4.5 Article

Endoscopic findings in the upper gastrointestinal tract of faecal occult blood-positive, colonoscopy-negative patients

期刊

DIGESTIVE AND LIVER DISEASE
卷 38, 期 7, 页码 503-507

出版社

PACINI EDITORE
DOI: 10.1016/j.dld.2006.01.021

关键词

colonoscopy; endoscopy; faecal occult blood

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. Detection of faecal occult blood is recommended for colorectal cancer screening in average risk populations. However, many subjects do not have any cause found in the colon to account for the occult blood loss. Aims. To determine the prevalence of upper gastrointestinal tract disease in faecal occult blood-positive, colonoscopy-negative patients. Patients and methods. Retrospective audit of 99 patients (56 females; mean age 60 years, range 18-83) who underwent same-day colonoscopy and upper gastrointestinal endoscopy over a 2-year period. Results. Fifty-two of the 99 patients had a normal colonoscopy, 16 had diverticulosis and 2 had hyperplastic polyps; these 70 patients comprised the colonoscopy-negative group. Significant upper gastrointestinal tract disease was noted in 25 (36%) of the colonoscopy-negative group compared with 10 (34%) of the 29 colonoscopy-positive group (p = ns). Most of the upper gastrointestinal tract lesions identified were benign. Within the colonoscopy-negative group, patients with anaemia or upper gastrointestinal tract symptoms had a higher prevalence of positive findings in the upper gastrointestinal tract, but this association was not statistically significant. Conclusions. Endoscopic examination of the upper gastrointestinal tract in faecal occult blood-positive individuals reveals mostly benign disease, with an equal prevalence in colonoscopy-negative and colonoscopy-positive patients. Routine performance of upper gastrointestinal endoseopy in faecal occult blood-positive individuals is not indicated and should be undertaken only for appropriate symptoms. (c) 2006 Editrice Gastroenterologica Italiana S.r.l. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据