Results of implementation of a fast track pathway for diagnosis of colorectal cancer

Vallverdú, Helena; Camp, Jordi Comajuncosas; Sáenz, Rolando A. Orbeal; Negre, José Luís López; Garriga, Pedro J. Gris; Fraile, Jaime Jimeno; Bosch, Judit Hermoso; Pradell, Cristina Sánchez; Alsina, Sandra Torra; Bosch, Joan Urgellés; Parés, David

doi:10.4321/s1130-01082011000800003

Cited by 19 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…At present, colonoscopy is still considered the "gold standard" for the diagnosis of colorectal cancer (CRC) and to determine the anatomical colonic segment where the lesion is located (1)(2)(3)(4). Once CRC has been diagnosed, computed tomography (CT) performance is indicated in the preoperative staging.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Endoscopic localization of colorectal cancer: Study of its accuracy and possible error factors

Borda

Jiménez

Borda

et al. 2012

Rev. esp. enferm. dig.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: accurate preoperative localization of colorectal cancer (CRC) is very important, with a wide range of published error rates.Aims: to determine accuracy of endoscopic localization of CRC in comparison with preoperative computed tomography (CT). To analyse variables that could be associated with a wrong endoscopic localization.Patients and methods: endoscopic and CT localization of a series of CRC without previous surgery were reviewed. We studied the concordance between endoscopic and radiologic localization against operative findings comparing accuracy of endoscopy and CT. We analysed the frequency of wrong endoscopic diagnoses with regard to a series of patient, endoscopy and tumor variables.Results: two hundred thirty seven CRC in 223 patients were studied. Concordance with surgical localization was: colonoscopy = 0.87 and CT = 0.69. Endoscopic localization accuracy was: 91.1%; CT: 76.2%: p = 0.00001; OR = 3.22 (1.82-5.72). Obstructive cancer presented a higher rate of wrong localization: 18 vs. 5.7% in non-obstructive tumors (p = 0.0034; OR = 3.65 (1.35-9.96). Endoscopic localization mistakes varied depending on tumor location, being more frequent in descending colon: 36.3%, p = 0.014; p = 0.007;.Conclusions: endoscopic accuracy for CRC localization was very high and significantly better than CT accuracy. Obstructive tumor and those located in the descending colon or cecum were associated with a significant increase of the error risk of CRC endoscopic localization.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Endoscopic localization of colorectal cancer: Study of its accuracy and possible error factors

Borda

Jiménez

Borda

et al. 2012

Rev. esp. enferm. dig.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9] Denmark implemented CPPs in 2008 and 2009. 2 The Danish CPPs consist of guidelines, including descriptions of selected alarm symptoms that may raise cancer suspicion, descriptions of medical procedures (mainly in the secondary healthcare sector), and specific timeframes for all phases (for example, 9 days from GP referral to first appointment at hospital when colorectal cancer is suspected).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tumour stage and implementation of standardised cancer patient pathways: a comparative cohort study

Jensen¹,

Tørring²,

Fenger‐Grøn

et al. 2016

Br J Gen Pract

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Likewise, the establishment of a fast CRC diagnosis, follow-up and treatment loop results in a better performance of population-based screening programs [29]. Our program included a commitment to perform a colonoscopy within less than one month in the event of a positive iFOBT, with a similar time frame for radiological and surgical staging.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Colorectal Cancer Screening in a Spanish Town: Evaluation of Colonoscopy Preparation, Sedation by the Endoscopist and Screening Results

Álvarez¹,

Monasterio²,

Pérez³

et al. 2014

OJGas

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The aim of this study is to evaluate the colonic cleansing preparation and colorectal cancer screening results in Sestao (Bilbao); and to verify the safety of endoscopist-controlled sedation. Materials and methods: A retrospective observational study of colorectal cancer screening using the immunological faecal occult blood test in a medium-risk population in this region, with colonoscopy being performed in the event of a positive result. The colonic cleansing preparation was administered in split doses; the second dose was administered 4 hours prior to colonoscopy. The quality of the preparation and lesion detection were evaluated. Sedation-related complications were analyzed. Results: Participation was high (4342 of 6896 people invited, 62.99%), with 309 subjects (7.12%) presenting a positive immunological faecal occult blood test. A high percentage of the 284 colonoscopies had optimal preparation: 276 (97.18%) had an adequate preparation. A total of 22 (7.91%) sedation-related complications were detected: only one (0.36%) was serious. A total of 140 high-risk adenomas were removed (47.13%) and 24 carcinomas were diagnosed (8.08%). Both these percentages are high. Conclusions: Split doses of colonoscopy preparation and reduction of the time interval between the second dose and the colonoscopy result in a high percentage of adequate preparation and lesion detection. Sedation by trained endoscopists is safe and effective. An immunological faecal occult blood test-based screening program is feasible and allows malignant and precancerous lesions to be efficiently detected and treated.

show abstract

Results of implementation of a fast track pathway for diagnosis of colorectal cancer

Cited by 19 publications

References 29 publications

Endoscopic localization of colorectal cancer: Study of its accuracy and possible error factors

Endoscopic localization of colorectal cancer: Study of its accuracy and possible error factors

Tumour stage and implementation of standardised cancer patient pathways: a comparative cohort study

Colorectal Cancer Screening in a Spanish Town: Evaluation of Colonoscopy Preparation, Sedation by the Endoscopist and Screening Results

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About