• 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

澳大利亚和新西兰结直肠外科医生对恶性息肉所致风险的评估。

Estimation of risk posed by malignant polyps amongst colorectal surgeons in Australia and New Zealand.

作者信息

Zammit Andrew P, Brown Ian, Hooper John D, Clark David A, Riddell Andrew D

机构信息

Faculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.

Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.

出版信息

Ann Coloproctol. 2024 Apr;40(2):114-120. doi: 10.3393/ac.2023.00178.0025. Epub 2024 Mar 25.

DOI:10.3393/ac.2023.00178.0025
PMID:38523290
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11082546/
Abstract

PURPOSE

The estimation of the risk posed by malignant polyps for residual or lymphatic disease plays a central role. This study investigated colorectal surgeons' assessment of these risks associated with malignant polyps.

METHODS

A cross-sectional questionnaire was electronically administered to colorectal surgeons in Australia and New Zealand in October 2022. The questionnaire contained 17 questions on demographics, when surgeons consider colorectal resection appropriate, and the risk assessment for 5 hypothetical malignant polyps.

RESULTS

The mean risk of residual or lymphatic disease that would prompt surgeons to recommend colonic resection was 5%. However, this increased to a mean risk of 10% if the malignant polyp was located in the rectum, and the only resection option was abdominoperineal resection with end-colostomy. There was high concordance between the estimated risk of residual or lymphatic disease by colorectal surgeons and the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI) guidelines for the 5 hypothetical malignant polyps, with the ACPGBI estimated risk lying within the 95% confidence interval for 4 of the 5 malignant polyps. Nonetheless, 96.6% of surgeons felt that an online risk calculator would improve clinical practice.

CONCLUSION

Colorectal surgeons in Australia and New Zealand accurately estimated the risk posed by malignant polyps. An online risk calculator may assist in better conveying risk to patients.

摘要

目的

评估恶性息肉导致残留或淋巴疾病的风险起着核心作用。本研究调查了结直肠外科医生对这些与恶性息肉相关风险的评估。

方法

2022年10月,通过电子方式向澳大利亚和新西兰的结直肠外科医生发放了一份横断面调查问卷。该问卷包含17个问题,涉及人口统计学、外科医生认为何时进行结直肠切除术合适,以及对5个假设的恶性息肉的风险评估。

结果

会促使外科医生建议进行结肠切除术的残留或淋巴疾病的平均风险为5%。然而,如果恶性息肉位于直肠,且唯一的切除选择是腹会阴联合切除术并结肠造口术,那么这一平均风险会升至10%。结直肠外科医生对残留或淋巴疾病的估计风险与英国和爱尔兰结直肠外科学会(ACPGBI)针对5个假设恶性息肉的指南之间具有高度一致性,在5个恶性息肉中,有4个的ACPGBI估计风险处于95%置信区间内。尽管如此,96.6%的外科医生认为在线风险计算器会改善临床实践。

结论

澳大利亚和新西兰的结直肠外科医生准确估计了恶性息肉带来的风险。在线风险计算器可能有助于更好地向患者传达风险。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2c06/11082546/c0dbd6ddde49/ac-2023-00178-0025f3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2c06/11082546/9951e8e442b0/ac-2023-00178-0025f1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2c06/11082546/14d3d5d343f8/ac-2023-00178-0025f2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2c06/11082546/c0dbd6ddde49/ac-2023-00178-0025f3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2c06/11082546/9951e8e442b0/ac-2023-00178-0025f1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2c06/11082546/14d3d5d343f8/ac-2023-00178-0025f2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2c06/11082546/c0dbd6ddde49/ac-2023-00178-0025f3.jpg

相似文献

1
Estimation of risk posed by malignant polyps amongst colorectal surgeons in Australia and New Zealand.澳大利亚和新西兰结直肠外科医生对恶性息肉所致风险的评估。
Ann Coloproctol. 2024 Apr;40(2):114-120. doi: 10.3393/ac.2023.00178.0025. Epub 2024 Mar 25.
2
Management of high and low risk malignant polyps: a population-wide analysis.高危和低危恶性息肉的管理:一项全人群分析。
Colorectal Dis. 2023 Jan;25(1):66-74. doi: 10.1111/codi.16328. Epub 2022 Sep 27.
3
Are we overtreating patients with malignant colorectal polyps? A 5-year review of the ACPGBI position statement.我们是否对恶性结直肠息肉患者过度治疗了?ACPGBI 立场声明的 5 年回顾。
Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2022 Feb;104(2):125-129. doi: 10.1308/rcsann.2021.0124. Epub 2021 Nov 3.
4
British Society of Gastroenterology/Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland/Public Health England post-polypectomy and post-colorectal cancer resection surveillance guidelines.英国胃肠病学会/英国大肠直肠外科学会/英国公共卫生署息肉切除术后和结直肠癌切除术后监测指南。
Gut. 2020 Feb;69(2):201-223. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2019-319858. Epub 2019 Nov 27.
5
Physician assessment and management of complex colon polyps: a multicenter video-based survey study.医生对复杂结肠息肉的评估和管理:一项基于多中心视频的调查研究。
Am J Gastroenterol. 2014 Sep;109(9):1312-24. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2014.95. Epub 2014 Jul 8.
6
Heuristics and bias in rectal surgery.直肠手术中的启发法与偏差
Int J Colorectal Dis. 2017 Aug;32(8):1109-1115. doi: 10.1007/s00384-017-2823-7. Epub 2017 Apr 25.
7
Indwelling trans-anastomotic rectal tubes in colorectal surgery: a survey of usage in UK and Ireland.结直肠手术中留置经吻合口直肠管:英国和爱尔兰的使用情况调查
Colorectal Dis. 2007 Jan;9(1):47-51. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2006.00969.x.
8
Management of malignant colorectal polyps in New Zealand.新西兰恶性大肠息肉的管理
ANZ J Surg. 2017 May;87(5):350-355. doi: 10.1111/ans.13502. Epub 2016 Apr 8.
9
Current Management of Malignant Colorectal Polyps Across a Regional United Kingdom Cancer Network.英国某区域癌症网络中结直肠恶性息肉的现行管理方法。
Dis Colon Rectum. 2020 Jan;63(1):39-45. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000001509.
10
Rectum versus colon: should malignant polyps be treated differently?直肠与结肠:恶性息肉是否应区别对待?
ANZ J Surg. 2021 May;91(5):927-931. doi: 10.1111/ans.16437. Epub 2020 Nov 11.

引用本文的文献

1
Management of the Malignant Rectal Polyp-A Narrative Review.恶性直肠息肉的管理——一项叙述性综述
Cancers (Basel). 2025 Apr 27;17(9):1464. doi: 10.3390/cancers17091464.

本文引用的文献

1
In comparison with polypectomy, colorectal resection is associated with improved survival for patients diagnosed with malignant polyps.与息肉切除术相比,结直肠切除术可提高恶性息肉患者的生存率。
Colorectal Dis. 2023 Feb;25(2):261-271. doi: 10.1111/codi.16369. Epub 2022 Nov 2.
2
Timing of surveillance colonoscopy following malignant colorectal polypectomy in Queensland.昆士兰州恶性大肠息肉切除术后监测结肠镜检查的时机
ANZ J Surg. 2023 Mar;93(3):606-611. doi: 10.1111/ans.18069. Epub 2022 Oct 3.
3
Missing parameters in malignant polyp histology reports: can appropriate decisions be made?
恶性息肉组织学报告中缺失的参数:能否做出恰当的决策?
Pathology. 2023 Feb;55(1):58-63. doi: 10.1016/j.pathol.2022.06.007. Epub 2022 Aug 27.
4
Management of high and low risk malignant polyps: a population-wide analysis.高危和低危恶性息肉的管理:一项全人群分析。
Colorectal Dis. 2023 Jan;25(1):66-74. doi: 10.1111/codi.16328. Epub 2022 Sep 27.
5
Patient and pathological predictors of management strategy for malignant polyps following polypectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.患者和病理预测因素对息肉切除术后恶性息肉处理策略的影响:系统评价和荟萃分析。
Int J Colorectal Dis. 2022 May;37(5):1035-1047. doi: 10.1007/s00384-022-04142-6. Epub 2022 Apr 8.
6
Surgical management and long-term functional outcomes after anastomotic leak in patients undergoing minimally invasive restorative rectal resection and without a diverting ileostomy.微创保肛直肠切除术且无预防性回肠造口术患者吻合口漏的手术处理和长期功能结局。
ANZ J Surg. 2022 Apr;92(4):806-812. doi: 10.1111/ans.17475. Epub 2022 Jan 24.
7
Predicting survival in colorectal carcinoma after curative resection: a new prognostic nomogram.预测结直肠癌根治性切除术后的生存:一种新的预后列线图。
Pathology. 2022 Feb;54(1):79-86. doi: 10.1016/j.pathol.2021.04.012. Epub 2021 Jul 22.
8
Risk factors and risk prediction models for colorectal cancer metastasis and recurrence: an umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies.结直肠癌转移和复发的危险因素和风险预测模型:系统评价和观察性研究荟萃分析的伞状评价。
BMC Med. 2020 Jun 26;18(1):172. doi: 10.1186/s12916-020-01618-6.
9
Improved Risk Prediction Calculator for Sentinel Node Positivity in Patients With Melanoma: The Melanoma Institute Australia Nomogram.澳大利亚黑色素瘤研究所列线图:改良的黑色素瘤患者前哨淋巴结阳性风险预测计算器。
J Clin Oncol. 2020 Aug 20;38(24):2719-2727. doi: 10.1200/JCO.19.02362. Epub 2020 Jun 12.
10
Histologic Evaluation of Malignant Polyps and Low-Stage Colorectal Carcinoma.恶性息肉和低期结直肠癌的组织学评估。
Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2019 Dec;143(12):1450-1454. doi: 10.5858/arpa.2019-0291-RA. Epub 2019 Sep 11.