Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24167384›Full record

ArticleActa informatica medica : AIM : journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina : casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH2013

Colonoscopic Polypectomies and Recommendations on the Colonoscopy Follow-up Intervals Depending on Endoscopic and Histopathological Findings.

Miroslav Simunic, Nikola Perkovic, Bruna Rosic-Despalatovic, Ante Tonkic, Zarko Ardalic, Marina Titlic, Marina Maras-Simunic

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Acta informatica medica : AIM : journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina : casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 30% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Miroslav SimunicDepartment of Internal Medicine, University Hospital Center Split, Split, Croatia.
Nikola Perkovic
Bruna Rosic-Despalatovic
Ante Tonkic
Zarko Ardalic
Marina Titlic
Marina Maras-Simunic
University of Split · HR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

THE

aimTo show histopathological diagnoses after colonoscopic polypectomy in the University Hospital Center (KBC) Split with recommendations on further follow-up colonoscopy depending on the endoscopic and histological findings. PATIENTS AND

methodsThe study included 2842 patients who underwent colonoscopy in a two-year period (2008-2009), followed by a detailed analysis of 350 patients in which one or more polyps were simultaneously removed and 163 patients who were only sampled for histological analysis. Patients from the National Program for Colorectal Cancer Prevention and patients in which colonoscopy is indicated as part of daily outpatient or inpatient treatment were included as well.

resultsDuring 2008 and 2009 in KBC Split, out of a total of 2842 colonoscopies, 350 patients underwent colonoscopic polypectomy, whereby 618 polyps were removed (1-8 polyps in individual patients), while in 163 patients only biopsy specimens were sampled. Out of the total of 557 polyps sent for histological analysis, 236 were hyperplastic (42%), 193 were identified as tubular adenoma (35%), 84 were tubulovillous (15%), 18 villous (3%), 9 were adenocarcinoma (2%) and other 17 (3%). In 35 (15.4%) polyps high-grade dysplasia was found. The largest number of nonpolypectomized changes confirmed the presence of adenocarcinoma (76-47%), adenomas and hyperplastic polyps were 37 (22%) and regular findings 23 (14%). Mucosal high-grade dysplasia was demonstrated in 35 (23.1%) biopsied changes.

conclusionColonoscopies with polypectomy decreased the risk of the formation of colorectal cancer in these patients almost to the level of risk in patients who have not even had a polyp during colonoscopy. Arguably the best method of prevention and early detection of colorectal cancer are already widely established national programs. The next qualitative level is constantly improving the quality of colonoscopy with clear criteria and the establishment of a body to evaluate the performers and the equipment, and making recommendations on the colonoscopy follow-up intervals depending on endoscopic and histopathological findings of patients who for any reason underwent colonoscopy.

Indexed as

colonoscopic polipectomyquality of endoscopy.surveillance

Identifiers

PMID24167384
PMCPMC3804476
OpenAlexW1998311894

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.