Do all colorectal polyps require pathological examination? Aim To assess whether it is possible to omit the pathological examination of some polyps without.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
WHAT ABOUT THE IMP? IMP HANDLING FOR THE TRIAL SITE PHARMACY.
Advertisements

A guaiac- based faecal occult blood colorectal cancer screening program involving general practitioners is feasible and cost-effective for mass population.
Polyps – Where do they come from and what do you do with them?!
Organized colorectal cancer screening program with FOBT: participation and diagnostic yield deteriorate with time Results – yield Aim To assess the short.
Role of colonoscopy in the treatment of malignant polyps Pathology of malignant colorectal polyps Assessing the risk of residual disease post-polypectomy.
Treatment of large and giant colorectal polyps in the real world Stéphanie HUSSON, Guy VENTRE, Frédéric VAGNE, Jean François VIES, Marjorie MUSSO, Jean.
Spotlight on Colorectal Cancer Screening 1 1. Home Screening for Colon Cancer
Assessment of pathologic interpretation of colorectal polyps by general pathologists in community practice Bernard DENIS, Carol PETERS, Catherine CHAPELAIN,
Surveillance colonoscopy after polypectomy – how frequent? Dr Chu Ming Leong Tuen Mun Hospital 1.
USPSTF Screening Recommendations: Implications for Adults at Higher Risk NYFAHC Roundtable, June 18, 2013 Robert A. Smith, PhD Senior Director, Cancer.
Multitarget Stool DNA Testing for Colorectal-Cancer Screening NEJM April 3, 2014 Vol 3 Imperiale, T.F. et al Presented by Melissa Spera, MD.
CCE 4: Bridging Clinical Expertise Using Predictive Computational Cancer Models CRC screening and follow-up – Semi-mechanistic model of CRC development.
DR Jameel Tariq Miro.  Lifetime incidence 5%  90% of cases occur after age 50  One-third of patients with colorectal cancer die from the disease 
Colorectal Cancer Screening & Surveillance: Anything New? Timothy C. Hoops, M.D.
CHARACTERISTICS OF PATIENTS WITH COLORECTAL CANCER IN NORTHWESTERN GREECE Dimitrios Christodoulou, Ioannis Mitselos, Chrisanthi Tzika, Epameinondas V.
Is upper endoscopy indicated in persons with a positive FOBT and a negative colonoscopy in a population-based colorectal cancer screening program ? Bernard.
Adverse effects of colorectal cancer screening with fecal occult blood test: a population-based organized program Results – serious adverse effects Adverse.
Joint Hospital Surgical Grand Round 19 June 2004.
Clinical Practice Screening for Colorectal Cancer David A. Lieberman, M.D. N Engl J Med Volume 361(12): September 17, 2009.
Update on Colorectal Cancer Screening Tests Source: Levin Bernard et al. Screening and Surveillance for the Early Detection of Colorectal Cancer and Adenomatous.
Upper and Lower GI Investigation of Elderly Patients who are Iron Deficient American Journal of Medicine July 1999.
High risk population in GI field how we can find them? Ahmad Shavakhi MD Associate professor of gastroenterology.
Andreas Adler Charité Medical University of Berlin, Virchow Clinic Campus Central Interdisciplinary Endoscopy Unit Narrow Band versus Conventional Endoscopic.
Colonoscopy; Surveillance Indications
Colorectal cancer screening by primary care physicians: a prospective chart audit Bernard DENIS, Guillaume SCHON, Marcel RUETSCH, Jean Christian GRALL,
TREATMENT OF LARGE AND GIANT COLORECTAL POLYPS IN THE REAL WORLD UEGW, PARIS, 2007 Association pour le Dépistage du Cancer colorectal dans le Haut-Rhin.
Colorectal carcinoma Dr.Mohammadzadeh.
FIRST TWO AND HALF YEAR OF NATIONAL SCREENING PROGRAM FOR COLORECTAL CANCERS IN REPUBLIC CROATIA Miroslava Katicic 1, Milan Kujundzic 2, Davor Stimac 3,
Our Vision – Healthy Kansans Living in Safe and Sustainable Environments.
CONFIDENTIAL PillCam ™ COLON PillCam™ COLON has received a CE Mark, but is not cleared for marketing or available for commercial distribution in the USA.
Slides last updated: June 2015 CRC: CLINICAL FEATURES.
Results and cost of a population-based biennial faecal occult blood colorectal cancer screening program Bernard DENIS, Philippe PERRIN, Jean François VIES,
COMPARING YIELD AND COST OF FOBT AND FS IN AN AVERAGE RISK POPULATION: RESULTS AFTER 2 SCREENING ROUNDS N.Segnan MD, Ms Epi Center for Cancer Prevention.
Colorectal cancer screening with the addition of flexible sigmoidoscopy to guaiac-based fecal occult blood testing: a population-based controlled trial.
PREPARED BY Colorectal Cancer Programme Screening for Colorectal Cancer A/P Susan Parry, Gastroenterologist, CD MOH Bowel Cancer Programme.
A National Bowel Screening Programme Anticipated Colonoscopy Volumes Susan Parry Gastroenterologist, Clinical Director, MOH Bowel Cancer Programme Emmanuel.
Perspectives from the Waitemata Bowel Screening Pilot team -The Endoscopic view Paul Frankish Lead Endoscopist.
The effects of inadequate preparation quality for colonoscopy Eric Sherer and Michael Catlin August 20 th, 2010 HSR&D Work-in-Progress 1.
Yield of colonoscopy for advanced neoplasia in a population-based setting Bernard DENIS, Jacques PICOT, Jean François VIES, Marjorie MUSSO, Paul François.
MALIGNANT POLYPS DURING THE FIRST THREE SCREENING ROUNDS ( ) FOR COLON-RECTAL CANCER (CRC) IN A NORTH-EASTERN SANITARY DISTRICT (ULSS-1 VENETO).
NHSBCSP - guidelines Phil Quirke. Why guidelines To meet the needs of the programme To improve outcomes To increase the knowledge base and evolve pathology.
Optical Diagnosis for Colorectal Polyps? Steve Schrock, MD, FAAFP November 5, 2015.
CT Colonography vs Colonoscopy for the Detection of Advanced Neoplasia David H. Kim, M.D., Perry J. Pickhardt, M.D., Andrew J. Taylor, M.D., Winifred K.
High Quality Screening Colonoscopy Colonoscopy is a common endoscopic procedure, with more than 3 million examinations performed in the United States annually.
Cheshire & Merseyside Bowel Cancer Screening Programme April 2008.
Colorectal Cancer Screening Implementation of a public health programme An Expert Group on Colorectal Cancer Screening Cancer Society of Finland, Finnish.
First results of a pilot population-based faecal occult blood colorectal cancer screening program B. DENIS, P. PERRIN, J.F. EBELIN, P. WEBER, E. KALTENBACH,
Towards Global Eminence K Y U N G H E E U N I V E R S I T Y Colonoscopy Surveillance After Colorectal Cancer Resection: Recommendations of the US Multi-Society.
Radiological-histological size correlation in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) Abstract # 8254 C Thibault 1, M Gosset 2, F Chamming’s 3, M-A Lefrere-Belda.
The Malignant Polyp Handout Version Hans Elzinga, MD Program Director- Advanced Procedures in Family Medicine Fellowship Salud Family Health Center-Longmont,
GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY Volume 78, No. 3 : 2013 F1 김태영
R4 채정민 / Prof 이창균. INTRODUCTION colonoscopy is a widely used screening tool for colorectal cancer adenoma detection rate (ADR) important quality indicator.
Am J Gastroenterol 2012; 107:1213– June 2012 R3. 김동희 /prof. 이창균.
High Quality Screening Colonoscopy Colonoscopy is a common endoscopic procedure, with more than 3 million examinations performed in the United States annually.
Colonoscopic Polypectomy and Long-Term Prevention of Colorectal- Cancer Deaths N ENG J MED ;8 : Ann G. Zauber, Ph.D, Sidney J. Winawer,
The capacity challenge:
Clinical process indicators
27th Annual Winter CME Conference
Sessile Serrated Adenomas: An Evidence-Based Guide to Management
Jasper Vleugels PhD-student AMC
Repeat Colonoscopy Recommendations
Feeling Rushed? Does Late Start Time Predict Poor Quality Colonoscopy?
Sessile Serrated Adenomas: An Evidence-Based Guide to Management
Polyps of the Colon and Rectum
Reporting in CRC screening
Cesare Hassan, Perry J. Pickhardt, Douglas K. Rex 
Risks of interval colorectal cancer in a FIT-based screening program
Breast Cancer Screening in High-Risk Men: A 12-Year Longitudinal Observational Study of Male Breast Imaging Utilization and Outcomes Mammography screening.
Presentation transcript:

Do all colorectal polyps require pathological examination? Aim To assess whether it is possible to omit the pathological examination of some polyps without any risk for the patient 2 studies - Retrospective study: retrospective assessment of all polyps removed from September 2003 to August 2008 within the organized gFOBT CRC screening program implemented in the Haut-Rhin (a French administrative district) 0.71 million inhabitants. All residents aged invited to participate in a program with biennial gFOBT (Hemoccult II) (Denis B et al Gut 2007) - Prospective study: prospective assessment of all polyps removed from January to August 2008 in the endoscopy unit of Pasteur Hospital in Colmar Conclusions - Due to the risk of invasive carcinoma, all polyps > 5 mm require pathological examination. - Conversely, the pathological examination of a great number of polyps ≤ 5 mm can be safely omitted, the proportion depending on the level of risk that is considered acceptable:. All polyps ≤ 5 mm associated with a CRC or a polyp ≥ 10 mm or removed in very old patients without any risk for the patient (15 – 20% of polyps). All polyps ≤ 5 mm associated with a polyp mm with the risk of a 5y surveillance interval instead of a 3y in one patient out of 175 (10% of polyps). All isolated polyps ≤ 5 mm in people with personal or family history of CRC or adenoma with the risk of a 5y surveillance interval instead of a 3y in one patient out of 44 (30% of polyps) Digestive Disease Week, Chicago, 2 June 2009 Background Médecine A, Hôpital Pasteur; Association pour le Dépistage du Cancer colorectal en Alsace (ADECA Alsace), Colmar, FRANCE Abstract Results – retrospective study Methods Percentage of correct surveillance intervals Bernard DENIS, Jacques BOTTLAENDER, Anne Marie WEISS, André PETER, Gilles BREYSACHER, Pascale CHIAPPA, Isabelle GENDRE, Philippe PERRIN Conflict of interest : none Pathological examination of removed colorectal polyps places a huge burden on pathologists and represents a non negligible cost. It is of value only if clinical management is affected eg if colorectal cancer (CRC) is detected or if the post-polypectomy surveillance interval is guided. Aim: to assess whether it is possible to omit the pathological examination of some polyps without any risk for the patient. Methods: retrospective assessment of all polyps removed from September 2003 to August 2008 within the organized gFOBT CRC screening program implemented in the Haut-Rhin and prospective assessment of all polyps removed from January to August 2008 in a hospital endoscopy unit. Results: The results of the retrospective study involving 4360 polyps are presented in the table. In the prospective study, 355 polyps were removed during 175 colonoscopic procedures. 47.4% of them were a 1st procedure and 46.5% a surveillance procedure after surgery for CRC or polypectomy. A family history of CRC was present in 13.9% of cases. 263 (74.1%) polyps were ≤ 5 mm and 54 (15.2%) were ≥ 10 mm. 90 (25.7%) polyps were non adenomatous, 76 (21.4%) advanced adenoma and 2 (0.6%) invasive carcinoma. The pathological examination was considered useful by the endoscopist for 148 (41.7%) polyps. This rate of useful examinations varied according to the polyps’ size (26.1% for polyps ≤ 5 mm, 73.7% for 6-9 mm and 92.5% for ≥ 10 mm)(p<0.001) and to the context (57.1% in case of a 1st procedure and 23.4% in case of a surveillance procedure). The pathological examination was necessary for the determination of the surveillance interval in 24.0% of patients and modified the surveillance interval proposed by the endoscopist in 8.6% of patients. It had no impact on the surveillance interval in 67.4% of patients. If isolated polyps ≤ 5 mm had not been examined in patients with either personal or family history of CRC or adenoma (37.5% of polyps in our prospective study) one patient out of 44 would have had a surveillance interval of 5 years instead of 3 years. Conclusion: Due to the risk of invasive carcinoma, all polyps > 5 mm require pathological examination. The pathological examination of diminutive polyps ≤ 5 mm either associated with a CRC or a polyp ≥ 10 mm or removed in very old patients can be omitted without any risk for the patient. They represent 13.8% of polyps in case of a diversified recruitment and 22.3% in an organized gFOBT CRC screening program. Haut-Rhin 175 colonoscopies - 68 Women – 107 Men y mean age - 1st colo : 47.4% - personal history of CRC or adenoma: 46.5% - 1st degree family history of CRC: 13.9% - After polypectomy, decisions regarding surgical resection and surveillance intervals are based on pathology findings of the removed specimens. - Pathological examination of all removed colorectal polyps is usually recommended. - However it places a huge burden on pathologists at a non negligible cost. - Furthermore, it is of value only if clinical management is affected eg if invasive carcinoma is detected or if the post-polypectomy surveillance interval is guided. 69 (5.1) 1290 (96.1) 1343 (33.8) ≥ 10 mm 70 (1.6)1 (0.2)0 (0)Invasive cancer n (%) 1748 (40.1)178 (30.2)280 (13.7)Advanced adenoma n (%) 3134 (71.9)483 (82.0)1361 (66.8)Adenomatous polyps n (%) (14.8)2038 (51.3)Number n (%) all6 – 9 mm≤ 5 mmPolyps’ size Results – prospective study % patients with correct surveillance intervals % polyps ≤ 5 mm analyzed Threshold? Polyps’ size≤ 5 mm6 – 9 mm≥ 10 mmall Number n (%)261 (74.6)35 (10.0)54 (15.4)350 Adenomatous polyps n (%)180 (69.0)29 (82.9)51 (94.4)260 (74.3) Advanced adenoma n (%)22 (8.4)13 (37.1)51 (94.4)86 (24.6) Invasive cancer n (%)0 (0) 2 (3.7)2 (0.6) Endoscopist performances for the diagnosis of malignant polyp disease CRC +CRC - test CRC CRC Sensitivity 100%- PPV 3.3% - Specificity 83.0%- NPV 100% Characteristics of polyps examined Number of polyps examined n (%) Number of patients with correct surveillance n (%) All (> 5 mm and all ≤ 5 mm )355 (100)175 (100) All except ≤ 5 mm associated with cancer or polyp ≥ 10 mm or very old age 306 (86.2)175 (100) Idem above except ≤ 5 mm associated with polyp(s) 6 – 9 mm 276 (77.7)174 (99.4) Idem above except isolated ≤ 5 mm polyps in patients with history* 143 (40.3)170 (97.1) Idem above except isolated ≤ 5 mm polyps in patients without history* (ie all polyps > 5 mm without any ≤ 5 mm ) 92 (25.9)142 (81.1) history*: personal or family history of CRC or adenoma Rate of useful pathological examinations: 41.1%