结肠息肉切除术后的监测。

IF 3.2 3区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Sandra Baile-Maxía, Rodrigo Jover
{"title":"结肠息肉切除术后的监测。","authors":"Sandra Baile-Maxía,&nbsp;Rodrigo Jover","doi":"10.1016/j.bpg.2023.101848","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span>Post-polypectomy surveillance has proven to reduce colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence in patients<span> with high-risk polyps, but it implies a major burden on colonoscopy units. Therefore, it should be targeted to individuals with a higher risk. Different societies have published guidelines on surveillance after resection of polyps, with notable discrepancies among them, and many recommendations come from low-quality evidence based on surrogate measures, such as risk of advanced </span></span>adenoma<span>, and not CRC risk. In this review, we aimed to summarize the evidence supporting post-polypectomy surveillance, compare the recently updated major guidelines, and discuss the existing discrepancies on this topic. Briefly, patients with adenomas ≥10 mm or high-grade dysplasia and patients with serrated polyps ≥10 mm or dysplasia are generally considered to have an increased risk of metachronous CRC and require surveillance, whereas the indication of surveillance is not clearly established in patients without these high-risk features.</span></p></div>","PeriodicalId":56031,"journal":{"name":"Best Practice & Research Clinical Gastroenterology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Surveillance after colorectal polyp resection\",\"authors\":\"Sandra Baile-Maxía,&nbsp;Rodrigo Jover\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.bpg.2023.101848\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p><span>Post-polypectomy surveillance has proven to reduce colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence in patients<span> with high-risk polyps, but it implies a major burden on colonoscopy units. Therefore, it should be targeted to individuals with a higher risk. Different societies have published guidelines on surveillance after resection of polyps, with notable discrepancies among them, and many recommendations come from low-quality evidence based on surrogate measures, such as risk of advanced </span></span>adenoma<span>, and not CRC risk. In this review, we aimed to summarize the evidence supporting post-polypectomy surveillance, compare the recently updated major guidelines, and discuss the existing discrepancies on this topic. Briefly, patients with adenomas ≥10 mm or high-grade dysplasia and patients with serrated polyps ≥10 mm or dysplasia are generally considered to have an increased risk of metachronous CRC and require surveillance, whereas the indication of surveillance is not clearly established in patients without these high-risk features.</span></p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56031,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Best Practice & Research Clinical Gastroenterology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Best Practice & Research Clinical Gastroenterology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1521691823000288\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Best Practice & Research Clinical Gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1521691823000288","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

息肉切除术后监测已被证明可以降低高危息肉患者的结直肠癌癌症(CRC)发病率,但这意味着结肠镜检查单位的主要负担。因此,它应该针对风险较高的个人。不同的学会发布了息肉切除后监测指南,其中存在显著差异,许多建议来自基于替代措施的低质量证据,如晚期腺瘤的风险,而不是CRC风险。在这篇综述中,我们旨在总结支持息肉切除术后监测的证据,比较最近更新的主要指南,并讨论在这一主题上存在的差异。简言之,腺瘤≥10mm或高度异型增生患者和锯齿状息肉≥10mm或异型增生的患者通常被认为异时性CRC的风险增加,需要监测,而在没有这些高危特征的患者中,监测的指征尚不明确。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Surveillance after colorectal polyp resection

Post-polypectomy surveillance has proven to reduce colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence in patients with high-risk polyps, but it implies a major burden on colonoscopy units. Therefore, it should be targeted to individuals with a higher risk. Different societies have published guidelines on surveillance after resection of polyps, with notable discrepancies among them, and many recommendations come from low-quality evidence based on surrogate measures, such as risk of advanced adenoma, and not CRC risk. In this review, we aimed to summarize the evidence supporting post-polypectomy surveillance, compare the recently updated major guidelines, and discuss the existing discrepancies on this topic. Briefly, patients with adenomas ≥10 mm or high-grade dysplasia and patients with serrated polyps ≥10 mm or dysplasia are generally considered to have an increased risk of metachronous CRC and require surveillance, whereas the indication of surveillance is not clearly established in patients without these high-risk features.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
23
审稿时长
69 days
期刊介绍: Each topic-based issue of Best Practice & Research Clinical Gastroenterology will provide a comprehensive review of current clinical practice and thinking within the specialty of gastroenterology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信