4.3 Review

Prevalence of gastric precancerous conditions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

期刊

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MEG.0000000000000065

关键词

atrophic gastritis; gastric cancer; gastric neoplasm; gastrointestinal endoscopy; Helicobacter pylori; intestinal metaplasia; meta-analysis; pepsinogens; review; stomach neoplasm

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Several reports of estimates for precancerous conditions for gastric adenocarcinoma can be found in the current literature. Our aim was to systematically review and estimate the prevalence of gastric precancerous conditions. Four databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Knowledge and EBSCO Academic Search Complete) were searched for original manuscripts addressing the presence of chronic atrophic gastritis (CAG) or intestinal metaplasia (IM). Subgroup analysis was carried out on methods of diagnosis, type of population, incidence of gastric cancer, sex, Helicobacter pylori status, age and extent of conditions. Overall, 107 studies were included. The worldwide prevalence of CAG in the general population was 33% (95% confidence interval: 26-41%) when considering biopsies (n=20 912) and 24% (19-29%) if serology (n=51 886) was used, whereas IM was found in 25% (19-30%) (n=30 960). Estimates for CAG were higher in countries with a high incidence of gastric cancer (42 vs. 23%), men (32 vs. 28%), H. pylori positive (46 vs. 17%) and if aged 40 years or older (48 vs. 22%). The prevalence of extensive conditions was 16% (12-20%) for CAG and 13% (9.0-17%) for IM. When comparing countries with high versus low to moderate incidence of gastric cancer, significant differences were achieved for CAG: 27% (12-36%) versus 7.3% (5.6-9.0%). Worldwide, one-third and one-fourth of individuals may harbour CAG and IM, respectively. In countries with a high incidence of gastric cancer, the prevalence of extensive conditions may increase up to 27% and these patients represent a high-risk population to whom endoscopic surveillance should be offered according to recent guidelines.

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

4.3
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