ArticleJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology2024
Post-polypectomy surveillance: follow-up recommendations from the Alberta Colorectal Cancer Screening Program.
Article in Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07445178 (Piecemeal Resection and Advanced Histology Independently Predict Local Recurrence After Colorectal Snare-based Endoscopic Resection), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 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.
Piecemeal Resection and Advanced Histology Independently Predict Local Recurrence After Colorectal Snare-based Endoscopic Resection: a Time-to-event Cohort Study
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Surveillance Outcomes in an Australian Cohort Undergoing Piecemeal Polypectomy for Conventional Adenomas and Serrated Lesions.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2026Observational
- Iron Metabolism in the Colorectal Tumor Microenvironment: Current Evidence and Clinical Implications.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Age-stratified prevalence of colorectal adenoma and advanced neoplasia in adults aged 18-39 years: a single-center cross-sectional study of 2, 149 colonoscopies.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Surveillance of colorectal neoplasia: a review of guidelines, current evidence, and future directions.Colorectal cancer · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In 2013, the Alberta Colorectal Cancer Screening Program (ACRCSP) initially published recommendations for post-colonoscopy follow-up and polypectomy. Over time, emerging evidence and evolving surveillance guidelines from various expert groups necessitated a comprehensive review to align with the healthcare landscape in Alberta. To accomplish this, an expert panel was convened. Using the Agree II tool, we identified high-quality Clinical Practice Guidelines that were relevant to the Alberta medical context. Recommendations from these guidelines were adapted to fit the specific needs of Alberta. Recognizing inconsistencies and gaps within the existing guidelines, we conducted targeted literature reviews to ensure a comprehensive and evidence-based approach to our recommendations. Our revised recommendations build upon the assumption that a high-quality index colonoscopy has been performed at baseline. They are intended to enhance the quality of care and reduce unnecessary procedures. As well, they align with the growing consensus in the scientific literature that individuals with low-risk tubular adenomas may not require aggressive colonoscopy surveillance. The updated Alberta recommendations aim to provide clear recommendations for practicing endoscopists, referring physicians, and their patients. They address crucial questions such as determining which patients should commence surveillance via colonoscopy and which individuals should return to average-risk screening using the fecal immunochemical test (FIT). Additionally, our recommendations outline the appropriate surveillance intervals for those requiring continued monitoring.
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.