4.2 Article

Incomplete colonoscopy in patients with occlusive colorectal cancer: Usefulness of CT colonography according to tumor location

Journal

YONSEI MEDICAL JOURNAL
Volume 48, Issue 6, Pages 934-941

Publisher

YONSEI UNIV COLL MEDICINE
DOI: 10.3349/ymj.2007.48.6.934

Keywords

colonography; colorectal neoplasms; staging; colonic obstruction

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: We sought to evaluate the clinical usefulness of CT colonography (CTC) after incomplete conventional colonoscopy (CC) for occlusive colorectal cancer (CRC) according to the tumor location. Materials And Methods: Seventy-five patients with occlusive CRC underwent subsequent CTC immediately after incomplete CC. Fifty-nine patients had distal CRC and 16 had proximal colon cancer. Experienced radiologists prospectively analyzed the location, length, and TNM staging of the main tumor. The colorectal polyps in the remaining colorectum and additional extraluminal findings were also recorded. Sixty-seven patients underwent colorectal resection. We retrospectively analyzed the surgical outcome and correlated CTC and CC findings. Results: The overall accuracies of tumor staging were: T staging, 86%; N staging (nodal positivity), 70% (80%); and intra-abdominal M staging, 94%. Additional colonic polyps were found in 23 patients. Six synchronous carcinomas were detected (9%); three in the proximal colon. and three in the distal colon of occlusion. Clinically significant localization errors at CC were noted in 8 patients (12%, 5 proximal colon cancers and 3 distal CRCs) and were corrected by CTC. After CTC, the surgeons modified the initial surgical plan in 11 cases (16%). Conclusion: In occlusive CRC, CTC is not only useful in the evaluation of the proximal bowel, but can also provide surgeons with accurate information about staging and tumor localization. CTC is recommended when endoscopists encounter occlusive CRC, regardless of tumor location.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available