ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2015
Endoscopic follow-up after surgery for colorectal cancer.
Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveFollow-up surgery for colorectal cancer is recommended. The yield of endoscopy is unknown and was therefore studied.
methodsPatients with colorectal cancer in the years 2003, 2004 and 2005 were included. Evaluation was done in July 2014.
resultsCancer was diagnosed in 267 patients. These were divided into three groups: group 1-still alive (n = 88), group 2-died within 1 year after diagnosis (n = 67), and group 3-died more than 1 year after diagnosis (n = 112). Patients in group 3 showed a trend towards non-cancer-related death (p = 0.06). Endoscopic follow-up was done in 101 patients (37.6 %). Patients still alive underwent more often follow-up colonoscopy (p < 0.001). Patients still alive had more often synchronous polyps detected during index endoscopy compared with patients of groups 2 and 3 (p = 0.03). Follow-up revealed more often new polyp(s) (p = 0.006). If no polyps were seen during the time of diagnosing cancer, follow-up endoscopy detected polyp(s) in 26 % of cases. Two newly developed cancers in group 1 and three in group 3 were diagnosed.
conclusionEndoscopic follow-up after curative surgery for colorectal cancer has a high diagnostic yield. Whether detection and removal of polyps increases survival is not yet clear.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.