• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

息肉切除术后结肠镜监测指南:美国结直肠癌多学会特别工作组和美国癌症协会的共识更新

Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after polypectomy: a consensus update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer and the American Cancer Society.

作者信息

Winawer Sidney J, Zauber Ann G, Fletcher Robert H, Stillman Jonathon S, O'Brien Michael J, Levin Bernard, Smith Robert A, Lieberman David A, Burt Randall W, Levin Theodore R, Bond John H, Brooks Durado, Byers Tim, Hyman Neil, Kirk Lynne, Thorson Alan, Simmang Clifford, Johnson David, Rex Douglas K

机构信息

Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.

出版信息

Gastroenterology. 2006 May;130(6):1872-85. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2006.03.012.

DOI:10.1053/j.gastro.2006.03.012
PMID:16697750
Abstract

Adenomatous polyps are the most common neoplastic findings discovered in people who undergo colorectal screening or who have a diagnostic work-up for symptoms. It was common practice in the 1970s for these patients to have annual follow-up surveillance examinations to detect additional new adenomas and missed synchronous adenomas. As a result of the National Polyp Study report in 1993, which showed 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 take place 3 years after polypectomy for most patients. In 2003 these guidelines were updated and colonoscopy was recommended as the only follow-up examination, stratification at baseline into low risk 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 shown that a large proportion of endoscopists are conducting surveillance examinations at shorter intervals than recommended in the guidelines. In the present report, a careful analytic approach was designed to address all evidence available in the literature to delineate predictors of advanced pathology, both cancer and advanced adenomas, so that patients can be stratified more definitely at their baseline colonoscopy into those at lower risk or increased risk for a subsequent advanced neoplasia. People at increased risk have either 3 or more adenomas, high-grade dysplasia, villous features, or an adenoma 1 cm or larger in size. It is recommended that they have a 3-year follow-up colonoscopy. People at lower risk who have 1 or 2 small (<1 cm) tubular adenomas with no high-grade dysplasia can have a follow-up evaluation in 5-10 years, whereas people with hyperplastic polyps only should have a 10-year follow-up evaluation, as for average-risk people. There have been recent studies that 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 the use of the recommendations by endoscopists. The 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.

摘要

腺瘤性息肉是在接受结直肠癌筛查或因症状进行诊断性检查的人群中最常见的肿瘤性发现。在20世纪70年代,这些患者通常每年进行随访监测检查,以发现额外的新发腺瘤和漏诊的同步腺瘤。1993年国家息肉研究报告明确显示,在随机设计中首次息肉切除术后的检查可推迟3年,因此,一个胃肠病学联合会在1997年发布的指南建议,大多数患者在息肉切除术后3年进行首次随访监测。2003年这些指南进行了更新,建议将结肠镜检查作为唯一的随访检查,并建议在基线时将患者分为后续腺瘤低风险和高风险两类。1997年和2003年的指南涉及筛查和监测。然而,越来越明显的是,息肉切除术后的监测现在已成为内镜实践的重要组成部分,占用了筛查和诊断的资源。此外,调查显示,很大一部分内镜医师进行监测检查的间隔时间比指南建议的要短。在本报告中,设计了一种严谨的分析方法,以梳理文献中所有可用证据,确定癌症和高级别腺瘤等高级别病理的预测因素,以便在患者基线结肠镜检查时能更明确地将其分为后续高级别肿瘤低风险或高风险人群。风险增加的人群有3个或更多腺瘤、高级别异型增生、绒毛状特征或直径1厘米或更大的腺瘤。建议他们进行3年一次的随访结肠镜检查。低风险人群若有1个或2个小(<1厘米)的无高级别异型增生的管状腺瘤,可在5至10年后进行随访评估,而仅患有增生性息肉的人群应像平均风险人群一样进行10年的随访评估。最近有研究报告称结肠镜检查漏诊了大量癌症。然而,高质量的基线结肠镜检查,做好充分的患者准备并保证足够的退镜时间,应能将此风险降至最低,并减轻临床医生的担忧。这些指南由美国结直肠癌多学会特别工作组和美国癌症协会联合制定,以达成更广泛的共识,从而增加内镜医师对这些建议的采用。在全国范围内采用这些指南可能会对将可用资源从密集监测转向筛查产生巨大影响。已表明首次筛查结肠镜检查和息肉切除术对降低腺瘤性息肉患者的结直肠癌发病率产生的影响最大。

相似文献

1
Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after polypectomy: a consensus update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer and the American Cancer Society.息肉切除术后结肠镜监测指南:美国结直肠癌多学会特别工作组和美国癌症协会的共识更新
Gastroenterology. 2006 May;130(6):1872-85. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2006.03.012.
2
Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after polypectomy: a consensus update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer and the American Cancer Society.息肉切除术后结肠镜监测指南:美国结直肠癌多学会特别工作组和美国癌症协会的共识更新
CA Cancer J Clin. 2006 May-Jun;56(3):143-59; quiz 184-5. doi: 10.3322/canjclin.56.3.143.
3
Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after cancer resection: a consensus update by the American Cancer Society and the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer.癌症切除术后结肠镜监测指南:美国癌症协会和美国结直肠癌多学会特别工作组的共识更新
Gastroenterology. 2006 May;130(6):1865-71. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2006.03.013.
4
Colonoscopy surveillance after polypectomy and colorectal cancer resection.息肉切除和结直肠癌切除术后的结肠镜监测
Am Fam Physician. 2008 Apr 1;77(7):995-1002.
5
Appropriateness of colonoscopy in Europe (EPAGE II). Surveillance after polypectomy and after resection of colorectal cancer.欧洲结肠镜检查的适宜性(EPAGE II)。息肉切除术后及结直肠癌切除术后的监测。
Endoscopy. 2009 Mar;41(3):209-17. doi: 10.1055/s-0028-1119646. Epub 2009 Mar 11.
6
Postpolypectomy and post-cancer resection surveillance.息肉切除术后及癌症切除术后监测。
Rev Gastroenterol Disord. 2003 Fall;3(4):202-9.
7
Surveillance after positive and negative colonoscopy examinations: issues, yields, and use.结肠镜检查结果为阳性和阴性后的监测:问题、收益及应用
Am J Gastroenterol. 2003 Jun;98(6):1237-46. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2003.07492.x.
8
Outcome of follow-up colon examination among a population-based cohort of colorectal cancer patients.基于人群的结直肠癌患者队列中随访结肠镜检查的结果。
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2007 Apr;5(4):470-6; quiz 407. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2006.11.027. Epub 2007 Jan 31.
9
Randomized comparison of surveillance intervals after colonoscopic removal of newly diagnosed adenomatous polyps. The National Polyp Study Workgroup.结肠镜切除新诊断腺瘤性息肉后监测间隔的随机对照比较。国家息肉研究工作组。
N Engl J Med. 1993 Apr 1;328(13):901-6. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199304013281301.
10
Findings at follow-up endoscopies in subjects with suspected colorectal abnormalities: effects of baseline findings and time to follow-up.疑似结肠直肠异常受试者随访内镜检查的结果:基线检查结果及随访时间的影响
Cancer J. 2007 Jul-Aug;13(4):263-70. doi: 10.1097/PPO.0b013e318046ebf1.

引用本文的文献

1
Zero-inflated models for the evaluation of colorectal polyps in colon cancer screening studies-a value-based biostatistics practice.用于结肠癌筛查研究中评估结直肠息肉的零膨胀模型——基于价值的生物统计学实践
PeerJ. 2025 May 26;13:e19504. doi: 10.7717/peerj.19504. eCollection 2025.
2
Use of artificial intelligence to measure colorectal polyp size without a reference object.在无参考物体的情况下使用人工智能测量结肠息肉大小。
Endosc Int Open. 2025 May 12;13:a25561836. doi: 10.1055/a-2556-1836. eCollection 2025.
3
Causal Relationship Between Gut Microbiota and Gastrointestinal Polyps: A Mendelian Randomization Study.
肠道微生物群与胃肠道息肉之间的因果关系:一项孟德尔随机化研究
Turk J Gastroenterol. 2025 Jan 6;36(5):302-311. doi: 10.5152/tjg.2025.24347.
4
DDS Profile: Sidney J. Winawer.牙医博士简介:西德尼·J·维纳韦尔。
Dig Dis Sci. 2025 Apr 10. doi: 10.1007/s10620-025-09009-8.
5
Racial Differences in Colorectal Adenomas at Screening Colonoscopy in the United States.美国结肠镜筛查中结直肠腺瘤的种族差异。
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2025 May 2;34(5):698-704. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-24-1609.
6
Relationship Between Adenoma Detection Rate and Respective Withdrawal Time in Different Colon Segments: A Retrospective, Single-Center Study.不同结肠段腺瘤检出率与各自退镜时间的关系:一项回顾性单中心研究
JGH Open. 2025 Jan 8;9(1):e70095. doi: 10.1002/jgh3.70095. eCollection 2025 Jan.
7
Cellular and molecular events in colorectal cancer: biological mechanisms, cell death pathways, drug resistance and signalling network interactions.结直肠癌中的细胞和分子事件:生物学机制、细胞死亡途径、耐药性及信号网络相互作用
Discov Oncol. 2024 Jul 20;15(1):294. doi: 10.1007/s12672-024-01163-1.
8
Clinical characteristics of symptomatic young patients with colonic adenomas.有症状的年轻结肠腺瘤患者的临床特征
Ann Gastroenterol. 2024 May-Jun;37(3):341-347. doi: 10.20524/aog.2024.0872. Epub 2024 Mar 20.
9
Survival trends for left and right sided colon cancer using population-based SEER database: A forty-five-year analysis from 1975 to 2019.基于人群的 SEER 数据库的左、右半结肠癌生存趋势:1975 年至 2019 年的 45 年分析。
Cancer Med. 2024 Apr;13(8):e7145. doi: 10.1002/cam4.7145.
10
Publication trends and hotspots of colorectal adenoma during 2002-2022: a bibliometric and visualized analysis.2002年至2022年期间结直肠腺瘤的发表趋势与热点:文献计量学与可视化分析
Front Oncol. 2023 Jul 10;13:1142703. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1142703. eCollection 2023.