ArticleGastrointestinal endoscopy2016
Association between adenoma location and risk of recurrence.
Article in Gastrointestinal endoscopy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recommendations for Follow-Up After Colonoscopy and Polypectomy: A Consensus Update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer.The American journal of gastroenterology · 2020Guideline
- Navigating the Terrain of Post-Polypectomy Surveillance: Charting the Complex Landscape of Guidelines and Recurrence Risks.Canadian journal of gastroenterology & hepatology · 2026Review
- Fecal immunochemical test surveillance in colorectal cancer following adenoma resection: A longitudinal, population-based linked cohort study in China.PLoS medicine · 2025Article
- Risk factors influencing sphincter preservation in laparoscopic radical rectal cancer surgery.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Withdrawal time in colonoscopy, past, present, and future, a narrative review.Translational gastroenterology and hepatology · 2023Review
- Adenoma characteristics associated with post-polypectomy proximal colon cancer incidence: a retrospective cohort study.British journal of cancer · 2022Article
- Recommendations for Follow-Up After Colonoscopy and Polypectomy: A Consensus Update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer.Gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2020Article
- Recommendations for Follow-Up After Colonoscopy and Polypectomy: A Consensus Update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer.Gastroenterology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsThe biological environment varies across the colorectum and may therefore affect neoplastic growth differently in the proximal and distal colon. The aim of the study was to evaluate the risk for recurrent adenomas and their anatomic location based on adenoma location at baseline colonoscopy.
methodsData were extracted from 3 adenoma prevention trials (n = 2430). Participants had at least 1 adenoma at baseline colonoscopy and underwent subsequent surveillance colonoscopy, at which time metachronous adenomas could be detected. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and the 95% confidence interval (CI) for metachronous adenomas by location of the baseline lesion and considered the impact of advanced neoplasia and multiplicity.
resultsAt baseline, 522 patients (21.5%) had adenomas only in the proximal colon, 1266 patients (52.1%) had adenomas only in the distal colorectum, and 642 (26.4%) had adenomas in both regions. Overall, 877 patients (36.5%) had metachronous adenomas during the follow-up period. Those with only proximal adenomas at baseline had a higher risk of metachronous adenomas compared with patients with only distal adenomas (RR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.01-1.35). A greater proximal risk was found after restricting the analysis to patients with multiple proximal adenomas versus multiple distal adenomas (RR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.10-1.67). The risk of recurrent adenomas on the same side was 48% higher for patients with only proximal adenomas at baseline compared with those with only distal adenomas at baseline (RR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.22-1.80).
conclusionsPatients with proximal adenomas only have a modestly greater risk of adenoma recurrence than patients with adenomas limited to the distal colon, and have a greater likelihood of adenoma recurrence on the same side compared with patients with distal adenomas. This observation suggests that biological factors may differentially affect neoplasia growth across the colon.
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.