Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after polypectomy: A consensus update by the US multi-society task force on colorectal cancer and the American Cancer Society Journal Article
| Authors: | Winawer, S. J.; Zauber, A. G.; Fletcher, R. H.; Stillman, J. S.; O'Brien, M. J.; Levin, B.; Smith, R. A.; Lieberman, D. A.; Burt, R. W.; Levin, T. R.; Bond, J. H.; Brooks, D.; Byers, T.; Hyman, N.; Kirk, L.; Thorson, A.; Simmang, C.; Johnson, D.; Rex, D. K. |
| Article Title: | Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after polypectomy: A consensus update by the US multi-society task force on colorectal cancer and the American Cancer Society |
| Abstract: | Adenomatous polyps are the most common neoplastic findings uncovered in people who undergo colorectal screening or have a diagnostic workup for symptoms. It was common practice in the 1970s for these patients to have annual follow-up surveillance examinations to detect additional new adenomas as well as missed synchronous adenomas. As a result of the National Polyp Study report in 1993, which demonstrated clearly in a randomized design that the first postpolypectomy examination could be deferred for 3 years, guidelines published by a gastrointestinal consortium in 1997 recommended that the first follow-up surveillance be 3 years after polypectomy for most patients. In 2003, these guidelines were updated, colonoscopy was recommended as the only follow-up examination, and stratification at baseline into lower and higher risk for subsequent adenomas was suggested. The 1997 and 2003 guidelines dealt with both screening and surveillance. However, it has become increasingly clear that postpolypectomy surveillance is now a large part of endoscopic practice, draining resources from screening and diagnosis. In addition, surveys have demonstrated that a large proportion of endoscopists are conducting surveillance examinations at shorter intervals than recommended in the guidelines. In the present paper, a careful analytic approach was designed addressing all evidence available in the literature to delineate predictors of advanced pathology, both cancer and advanced adenomas, so that patients can be more definitely stratified at their baseline colonoscopy into those at lower or increased risk for a subsequent advanced neoplasia. People at increased risk have either three or more adenomas, or high-grade dysplasia, or villous features, or an adenoma ≥1 cm in size. It is recommended that they have a 3-year follow-up colonoscopy. People at lower risk who have one or two small (<1 cm) tubular adenomas with no high-grade dysplasia can have a follow up in 5 to 10 years, whereas people with hyperplastic polyps only should have a 10-year follow up as average-risk people. Recent papers have reported a significant number of missed cancers by colonoscopy. However, high-quality baseline colonoscopy with excellent patient preparation and adequate withdrawal time should minimize this and reduce clinicians' concerns. These guidelines were developed jointly by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer and the American Cancer Society to provide a broader consensus and thereby increase utilization of the recommendations by endoscopists. Adoption of these guidelines nationally can have a dramatic impact on shifting available resources from intensive surveillance to screening. It has been shown that the first screening colonoscopy and polypectomy produces the greatest effects on reducing the incidence of colorectal cancer in patients with adenomatous polyps. © American Cancer Society, Inc., 2006. |
| Keywords: | review; anamnesis; cancer risk; united states; follow up; colorectal cancer; demography; consensus; incidence; practice guideline; colorectal neoplasms; societies, medical; colonoscopy; medical literature; population surveillance; polypectomy; colonic polyps; adenomatous polyp; dysplasia; non profit organization; adenomatous polyps; american cancer society |
| Journal Title: | CA - A Cancer Journal for Clinicians |
| Volume: | 56 |
| Issue: | 3 |
| ISSN: | 0007-9235 |
| Publisher: | Wiley-Blackwell |
| Date Published: | 2006-05-01 |
| Start Page: | 143 |
| End Page: | 159 |
| Language: | English |
| DOI: | 10.3322/canjclin.56.3.143 |
| PUBMED: | 16737947 |
| PROVIDER: | scopus |
| DOI/URL: | |
| Notes: | --- - "Cited By (since 1996): 115" - "Export Date: 4 June 2012" - "CODEN: CAMCA" - "Source: Scopus" |
Altmetric
Citation Impact
BMJ Impact Analytics
Related MSK Work