The British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and the Association of Coloproctology for Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI) commissioned this update of the 2002 guidance. The aim, as before, is to provide guidance on the appropriateness, method and frequency of screening for people at moderate and high risk from colorectal cancer. This guidance provides some new recommendations for those with inflammatory bowel disease and for those at moderate risk resulting from a family history of colorectal cancer. In other areas guidance is relatively unchanged, but the recent literature was reviewed and is included where appropriate.
Objective
To develop and validate new classification criteria for adult and juvenile idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM) and their major subgroups.
Methods
Candidate variables were assembled from published criteria and expert opinion using consensus methodology. Data were collected from 47 rheumatology, dermatology, neurology and pediatric clinics worldwide. Several statistical methods were utilized to derive the classification criteria.
Results
Based on data from 976 IIM patients (74% adults; 26% children) and 624 non-IIM patients with mimicking conditions (82% adults; 18% children) new criteria were derived. Each item is assigned a weighted score. The total score corresponds to a probability of having IIM. Sub-classification is performed using a classification tree. A probability cutoff of 55%, corresponding to a score of 5.5 (6.7 with muscle biopsy) “probable IIM”, had best sensitivity/specificity (87%/82% without biopsies, 93%/88% with biopsies) and is recommended as a minimum to classify a patient as having IIM. A probability of ≥90%, corresponding to a score of ≥7.5 (≥8.7 with muscle biopsy), corresponds to “definite IIM”. A probability of <50%, corresponding to a score of <5.3 (<6.5 with muscle biopsy) rules out IIM, leaving a probability of ≥50 to <55% as “possible IIM”.
Conclusions
The EULAR/ACR classification criteria for IIM have been endorsed by international rheumatology, dermatology, neurology and pediatric groups. They employ easily accessible and operationally defined elements, and have been partially validated. They allow classification of “definite”, “probable”, and “possible” IIM, in addition to the major subgroups of IIM, including juvenile IIM. They generally perform better than existing criteria.
Objective To study circumferential margin involvement (CMI) in patients undergoing restorative, compared with nonrestorative, surgery for rectal cancer.Data source Descriptive multicentre study, using routinely collected clinical data from the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI) Bowel Cancer Audit database. The study encompassed 1403 newly diagnosed patients with rectal cancer undergoing either restorative (anterior resection (AR)), or nonrestorative (abdominoperineal excision of rectum (APER) or Hartmann's procedure), surgery. Operations were carried out in 39 hospitals during a variable period between April 1999 to March 2002. A logistic regression analysis was used to control for variables associated with circumferential margin involvement.Results One thousand and thirty-six patients satisfied the inclusion criteria. The average CMI was 12.5% (range 0-33.3% between hospitals). CMI for anterior resection was 7.5% (n ¼ 629) compared with a CMI of 16.7% for APER (n ¼ 306) and a CMI of 31.7% for Hartmann's procedure (n ¼ 101); P £ 0.001. CMI for patients undergoing curative surgery was 7.1% (423 anterior resections, CMI 3.8% (n ¼ 16); 181 APER, CMI 13.3% (n ¼ 24); 29 Hartmann's procedure, CMI 17.2%). On multivariate analysis, having controlled for Dukes' stage and operative intent, the CMI was significantly different between APER and AR (odds ratio 3.3, 95%CI 2.0-5.4), but less so between Hartmann's procedure and AR (odds ratio 2.2, 95%CI 1.1-4.2).Conclusions APER is associated with a significantly higher CMI than anterior resection. Attention to surgical technique, with a wide perineal dissection and the use of pre-operative adjuvant therapy, may reduce CMI in patients undergoing APER.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.