ArticleAnnals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England2022
Are we overtreating patients with malignant colorectal polyps? A 5-year review of the ACPGBI position statement.
Article in Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIn 2013, The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI) issued a position statement regarding management of malignant polyps. We reviewed the management of endoscopically resected malignant colorectal polyps in a district general hospital to evaluate whether patients were being overtreated as per these guidelines.
methodsAll patients who underwent a complete, non-piecemeal endoscopic removal of a malignant polyp between October 2013 and September 2018 were studied. Polyps were risk stratified for residual disease and followed up as per the ACPGBI. Patients were divided into two groups based on management after polypectomy. Primary outcome measured was the presence of residual tumour or involved lymph nodes in the resection specimen. Secondary outcomes included complications and recurrence.
resultsThirty-three patients were included: 21 in the non-operative group (NOG) and 12 in the operative group (OG). The ACPGBI risk score in the NOG varied between 1 and over 4 compared with the OG who all scored over 4. Two patients in the OG (16%) demonstrated residual disease. Five patients suffered a postoperative complication. No recurrences were noted in the OG and one in the NOG.
conclusionOur findings against a backdrop of the available literature suggest that the risk of residual disease after malignant polypectomy may not be as high as stated by the ACPGBI. As a result, there is a risk of overtreating patients and exposing them to the significant complications of surgery if careful consideration is not exercised.
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.