ReviewIntestinal research2023
Summary and comparison of recently updated post-polypectomy surveillance guidelines.
Review in Intestinal research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Long-term effectiveness of a two-step colorectal cancer screening strategy and risk of colorectal cancer after polypectomy.Chinese journal of cancer research = Chung-kuo yen cheng yen chiu · 2026Article
- Iron Metabolism in the Colorectal Tumor Microenvironment: Current Evidence and Clinical Implications.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- AI-Enhanced Prognostic Model for Predicting Polyp Recurrence and Guiding Post-Polypectomy Surveillance Intervals Using the ERCPMP-V5 Dataset.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Demographic and Clinicopathologic Factors Associated With Colorectal Adenoma Recurrence.JAMA network open · 2026Observational
- Comparison between endoscopic resection and transanal surgery for treatment of rectal tumors: a systematic review and meta‑analysis.Intestinal research · 2026Review
- A screening model for advanced colorectal neoplasia based on tumor markers and inflammatory indices: a retrospective study with an online risk calculator.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Navigating the Terrain of Post-Polypectomy Surveillance: Charting the Complex Landscape of Guidelines and Recurrence Risks.Canadian journal of gastroenterology & hepatology · 2026Review
- Prevention and treatment of recurrence after endoscopic resection of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2025Review
- Assessing Patient Preferences and Response to Extended Colonoscopy Intervals in a Colorectal Cancer Surveillance Program.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2025Article
- Annual Blood Tests Are an Acceptable form of Surveillance to Supplement Colonoscopies for Colorectal Cancer.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2025Article
- Colorectal Cancer Screening using Immunochemical Faecal Occult Blood Testing (iFOBT) in Urban-Poor Communities in Cheras, Malaysia: A Cross-Sectional Study.The Malaysian journal of medical sciences : MJMS · 2025Article
- Frequency and Risk Factors of Advanced Neoplasia in Korean Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients with Low-grade Dysplasia.The Korean journal of gastroenterology = Taehan Sohwagi Hakhoe chi · 2025Article
- The impact of COVID-19 on clinical practices of colorectal cancer in South Korea.Intestinal research · 2025Article
- Review
- Screening and surveillance for hereditary colorectal cancer.Intestinal research · 2024Review
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
Recently, updated guidelines for post-polypectomy surveillance have been published by the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force (USMSTF), the British Society of Gastroenterology/Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland/Public Health England (BSG/ACPGBI/PHE), the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE), the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society (JGES), and the Korean Multi-Society Taskforce Committee. This review summarizes and compares the updated recommendations of these 5 guidelines. There are some differences between the guidelines for the recommended post-polypectomy surveillance intervals. In particular, there are prominent differences between the guidelines for 1-4 tubular adenomas < 10 mm with low-grade dysplasia (nonadvanced adenomas [NAAs]) and tubulovillous or villous adenomas. The USMSTF, JGES, and Korean guidelines recommend colonoscopic surveillance for patients with 1-4 NAAs and those with tubulovillous or villous adenomas, whereas the BSG/ACPGBI/PHE and ESGE guidelines do not recommend endoscopic surveillance for such patients. Surveillance recommendations for patients with serrated polyps (SPs) are limited. Although the USMSTF guidelines provide specific recommendations for patients who have undergone SPs removal, these are weak and based on very lowquality evidence. Future studies should examine this topic to better guide the surveillance recommendations for patients with SPs. For countries that do not have separate guidelines, we hope that this review article will help select the most appropriate guidelines as per each country's healthcare environment.
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.