Suppr超能文献

比较经直肠硬性乙状结肠镜检查、纤维结肠镜检查和直肠指检在确定直肠癌定位中的作用。

Comparisons of Rigid Proctoscopy, Flexible Colonoscopy, and Digital Rectal Examination for Determining the Localization of Rectal Cancers.

机构信息

Department of Surgery, Tokai University School of Medicine, Isehara, Kanagawa, Japan.

出版信息

Dis Colon Rectum. 2018 Feb;61(2):202-206. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000000906.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Rigid proctoscopy is considered essential for rectal tumor localization, although the current gold standard for detection of colorectal cancers is colonoscopy. The European Society for Medical Oncology Guidelines indicate that rigid and flexible endoscopies afford essentially identical results, although little evidence is yet available to support this.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to determine the accuracy of colonoscopy in identifying the location of rectal cancer and to compare the results with those of rigid proctoscopy and digital rectal examination.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective analysis of a prospective database.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted at a single tertiary colorectal surgery referral center.

PATIENTS

A total of 173 patients scheduled for curative surgery for histologically verified rectal adenocarcinoma between December 2009 and February 2015 were entered into the study, after having given informed consent.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The main study measure was the mean difference and limits of agreement in assessment of the height of the distal edge of rectal cancer from the anal verge, using the Bland and Altman method.

RESULTS

The mean difference between rigid proctoscopy and flexible colonoscopy was -0.2 cm (95% CI, -2.0 to 1.6 cm). The mean difference between rigid proctoscopy and digital rectal examination was 0.3 cm (95% CI, 1.9 to 2.4 cm). Intermethod variability larger than the 95% CI between rigid and flexible endoscopes was correlated to the tumor height (OR, 4.27 (95% CI, 1.84-3.10); p = 0.021).

LIMITATIONS

This study was conducted in a single center.

CONCLUSIONS

The limits of agreement (-2.0 and 1.6 cm) in identifying the height of rectal cancers from the anal verge are sufficiently small to support the view that flexible colonoscopy provides similar tumor locations to those measured by rigid proctoscopy, although the discrepancy occasionally exceeded 2 cm for tumors >5 cm above the anal verge. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A405.

摘要

背景

直肠肿瘤定位时,硬性直肠镜检查被认为是必不可少的,尽管目前结直肠癌的金标准检测方法是结肠镜检查。欧洲肿瘤内科学会指南表明,硬性和软性内镜检查的结果基本相同,尽管目前还没有证据支持这一点。

目的

本研究旨在确定结肠镜检查识别直肠癌位置的准确性,并将结果与硬性直肠镜检查和直肠指检进行比较。

设计

这是一项回顾性的前瞻性数据库分析。

设置

这项研究在一个单一的三级结直肠外科转诊中心进行。

患者

共有 173 名患者在 2009 年 12 月至 2015 年 2 月期间签署知情同意书后,被纳入了这项研究,这些患者被安排接受经组织学证实的直肠腺癌的根治性手术。

主要观察指标

主要研究指标是采用 Bland 和 Altman 方法评估直肠癌远端边缘距肛门缘的高度的平均值差异和一致性界限。

结果

硬性直肠镜检查和软性结肠镜检查之间的平均差异为-0.2cm(95%置信区间,-2.0 至 1.6cm)。硬性直肠镜检查和直肠指检之间的平均差异为 0.3cm(95%置信区间,1.9 至 2.4cm)。硬性和软性内镜之间的 95%置信区间内的方法间变异性大于肿瘤高度相关(比值比,4.27(95%置信区间,1.84-3.10);p=0.021)。

局限性

本研究仅在一个中心进行。

结论

从肛门缘识别直肠癌高度的一致性界限(-2.0 和 1.6cm)足够小,足以支持软性结肠镜检查提供与硬性直肠镜检查相似的肿瘤位置的观点,尽管对于距肛门缘超过 5cm 的肿瘤,差异偶尔超过 2cm。

请注意,这只是一个基本的翻译,可能存在一些不准确或不流畅的地方。如果你需要更准确和自然的翻译,请提供更多的上下文和信息。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验