4.6 Article

Reduction of the incidence and mortality of rectal cancer by polypectomy: a prospective cohort study in Haining County

期刊

WORLD JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY
卷 8, 期 3, 页码 488-492

出版社

BAISHIDENG PUBLISHING GROUP INC
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v8.i3.488

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

AIM: To reduce the incidence and mortality of rectal cancer and address the hypothesis that colorectal cancer often arise from precursor lesion (s), either adenomas or nonadenomatous polyps, by conducting a population-based mass screening for colorectal cancer in Haining County, Zhejiang, PRC. METHODS: From 1977 to 1980, physicians screened the population of Haining County using 15 cm rigid endoscopy. Of over 240 000 participants, 4076 of them were diagnosed with. precursor lesions, either adenomas or nonadenomatous polyps, which were then removed surgically. All individuals with precursor lesions were followed up and reexamined by endoscopy every two to five years up to 1998. RESULTS: After the initial screening, 953 metachronous adenomas and 417 non-adenomatous polyps were detected and removed from the members of this cohort. Further, 27 cases of colorectal cancer were detected and. treated. Log-rank tests showed that the survival time among those cancer patients who underwent mass screening increased significantly compared,to that of other colorectal cancer patients ( P < 0.0001). According to the population-based cancer registry in Haining County, age-adjusted incidence and mortality of rectal cancer decreased by 41 % and 29 % from 1977-1981 to 1992-1996, respectively. Observed cumulative 20-year rectal cancer incidence was 31 % lower than, the expected in the screened group; the mortality due to rectal cancer was 18 % lower than the expected in the screened group. CONCLUSION: Mass screening for rectal cancer and precursor lesions with protocoscopy in the general population and periodical following-up with routine endoscopy for high-risk patients may decrease both the incidence and mortality of rectal cancer.

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

4.6
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