%) with diminutive polyps, 20 of the patients (43%) with small polyps and 19 of the patients (57%) with large polyps had neoplasm in the proximal bowel. In these patients, advanced proximal neoplasm was found in 8 (8%), in 6 (13%) and in 11 (33%), respectively. There was no difference regarding the presence of neoplasm in the proximal colon between these groups. The rate of advanced proximal neoplasm was found to be significantly higher in the group with large polyps in the rectosigmoid area than in the groups with small and diminutive polyps (p<0.05). In 104 patients (57%) with polyp(s) in rectum and sigmoid colon, no associated polyp or cancer was encountered in the proximal colon. CONCLUSION: Colonoscopy is indicated when adenomatous polyp, regardless of size, is found on rectosigmoidoscopy performed because of symptoms.     

Risk of proximal colorectal neoplasia among asymptomatic patients with distal hyperplastic polyps

PURPOSE: Many guidelines on colorectal cancer screening do not consider distal hyperplastic polyps to be a marker for proximal neoplasia. However, 11 of 17 published studies have shown an increased risk of proximal neoplasia in patients with distal hyperplastic polyps. Our goal is to assess the risk of proximal neoplasia in asymptomatic patients with distal hyperplastic polyps, compared to those with distal tubular adenomas or no distal polyps. METHODS: We assessed proximal (cecum, ascending, transverse colon and splenic flexure) and distal polyps in patients undergoing screening colonoscopy, classifying them into 3 groups: distal hyperplastic polyps only; distal adenomas with or without hyperplastic polyps; no distal polyps. The prevalence of proximal neoplasia and advanced neoplasia (polyps > or =1 cm, villous adenomas, or cancer) was compared among these groups. RESULTS: Of 2357 patients, 427 (18%) had neoplasia, including 103 (4%) with advanced neoplasia. Proximal neoplasia occurred in 175 (9%) of 1896 patients with no distal polyps, compared with 28 (12%) of 237 with distal hyperplastic polyps (P = 0.20) and 64 (29%) of 224 with distal adenomas (P <0.0001). Proximal advanced neoplasia occurred in 39 (2%) patients with no distal polyps, compared with 4 (2%) with distal hyperplastic polyps (P = 0.70) and 9 (4%) with distal adenomas (P = 0.13). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with distal hyperplastic polyps, unlike those with distal adenomas, do not exhibit an increased risk for proximal neoplasia or proximal advanced neoplasia compared to those with no distal polyps. The discovery of hyperplastic polyps on screening sigmoidoscopy should not prompt colonoscopy.     

Findings on optical colonoscopy after positive CT colonography exam

BACKGROUND & AIMS:  The aim of this study is to evaluate the findings on optical colonoscopy (OC) after a positive CT colonography (CTC) exam and characterize the type of polyps seen on OC but not reported by CTC.
METHODS:  Over an 18-month period a total of 159 asymptomatic adults had polyps seen on computed tomography colonography examination and subsequently underwent planned therapeutic optical colonoscopy. The colonoscopists were aware of the findings on CT colonography prior to further evaluation of the colon. Characteristics of polyps and adenomas seen on subsequent optical colonoscopy but not seen or reported on CT colonography were examined.
RESULTS:  The adenoma miss rate for CT colonography overall was 18.9% (25/132) including 6.2% (4/65) for polyps >9 mm and 18.2% (8/44) for polyps 6–9 mm. Three of the adenomas >9 mm not seen on CTC were sessile, and two were found in patients with technically difficult CT colonography studies due to poor colonic distention. No adenomas with advanced pathology <6 mm were found on optical colonoscopy but not reported on CT colonography. False-positive CTC referral where no polyp was seen on colonoscopy was 5.0%.
CONCLUSIONS:  CT colonography has adenoma miss rates similar to miss rates historically found with optical colonoscopy, with most missed adenomas being <10 mm and sessile in shape.     

Hyperplastic polyps and the risk of adenoma recurrence in the polyp prevention trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Recent studies have suggested that some hyperplastic polyps may be associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer. Prospective information on the risk of adenoma recurrence associated with hyperplastic polyps is limited. We sought to investigate whether the coexistence of hyperplastic polyps with adenomas increases the risk of adenoma recurrence. METHODS: We used unconditional logistic regression models to examine the association between baseline hyperplastic polyps and subsequent adenoma recurrence during a 3-year follow-up evaluation, among 1637 participants in the Polyp Prevention Trial. RESULTS: A total of 437 participants (26.7%) had hyperplastic polyps coexisting with adenomas at baseline. Of these, 132 (30.2%) had at least one hyperplastic polyp in the proximal colon, whereas 305 (69.8%) had only distal hyperplastic polyps. When compared with subjects without any hyperplastic polyps at baseline, there was no statistically significant association between the presence of baseline hyperplastic polyps and recurrence of any adenoma (odds ratio [OR], 1.19; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.94-1.51) or advanced adenoma (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.78-2.03). Also, there was no association between hyperplastic polyp location and adenoma recurrence (OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.69-1.48) for any proximal hyperplastic polyp (OR, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.96-1.65) and for distal hyperplastic polyps. CONCLUSIONS: The coexistence of hyperplastic polyps with adenomas, irrespective of location, does not confer an increased risk of adenoma recurrence beyond that of adenomas alone within 3 years of follow-up evaluation. Prospective long-term studies on adenoma recurrence risk associated with hyperplastic polyps in screening populations are needed.     

Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy computer-aided polyp detection in a screening population

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The sensitivity of computed tomographic (CT) virtual colonoscopy (CT colonography) for detecting polyps varies widely in recently reported large clinical trials. Our objective was to determine whether a computer program is as sensitive as optical colonoscopy for the detection of adenomatous colonic polyps on CT virtual colonoscopy. METHODS: The data set was a cohort of 1186 screening patients at 3 medical centers. All patients underwent same-day virtual and optical colonoscopy. Our enhanced gold standard combined segmental unblinded optical colonoscopy and retrospective identification of precise polyp locations. The data were randomized into separate training (n = 394) and test (n = 792) sets for analysis by a computer-aided polyp detection (CAD) program. RESULTS: For the test set, per-polyp and per-patient sensitivities for CAD were both 89.3% (25/28; 95% confidence interval, 71.8%-97.7%) for detecting retrospectively identifiable adenomatous polyps at least 1 cm in size. The false-positive rate was 2.1 (95% confidence interval, 2.0-2.2) false polyps per patient. Both carcinomas were detected by CAD at a false-positive rate of 0.7 per patient; only 1 of 2 was detected by optical colonoscopy before segmental unblinding. At both 8-mm and 10-mm adenoma size thresholds, the per-patient sensitivities of CAD were not significantly different from those of optical colonoscopy before segmental unblinding. CONCLUSIONS: The per-patient sensitivity of CT virtual colonoscopy CAD in an asymptomatic screening population is comparable to that of optical colonoscopy for adenomas > or = 8 mm and is generalizable to new CT virtual colonoscopy data.     

The usefulness of colonoscopy as a screening test for detecting colorectal polyps

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Colonic polyps are the most common lesions encountered during screening colonoscopy. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the usefulness of colonoscopy to detect colonic polyps in adults. METHODOLOGY: From January 2003 to September 2005, a total of 4,629 adults underwent colonoscopic screening as a part of a health evaluation program. We analyzed the completed questionnaires, and the colonoscopic and pathologic findings. RESULTS: Complete colonic evaluation was possible in 4,491 (97.0%) subjects, and 804 (17.9%) had adenomatous polyps, including 153 subjects (3.4%) with advanced adenomas. There were no significant complications such as bowel perforation or massive bleeding requiring transfusion in relation to the procedure. There was a trend toward an increased prevalence of adenomatous polyps with age. Among the subjects with polyps, 72.1% of the subjects had distal polyps and the relative risk for proximal polyp, according to the distal findings, was 5.4 (95% CI: 4.5-6.3) for adenomatous polyp, 5.1 (95% CI 3.6-7.0) for advanced adenoma as compared to the finding of no adenomatous polyp. CONCLUSIONS: Colonoscopy performed by experienced colonoscopists as a screening test is feasible for detecting subjects with colorectal polyps.     

Screening for Colon Malignancy with Colonoscopy

Screening of asymptomatic individuals for colon malignancy has been advocated for the past 20 yr in the hopes of reducing colon cancer mortality. Although sigmoidoscopy is an important element of current screening recommendations, the sensitivity of this test in asymptomatic subjects has never been studied. The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence and location of polyps and cancers in an asymptomatic population by performing full colonoscopy. We wished to assess the sensitivity of screening flexible sigmoidoscopy to 60 cm by determining how many patients with adenomas or cancer had "index" adenomatous polyps in the distal 60 cm. One hundred five healthy male outpatients, over 50 yr old, with negative examinations for occult blood in stools and no prior history of colon pathology, had full colonoscopy. Careful examination of the distal 60 cm was performed, followed by a full colon examination to the cecum. Forty-three patients (41%) had adenomatous polyps, and only 19 of these patients had an index adenomatous polyp in the distal 60 cm. Therefore, the sensitivity of sigmoidoscopy was 44%. The prevalence of adenomas increased with age. Patients were assigned to one of three groups based on the findings in the distal 60 cm. Group 1 (n = 65) had no polyps in the distal 60 cm, but 18 of these patients (28%) had adenomatous polyps in the proximal colon. Among 21 patients with only hyperplastic polyps in the distal 60 cm (group 2), six patients (29%) had proximal adenomas. In group 3, eight of 19 patients (42%) with adenomas in the distal 60 cm also had proximal adenomatous polyps. We conclude that adenomatous polyps are common in asymptomatic men who have negative tests for fecal occult blood. Sigmoidoscopy to 60 cm had a sensitivity of only 44% in this patient population, suggesting that this is an insensitive test for the detection of patients with adenomatous polyps.     

Is the distal hyperplastic polyp a marker for proximal neoplasia?

CONTEXT: The current literature is unclear about the association between distal hyperplastic polyps and synchronous neoplasia (adenomatous polyps and cancer) in the proximal colon. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the prevalence of proximal neoplasia associated with distal hyperplastic polyps. DATA SOURCES: Database searches (medline and embase from 1966 to 2001) and manual search of the bibliographies of included and excluded studies, case reports, editorials, review articles, and textbooks of Gastroenterology. STUDY SELECTION: Studies describing the prevalence of proximal neoplasia in persons with distal hyperplastic polyps. DATA EXTRACTION: Demographics, clinical variables, study design, and prevalence of proximal neoplasia associated with various distal colorectal findings. DATA SYNTHESIS: Of 18 included studies, 12 involved asymptomatic individuals in which the pooled absolute risk of any proximal neoplasia associated with distal hyperplastic polyps was 25% (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 21% to 29%). In 4 studies where colonoscopy was performed irrespective of distal findings, the absolute risk was 21% (95% CI, 14% to 28%). The relative risk of finding any proximal neoplasia in persons with distal hyperplastic polyps was 1.3 (95% CI, 0.9 to 1.8) compared to those with no distal polyps. Among 6 studies of patients with symptoms or risk factors for neoplasia, the absolute risk of proximal neoplasia was 35% (95% CI, 32% to 39%) in persons with distal hyperplastic polyps. In 2 studies of screening colonoscopy, advanced proximal neoplasia (cancer, or a polyp with villous histology or severe dysplasia, or a tubular adenoma >/=1 cm) was present in 4% to 5% of persons with distal hyperplastic polyps, which was 1.5 to 2.6 times greater than in those with no distal polyps. CONCLUSIONS: In asymptomatic persons, a distal hyperplastic polyp is associated with a 21% to 25% risk for any proximal neoplasia and a 4% to 5% risk of advanced proximal neoplasia, and may justify examination of the proximal colon. Further study is needed to determine the risk of advanced proximal neoplasia associated with size and number of distal hyperplastic polyps.     

Predictors of advanced proximal neoplasia in persons with abnormal screening flexible sigmoidoscopy.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The relationship between distal and proximal colonic findings is uncertain. Thus, there is no consensus on which findings on screening flexible sigmoidoscopy should trigger colonoscopy. METHODS: We analyzed data from the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial to assess the relationship between distal and proximal colonic findings. RESULTS: A total of 8802 subjects had an abnormal baseline sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy follow-up. Subjects with <10-mm single or multiple tubular adenomas had similar risks for advanced proximal neoplasia as subjects with hyperplastic polyps or other benign lesions (3%-5%). Subjects with large (>or=10 mm), villous, or severely dysplastic distal adenomas had similarly elevated risks for advanced proximal neoplasia (11%-12%). Multivariate logistic modeling showed a significantly increased risk for advanced proximal neoplasia associated with the presence of a large tubular (odds ratio [OR], 2.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.0-3.4) or villous distal adenoma (OR, 2.7; 95% CI, 2.1-3.5) but not with the presence of one (OR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.8-1.3) or multiple (OR, 0.8; 95% CI, 0.5-1.2) <10-mm tubular distal adenomas. CONCLUSIONS: Among subjects with a polypoid lesion on screening flexible sigmoidoscopy, those with small tubular distal adenomas are at similar risk for advanced proximal neoplasia as those without distal adenomas. Subjects with a large, villous, or dysplastic distal adenoma are at increased risk. A strategy that encourages individuals with small tubular adenomas on sigmoidoscopy to undergo follow-up colonoscopy and excludes those with nonadenomatous lesions is of questionable validity, because both groups are at similar risk for advanced proximal neoplasia.     

Occurrence of Distal Colorectal Neoplasia Among Whites and Blacks Following Negative Flexible Sigmoidoscopy: An Analysis of PLCO Trial

BACKGROUND

It is unclear whether the higher rate of colorectal cancer (CRC) among non-Hispanic blacks (blacks) is due to lower rates of CRC screening or greater biologic risk.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to evaluate whether blacks are more likely than non-Hispanic whites (whites) to develop distal colon neoplasia (adenoma and/or cancer) after negative flexible sigmoidoscopy (FSG).

DESIGN

We analyzed data of participants with negative FSGs at baseline in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) cancer screening trial who underwent repeat FSGs 3 or 5 years later. Subjects with polyps or masses were referred to their physicians for diagnostic colonoscopy. We collected and reviewed the records of diagnostic evaluations.

PARTICIPANTS

Our analytic cohort consisted of 21,550 whites and 975 blacks.

MAIN MEASURES

We did a comparison by race (whites vs. blacks) in the findings of polyps or masses at repeat FSG, the follow-up of abnormal test results and the detection of colorectal neoplasia at diagnostic colonoscopy.

KEY RESULTS

At the follow-up FSG examination, 304 blacks (31.2 %) and 4183 whites (19.4 %) had abnormal FSG, [adjusted relative risk (RR) = 1.00; 95 % confidence interval (CI), 0.90–1.10]. However, blacks were less likely to undergo diagnostic colonoscopy (76.6 % vs. 83.1 %; RR = 0.90; 95 % CI, 0.84–0.96). Among all included patients, blacks had similar risk of any distal adenoma (RR = 0.86; 95 % CI, 0.65–1.14) and distal advanced adenoma (RR = 1.01; 95 % CI, 0.60–1.68). Similar results were obtained when we restricted our analysis to compliant subjects who underwent diagnostic colonoscopy (RR = 1.01; 95 % CI, 0.80–1.29) for any distal adenoma and (RR = 1.18; 95 % CI, 0.73–1.92) for distal advanced adenoma.

CONCLUSIONS

We did not find any differences between blacks and whites in the risk of distal colorectal adenoma 3–5 years after negative FSG. However, follow-up evaluations were lower among blacks.KEY WORDS: PLCO, colorectal cancer disparities, adenomatous polyps, flexible sigmoidoscopy, screening     

Predicting proximal advanced neoplasms at screening sigmoidoscopy

PURPOSE: This study was designed to assess the predictive value for advanced proximal neoplasms (cancer, adenoma = 10 mm, or villous component >20 percent, or severe dysplasia) of the characteristics of distal polyps.METHODS: The study was conducted among patients, aged 55 to 64 years, referred for colonoscopy in the Italian trial of sigmoidoscopy screening for colorectal cancer. Patients reporting a history of colorectal cancer, adenomas, inflammatory bowel disease, recent colorectal endoscopy, or two first-degree relatives with colorectal cancer were excluded. We compared the prevalence of advanced proximal neoplasia in patients with low-risk (1–2 tubular adenomas, <10 mm, with low-grade dysplasia, or hyperplastic polyp) and in those with high-risk (size, =10 mm, or =3 adenomas, or villous component >20 percent, or severe dysplasia) polyps in the distal colon.RESULTS: Of 426 patients with polyps > 5 mm, 29 (6.9 percent) were detected with an advanced proximal neoplasm (including 4 colorectal cancers). The prevalence of proximal advanced neoplasia was 9.4 percent among patients with high-risk distal polyps and 2.5 percent among those with low-risk lesions (adjusted odds ratio, 3.19; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.06–9.59). Approximately 40 people with low-risk distal polyps 6 to 9 mm should undergo colonoscopy to detect one proximal advanced neoplasm; the corresponding number for patients with high-risk distal polyps is 10.CONCLUSIONS: The 2.5 percent prevalence of proximal advanced neoplasms among people with low-risk 6-mm to 9-mm distal polyps is similar to the prevalence observed among people without distal polyps. Restricting colonoscopy referral to patients with high-risk distal polyps might represent a cost-effective strategy in a screening context.The SCORE trial was funded by the Italian Association for Cancer Research (AIRC: 1995-1997) and by the Italian National Research Council (CNR - grant n. 95.00539.PF39; n.96.00736.PF39). The Istituto Oncologico Romagnolo (IOR), the Fondo E Tempia, the University of Milano and the Local Heath Unit ASL1 - Torino supported the implementation of the study in Rimini, Biella, Milano and Torino respectively.SOFAR s.p.a. provided the enemas for the bowel preparation.A report on the preliminary results of this study has been presented at the Digestive Disease Week, Orlando, Florida, May 1999, ASGE poster session.     

Detection rate and proximal shift tendency of adenomas and serrated polyps: a retrospective study of 62,560 colonoscopies

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to estimate the detection rates of adenomas and serrated polyps and to identify proximalization and associate risk factors in patients from Southern China.

Methods

Consecutive patients undergoing colonoscopy from 2004 to 2013 in Guangzhou were included. The proportions of proximal adenomas to advanced adenomas and serrated polyps were compared and potential predictors were evaluated.

Results

Colonoscopies (n?=?62,560) were performed, and 11,427 patients were diagnosed with polyps. Detection rates for adenomas, hyperplastic polyps, and serrated adenomas were 12.0, 2.5, and 0.2 patients per 100 colonoscopies. When comparing the 1st (2004–2008) to the 2nd period (2009–2013), adenoma and serrated polyp detection in proximal and distal colon both increased significantly (proximal colon [adenoma 3.9 vs. 6.1 patients/100 colonoscopies, P?<?0.001; serrated polyp 0.4 vs. 1.1 patients/100 colonoscopies, P?<?0.001]; distal colon [adenoma 6.6 vs. 7.2 patients/100 colonoscopies, P?=?0.003; serrated polyp 1.2 vs. 2.4 patients/100 colonoscopies, P?<?0.001]). Advanced adenoma detection increased over these two periods only in proximal colon (1st vs. 2nd period: 1.5 vs. 2.4 patients/100 colonoscopies, P?<?0.001), not the distal colon (P?=?0.114). Multivariate analyses showed that diagnostic period was an independent predictor for adenoma proximalization (OR?=?1.36, 95% CI 1.25–1.48, P?<?0.001), but not for advanced adenomas (P?=?0.117) or serrated polyps (P?=?0.928).

Conclusions

Adenomas and serrated polyps were increasingly detected throughout the colon, whereas advanced adenomas were only in proximal colon. A proximal shift tendency detected by colonoscopy was observed for adenomas, but not advanced adenomas or serrated polyps, in Southern China. The screening for proximal polyps should be emphasized and colonoscopy might be a preferred initial screening tool.

     

Treatment of colonic polyps--practical considerations

The adenomatous colonic polyp, a neoplastic lesion, is the precursor of most if not all carcinomas of the colon and rectum. Confirmatory evidence is derived from epidemiological, histological and clinical data demonstrating a close parallelism between adenomas and cancer of the colon. Based on current knowledge, all colonic polyps should be removed to prevent the development of colonic cancer. However, since the risk of malignancy within an adenoma is related to its size, histology and the degree of dysplasia, practical considerations dictate that all polyps 1 cm in diameter or larger should be removed upon their detection by barium enema or colonoscopy since such adenomas are the ones most likely to contain malignancy. The endoscopic removal of colon polyps can be efficiently and safely accomplished when established principles of colonoscopy and electrosurgery are followed. This technique requires the proper equipment, a skilled endoscopy assistant, and an experienced endoscopist with the ability to adeptly perform colonoscopy, an understanding of the basic concepts of electrocautery and knowledge of the various structural configurations of colonic polyps. Colonoscopic polypectomy will avoid the need for surgical resection in most instances. Management of the malignant colonic polyp remains controversial. The patient with a sessile or pseudo-pedunculated polyp containing invasive cancer should undergo colonic resection. Surgery is not necessary for the majority of patients whose pedunculated adenomas contain invasive cancer, unless the malignancy is poorly differentiated, the cancer invades lymphatics or vascular channels, or tumour is seen at or near the resection margin. Surveillance colonoscopy after endoscopic polypectomy should be performed in most instances within one year to look for recurrent tumour, missed polyps or a metachronous adenoma. Subsequently, colonoscopy should be performed every two years in patients with multiple index polyps, and every three years after removal of a single index adenoma.     

Surveillance after positive colonoscopy based on adenoma characteristics

BackgroundPatients with adenomatous polyps are at increased risk for developing colorectal cancer based on the characteristics and number of polyps, but less is known about the individual and combined contribution of these factors. This study aimed to better characterize the risk of advanced adenoma and cancer in patients with positive baseline colonoscopy.MethodsPatients who had polyps at baseline colonoscopy were included in this retrospective cohort study (N = 1165) and were categorized into 6 groups: (1) 1–2 non-advanced adenomas (NAA’s), (2) ≥3 NAA’s, (3) advanced tubular adenoma, (4) small tubulovillous adenoma (TVA), (5) large TVA and (6) multiple advanced adenomas (MAA’s). Findings at surveillance colonoscopy were documented in each group.ResultsThe combined incidence of advanced adenoma, ≥3 NAA’s, and colorectal cancer at surveillance colonoscopy was significantly higher in the baseline large TVA (29.2%) than small TVA groups (13.5%, P < 0.001), as well as in the MAA’s group (44.1%) compared with large TVA group (P = 0.02). The incidence of colorectal cancer, however, was not significantly different between the groups.ConclusionsThe size of the polyp and the number of advanced lesions are more important than its histology for predicting the risk of high-risk metachronous lesions at follow-up.     

Synchronous Proximal Polyps and Cancer in Patients with Polyps Detected at Sigmoidoscopy: Results of a Single, Rural-Based Sigmoidoscopy Clinic

The prevalence of polyps and cancer in the proximal colon among patients who have polyps detected on sigmoidoscopy was determined in a large rural referral hospital in north central Pennsylvania. Eleven thousand one hundred sixty patients underwent sigmoidoscopy between 1991 and 1997. Polyps were detected in 709 patients. Five hundred twenty-three patients who had a polyp at sigmoidoscopy and full colonoscopy completed within one year were included in this study. 120 patients (23%) had a proximal polyp detected at colonoscopy. The prevalence of proximal polyps and histologically advanced polyps was related to the size, number, and histology of the distal index polyp found at sigmoidoscopy. However, the absolute difference in prevalence of proximal polyps stratified by dings at sigmoidoscopy was small. A total of 5 adenocarcinomas were detected in the proximal colon. All proximal cancers detected at colonoscopy occurred in patients with a distal polyp less than 10 mm. Our data emphasize the importance of colonoscopy in all patients with a polyp detected at sigmoidoscopy independent of its size and histology.     

Diagnostic value of distal colonic polyps for prediction of advanced proximal neoplasia in an average-risk population undergoing screening colonoscopy

BACKGROUND: For colorectal cancer screening, the predictive value of distal findings in the ascertainment of proximal lesions is not fully established. The aims of this study were to assess distal findings as predictors of advanced proximal neoplasia and to compare the predictive value of endoscopy alone vs. combined endoscopic and histopathologic data. METHODS: Primary colonoscopy screening was performed in 2210 consecutive, average-risk adults. Age, gender, endoscopic (size, number of polyps), and histopathologic distal findings were used as potential predictors of advanced proximal neoplasms (i.e., any adenoma > or =1 cm in size, and/or with villous histology, and/or with severe dysplasia or invasive cancer). Polyps were defined as distal if located in the descending colon, the sigmoid colon, or the rectum. Those in other locations were designated proximal. RESULTS: Neoplastic lesions, including 11 invasive cancers, were found in 617 (27.9%) patients. Advanced proximal neoplasms without any distal adenoma were present in 1.3% of patients. Of the advanced proximal lesions, 39% were not associated with any distal polyp. Older age, male gender, and distal adenoma were independent predictors of advanced proximal neoplasms. The predictive ability of a model with endoscopic data alone did not improve after inclusion of histopathologic data. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, the predictive ability of models that use age, gender, and any combination of distal findings was relatively low. The proportion of advanced proximal neoplasms identified if any distal polyp was an indication for colonoscopy was only 62%. CONCLUSIONS: A strategy in which colonoscopy is performed solely in patients with distal colonic findings is not effective screening for the detection of advanced proximal neoplasms in an average-risk population.     

Prevalence of clinically important histology in small adenomas.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The prevalence of advanced histology in small polyps has become a crucial issue in optimizing colorectal cancer screening strategies, especially in view of the advent of computed tomography colonography. We evaluated the prevalence of advanced histology in small and diminutive adenomas to clarify their clinical importance in terms of malignant potential. METHODS: Data were reviewed retrospectively from 3291 colonoscopies performed on asymptomatic patients found to have an adenoma on screening with flexible sigmoidoscopy a few weeks before the colonoscopy or who had a family history of colorectal cancer. All polyps were excised endoscopically and sent for pathology testing. Specimens with advanced histology were confirmed by a second reading. RESULTS: Of the 3291 colonoscopies performed, 1235 colonoscopies yielded a total of 1933 small or diminutive adenomatous polyps. Advanced histology including carcinoma was found in 10.1% of small (5-10 mm) adenomas and in 1.7% of diminutive adenomas (< or = 4 mm). Carcinoma was found in .9% of small adenomas, and 0% of diminutive adenomas. Of the 107 patients found to have polyps 2-10 mm with advanced histology, 100 (93%) were referred for colonoscopy because of an adenoma found on a recent screening with flexible sigmoidoscopy. Seven patients underwent colonoscopy for a positive family history of colon cancer; all 7 had a single affected first-degree relative older than age 50. CONCLUSIONS: Adenomas 5-10 mm in size harbor pathologically significant histology, and the need for removal of these lesions must be addressed to optimize colorectal cancer prevention.     

The natural history of isolated rectosigmoid adenomatous polyps

PURPOSE: Colonoscopic surveillance is recommended for patients with adenomatous polyps. Significant cost savings would result from identification of subgroups of patients in whom less costly surveillance would suffice. This study was performed to determine the natural history of patients undergoing removal of isolated rectosigmoid adenomas and to establish whether flexible sigmoidoscopy might be adequate for follow-up. METHODS: A retrospective review of a database of 7,677 colonoscopies, from 1990 to 1996, identified patients who had a minimal follow-up of two years after removal of adenomatous polyps isolated to the rectosigmoid. Polyps detected on surveillance colonoscopy were categorized as distal (60 cm from anal verge), proximal (>60 cm from anal verge), and diffuse (proximal plus distal). The risk of polyp formation was determined by actuarial analysis using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Sixty-two patients undergoing surveillance for adenomas met inclusion criteria. At the index colonoscopy, 124 isolated rectosigmoid polyps were identified. The median polyp size was 1 cm and median frequency was one polyp. The median follow-up time for the entire cohort (N = 62) was 53 months. At follow-up surveillance colonoscopy, 105 additional adenomas were discovered and removed in 40 patients. No malignant polyps were detected. The pattern of polyps detected were proximal (n=19), rectosigmoid (n=16), and diffuse (n=5). CONCLUSIONS: The majority (65 percent) of patients with isolated rectosigmoid polyps have additional polyps on long-term surveillance, and 60 percent of patients will have these polyps located proximal to the reach of a sigmoidoscope. Therefore, flexible sigmoidoscopy is not a safe alternative for surveillance of patients with isolated rectosigmoid polyps.Read at The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons' 100th Anniversary and Tripartite Meeting, Washington. D.C., May 1 to 6, 1999.     

An initial experience with screening for colon polyps using spiral CT with and without CT colography (virtual colonoscopy)

BACKGROUND: Computed tomographic (CT) colography (virtual colonoscopy) is a new imaging method for detection of colon polyps and cancer. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the sensitivity of CT colography for polyp detection in a population without symptoms that included persons without colon neoplasia and with radiologists blinded to colonoscopic findings. METHODS: Forty-six persons without symptoms underwent spiral CT followed by same-day colonoscopy with subsequent inspection of two-dimensional axial CT images, interactive multiplanar images, and surfaced and volume-rendered images of the colon (three-dimensional CT colography). RESULTS: Three-dimensional CT colography was superior to two-dimensional axial imaging for detection of colon polyps. Three-dimensional CT colography depicted 1 of 4 (25%) adenomas 2 cm in diameter or larger, 6 of 10 (60%) adenomas 1 to 1.9 cm, 6 of 14 (43%) 6 to 9 mm, and 7 of 65 (11%) 5 mm in diameter or smaller. Three-dimensional CT colography showed a polyp that might have led to colonoscopy in 3 of 4 (75%) patients whose largest adenoma was 2 cm or larger, 5 of 6 (83%) patients with largest adenoma 1 to 1.9 cm, 3 of 7 (43%) patients with largest adenoma 6 to 9 mm, and 4 of 16 patients (25%) with largest adenoma 5 mm or smaller. Large, flat adenomas of the right colon were difficult to identify with three-dimensional CT colography. The specificity of three-dimensional CT colography for patients with adenomas 1 cm in diameter or larger was 89%. Examination of patients with missed adenomas after unblinding indicated that meticulous bowel preparation and adequate distention are critical to accurate interpretation. Perceptual errors were common. CONCLUSIONS: CT colography as performed in this study is not adequate as a colorectal cancer screening test. Several technical factors that appear critical to accurate performance of CT colography are defined.     

First-degree relatives of patients with advanced colorectal adenomas have an increased prevalence of colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The risk of colorectal cancer in relatives of patients with adenomatous colonic polyps is not well defined. This study assessed whether finding colonic neoplasia during screening colonoscopy was related to the family history of colorectal cancer among the participants' parents and siblings. METHODS: Self-reported family history of colorectal cancer was recorded for all participants in a screening colonoscopy study. The size and location of all polyps were recorded before their removal and histologic examination. Participants were grouped according to the most advanced lesion detected. RESULTS: Three thousand one hundred twenty-one patients underwent complete colonoscopic examination. Subjects with adenomas were more likely to have a family history of colorectal cancer than were subjects without polyps (odds ratio [OR], 1.36; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09-1.70). The finding of a small (<1 cm) tubular adenoma as the most advanced lesion was associated with only a modest increase in the OR of colorectal cancer in family members (OR, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.99-1.61), but the presence of an advanced adenoma was associated with a higher OR (OR, 1.62;5% CI, 1.16-2.26). Younger age of adenoma diagnosis was not related to a higher prevalence of a family history of colorectal cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Relatives patients with advanced colorectal adenomas have an increased risk of colorectal cancer. Individuals with advanced colorectal adenomas should be counseled about the increased risk of colorectal cancer among their relatives.