PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Intestinal Polyps”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 1,531 records · Page 85Linked to original sources
PubMed1988

Small polyps found during fiberoptic sigmoidoscopy in asymptomatic patients.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of small polyps in the rectosigmoid in an asymptomatic group and the likelihood of finding synchronous neoplastic polyps proximally at colonoscopy. DESIGN: Asymptomatic patients with polyps 9 mm or less found at screening fiberoptic sigmoidoscopy were referred for colonoscopy, at which time all polyps were removed. SETTING: Screening fiberoptic sigmoidoscopy unit. PATIENTS: Referral from Executive Health Wellness Clinic and large multispeciality clinic. RESULTS: From 3923 sigmoidoscopic examinations, 258 asymptomatic subjects (7%) were identified who had polyps 9 mm or smaller. One hundred and eighty-nine patients (73%) had colonoscopy. In 179 patients, the target lesion noted at sigmoidoscopy was identified at colonoscopy. Based on histology of the target lesion, patients were divided into three groups: Group 1 (72 patients) had only hyperplastic polyps; Group 2 (69 patients) had at least one neoplastic polyp; and Group 3 (31 patients) had polyps with normal histology. Seven patients were not classified. Neoplastic polyps were found proximally in 21 patients in Group 1 (29%; 95% CI, 19 to 39), 23 patients in Group 2 (33%; 95% CI, 22 to 44), and 4 patients in Group 3 (13%; 95% CI, 4 to 30). There was no difference in mean age between groups. The results were similar when only polyps 5 mm or smaller were analyzed. CONCLUSION: Because small polyps of any histologic type in the rectosigmoid indicate a high risk for having neoplastic polyps proximally, the guidelines of both the American College of Physicians and the American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy may need to be revised. Colonoscopy seems justified in any patient in whom a small polyp is discovered at sigmoidoscopy.

Adult↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Rectosigmoid polyps as markers of proximal colonic neoplasms: a cost benefit analysis of different diagnostic protocols.

The predictive value of hyperplastic polyps of the rectosigmoid for neoplastic lesions in the proximal colon is controversial. Some authors who deny predictive value have proposed a protocol which entails initially biopsying rectosigmoid polyps, and only in the case of adenomas then proceeding to total colonoscopy (protocol 1). The diagnostic and economic efficiency of this protocol, and of an alternative which entailed the full exploration of the colon during the initial examination in the case of rectosigmoid polyps (protocol 2), were evaluated by retrospectively simulating their application to 216 patients who had undergone total colonoscopy. A proximal neoplastic pathology was present in 49.5% of patients with rectosigmoid adenoma, 27.3% of patients with distal non neoplastic polyps alone (33.3% if only distal hyperplastic polyps were considered) and 11% of patients with no distal polyps. Protocol 1 gave rise to a higher cost ($ 58,413), not only compared to protocol 2 ($ 50,276), but also compared to total colonoscopy in all patients ($ 57,008); there was also a larger number of patients who eluded diagnosis (29%, against 16% in protocol 2). In terms of cost per lesion detected and of colorectal cancers prevented (on the basis of an evolution to cancer of 5% of adenomas), total colonoscopy for all patients on principle is advantageous compared to either protocol ($ 864 per proximal lesion and $ 7,082 per cancer prevented). Since distal hyperplastic polyps are also predictive of proximal neoplastic pathology, when rectosigmoid polyps are detected it is both indicated and economic to proceed with the exploration of the entire colon during the initial examination. This appears to be a reasonable compromise compared to total colonoscopy on principle, which has higher overall costs. The latter management, however, should not be ruled out, since it has a better diagnostic yield and lower cost per lesion detected and per cancer prevented.

Adenoma↗