Do patients with rectosigmoid adenomas 5 mm or less in diameter need total colonoscopy?

Stefania Sciallero, Luigina Bonelli, Hugo Aste, Tino Casetti, Elisabetta Bertinelli, Stefania Bartolini, Roberto Parri, Guido Castiglione, Paola Mantellini, Massimo Costantini, Carlo Naldoni, Paolo Bruzzi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

25 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: The need for colonoscopy in the care of patients with rectosigmoid adenoma 5 mm or less in diameter is still debatable. Methods: We estimated the prevalence of proximal adenomas among 3052 consecutive subjects undergoing total colonoscopy. Rectosigmoid adenoma was classified as diminutive (5 mm), small (6 to 10 mm), or large (≥11 mm). Advanced proximal adenoma was 10 mm in diameter or larger, or with a villous component, severe dysplasia, or infiltrating adenocarcinoma. Results: Proximal adenoma was found in 212 of 2483 patients (8.5%, 95% CI [7.5, 9.7]) without distal neoplastic polyps, 49 of 214 (22.9%, 95% CI [17.6, 29.2]) with diminutive, 44 of 174 (25.3%, 95% CI [19.1, 32.5] with small, and 70 of 181 (38.7%, 95% CI [31.6, 46.2]) with large distal adenoma. Advanced proximal adenoma was found in 49 (2.0%, 95% CI [1.5, 2.6]), 8 (3.7%, 95% CI [1.7, 7.5]), 17 (9.8%, 95% CI [6.0, 15.4]), and 29 patients (16.0%, 95% [11.2, 22.4]), respectively. In patients with distal adenoma risk for proximal lesions increased with increasing age, size, and number of distal adenomas (p = 0.01). Size of distal adenoma was the strongest predictor of the presence of proximal advanced adenoma (multivariate analyses). Conclusions: In a clinical setting, the decision to perform colonoscopy should take into account proximal lesions of clinical interest, life expectancy, costs, and risks associated with the procedure. When detection of advanced proximal adenoma is the goal, presence of distal diminutive adenoma alone might not be an indication for total colonoscopy.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)314-321
Number of pages8
JournalGastrointestinal Endoscopy
Volume50
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1999

Fingerprint

Colonoscopy
Adenoma
Polyps
Life Expectancy
Patient Care
Adenocarcinoma
Multivariate Analysis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Gastroenterology

Cite this

Do patients with rectosigmoid adenomas 5 mm or less in diameter need total colonoscopy? / Sciallero, Stefania; Bonelli, Luigina; Aste, Hugo; Casetti, Tino; Bertinelli, Elisabetta; Bartolini, Stefania; Parri, Roberto; Castiglione, Guido; Mantellini, Paola; Costantini, Massimo; Naldoni, Carlo; Bruzzi, Paolo.

In: Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Vol. 50, No. 3, 1999, p. 314-321.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Sciallero, S, Bonelli, L, Aste, H, Casetti, T, Bertinelli, E, Bartolini, S, Parri, R, Castiglione, G, Mantellini, P, Costantini, M, Naldoni, C & Bruzzi, P 1999, 'Do patients with rectosigmoid adenomas 5 mm or less in diameter need total colonoscopy?', Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, vol. 50, no. 3, pp. 314-321. https://doi.org/10.1053/ge.1999.v50.97110
Sciallero, Stefania ; Bonelli, Luigina ; Aste, Hugo ; Casetti, Tino ; Bertinelli, Elisabetta ; Bartolini, Stefania ; Parri, Roberto ; Castiglione, Guido ; Mantellini, Paola ; Costantini, Massimo ; Naldoni, Carlo ; Bruzzi, Paolo. / Do patients with rectosigmoid adenomas 5 mm or less in diameter need total colonoscopy?. In: Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 1999 ; Vol. 50, No. 3. pp. 314-321.
@article{9c13e9cdcf0c4aff977fd22c8fe0184c,
title = "Do patients with rectosigmoid adenomas 5 mm or less in diameter need total colonoscopy?",
abstract = "Background: The need for colonoscopy in the care of patients with rectosigmoid adenoma 5 mm or less in diameter is still debatable. Methods: We estimated the prevalence of proximal adenomas among 3052 consecutive subjects undergoing total colonoscopy. Rectosigmoid adenoma was classified as diminutive (5 mm), small (6 to 10 mm), or large (≥11 mm). Advanced proximal adenoma was 10 mm in diameter or larger, or with a villous component, severe dysplasia, or infiltrating adenocarcinoma. Results: Proximal adenoma was found in 212 of 2483 patients (8.5{\%}, 95{\%} CI [7.5, 9.7]) without distal neoplastic polyps, 49 of 214 (22.9{\%}, 95{\%} CI [17.6, 29.2]) with diminutive, 44 of 174 (25.3{\%}, 95{\%} CI [19.1, 32.5] with small, and 70 of 181 (38.7{\%}, 95{\%} CI [31.6, 46.2]) with large distal adenoma. Advanced proximal adenoma was found in 49 (2.0{\%}, 95{\%} CI [1.5, 2.6]), 8 (3.7{\%}, 95{\%} CI [1.7, 7.5]), 17 (9.8{\%}, 95{\%} CI [6.0, 15.4]), and 29 patients (16.0{\%}, 95{\%} [11.2, 22.4]), respectively. In patients with distal adenoma risk for proximal lesions increased with increasing age, size, and number of distal adenomas (p = 0.01). Size of distal adenoma was the strongest predictor of the presence of proximal advanced adenoma (multivariate analyses). Conclusions: In a clinical setting, the decision to perform colonoscopy should take into account proximal lesions of clinical interest, life expectancy, costs, and risks associated with the procedure. When detection of advanced proximal adenoma is the goal, presence of distal diminutive adenoma alone might not be an indication for total colonoscopy.",
author = "Stefania Sciallero and Luigina Bonelli and Hugo Aste and Tino Casetti and Elisabetta Bertinelli and Stefania Bartolini and Roberto Parri and Guido Castiglione and Paola Mantellini and Massimo Costantini and Carlo Naldoni and Paolo Bruzzi",
year = "1999",
doi = "10.1053/ge.1999.v50.97110",
language = "English",
volume = "50",
pages = "314--321",
journal = "Gastrointestinal Endoscopy",
issn = "0016-5107",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Do patients with rectosigmoid adenomas 5 mm or less in diameter need total colonoscopy?

AU - Sciallero, Stefania

AU - Bonelli, Luigina

AU - Aste, Hugo

AU - Casetti, Tino

AU - Bertinelli, Elisabetta

AU - Bartolini, Stefania

AU - Parri, Roberto

AU - Castiglione, Guido

AU - Mantellini, Paola

AU - Costantini, Massimo

AU - Naldoni, Carlo

AU - Bruzzi, Paolo

PY - 1999

Y1 - 1999

N2 - Background: The need for colonoscopy in the care of patients with rectosigmoid adenoma 5 mm or less in diameter is still debatable. Methods: We estimated the prevalence of proximal adenomas among 3052 consecutive subjects undergoing total colonoscopy. Rectosigmoid adenoma was classified as diminutive (5 mm), small (6 to 10 mm), or large (≥11 mm). Advanced proximal adenoma was 10 mm in diameter or larger, or with a villous component, severe dysplasia, or infiltrating adenocarcinoma. Results: Proximal adenoma was found in 212 of 2483 patients (8.5%, 95% CI [7.5, 9.7]) without distal neoplastic polyps, 49 of 214 (22.9%, 95% CI [17.6, 29.2]) with diminutive, 44 of 174 (25.3%, 95% CI [19.1, 32.5] with small, and 70 of 181 (38.7%, 95% CI [31.6, 46.2]) with large distal adenoma. Advanced proximal adenoma was found in 49 (2.0%, 95% CI [1.5, 2.6]), 8 (3.7%, 95% CI [1.7, 7.5]), 17 (9.8%, 95% CI [6.0, 15.4]), and 29 patients (16.0%, 95% [11.2, 22.4]), respectively. In patients with distal adenoma risk for proximal lesions increased with increasing age, size, and number of distal adenomas (p = 0.01). Size of distal adenoma was the strongest predictor of the presence of proximal advanced adenoma (multivariate analyses). Conclusions: In a clinical setting, the decision to perform colonoscopy should take into account proximal lesions of clinical interest, life expectancy, costs, and risks associated with the procedure. When detection of advanced proximal adenoma is the goal, presence of distal diminutive adenoma alone might not be an indication for total colonoscopy.

AB - Background: The need for colonoscopy in the care of patients with rectosigmoid adenoma 5 mm or less in diameter is still debatable. Methods: We estimated the prevalence of proximal adenomas among 3052 consecutive subjects undergoing total colonoscopy. Rectosigmoid adenoma was classified as diminutive (5 mm), small (6 to 10 mm), or large (≥11 mm). Advanced proximal adenoma was 10 mm in diameter or larger, or with a villous component, severe dysplasia, or infiltrating adenocarcinoma. Results: Proximal adenoma was found in 212 of 2483 patients (8.5%, 95% CI [7.5, 9.7]) without distal neoplastic polyps, 49 of 214 (22.9%, 95% CI [17.6, 29.2]) with diminutive, 44 of 174 (25.3%, 95% CI [19.1, 32.5] with small, and 70 of 181 (38.7%, 95% CI [31.6, 46.2]) with large distal adenoma. Advanced proximal adenoma was found in 49 (2.0%, 95% CI [1.5, 2.6]), 8 (3.7%, 95% CI [1.7, 7.5]), 17 (9.8%, 95% CI [6.0, 15.4]), and 29 patients (16.0%, 95% [11.2, 22.4]), respectively. In patients with distal adenoma risk for proximal lesions increased with increasing age, size, and number of distal adenomas (p = 0.01). Size of distal adenoma was the strongest predictor of the presence of proximal advanced adenoma (multivariate analyses). Conclusions: In a clinical setting, the decision to perform colonoscopy should take into account proximal lesions of clinical interest, life expectancy, costs, and risks associated with the procedure. When detection of advanced proximal adenoma is the goal, presence of distal diminutive adenoma alone might not be an indication for total colonoscopy.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0032819851&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0032819851&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1053/ge.1999.v50.97110

DO - 10.1053/ge.1999.v50.97110

M3 - Article

C2 - 10462649

AN - SCOPUS:0032819851

VL - 50

SP - 314

EP - 321

JO - Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

JF - Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

SN - 0016-5107

IS - 3

ER -