4.7 Article

The role of high-magnification-chromoscopic colonoscopy in hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer screening: A prospective back-to-back endoscopic study

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY
Volume 100, Issue 10, Pages 2167-2173

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2005.41481.x

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BACKGROUND: In hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer flat and diminutive adenomas occur, particularly in the right colon. Such lesions may assume a high risk of malignant transformation. Interval cancers are known to occur in this group. Chromoscopic colonoscopy enhances detection in patients assuming a moderate to high lifetime risk of colorectal cancer. AIM: To prospectively assess the efficacy of high-magnification-chromoscopic colonoscopy for the detection of neoplastic lesions in patients undergoing hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer screening. METHODS: Twenty-five asymptomatic patients fulfilling modified Amsterdam criteria underwent back-to-back colonoscopy. Conventional colonoscopy with targeted chromoscopy was performed initially followed by pan-colonic chromoscopic colonoscopy. Diagnostic extubation times and volumes of normal saline and indigo carmine (IC) were controlled. RESULTS: Using conventional colonoscopy and targeted chromoscopy 24 lesions were detected in 13 patients (20 exophytic/4 flat). Pan-colonic chromoscopy identified a further 52 lesions in 16 patients (17 exophytic/35 flat). Pan-chromoscopy identified significantly more adenomas than conventional colonoscopy (p= 0.001) and a significantly high number of flat adenomas (p= 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Pan-colonic chromoscopic colonoscopy improves detection of significant neoplastic lesions in hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer screening. Pan-chromoscopy may help better stratify colorectal cancer risk in this cohort and aid planning of surveillance colonoscopic follow-up.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available