Download PDF
Endoscopy 1999; 31(8): 664-672
DOI: 10.1055/s-1999-128
Special Topic
Georg Thieme Verlag Stuttgart ·New York

13. Appropriateness of Colonoscopy: Surveillance After Curative Resection of Colorectal Cancer [1]

M. Bochud*, B. Burnand*, F. Froehlich**, R. W. Dubois***, J.-P. Vader*, J.-J. Gonvers**
  • * Institut Universitaire de Médecine Sociale et Préventive, Lausanne, Switzerland
  • ** Policlinique Médicale Universitaire, Lausanne, Switzerland
  • *** Protocare Sciences, Santa Monica, USA
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
31 December 1999 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Introduction

Almost all cancers of the colon and rectum are carcinomas that develop from the mucosal epithelium. Cancer of the colon and of the rectum are generally considered together under the heading of colorectal cancers. Most of these cancers are adenocarcinomas, and the development of carcinoma from an adenomatous polyp is considered to be the most common developmental feature of colorectal cancer. Patients with previous adenomatous polyps or colorectal cancer have an increased risk of developing a further cancer. In Europe, the annual age-standardized incidence (world population) of colorectal cancer is between 20 and 45 per 100 000 among males and between 15 and 30 per 100 000 among females [1]. Incidence rates increase in a regular fashion with age [1] [2] [3] .

Surveillance monitors people with previously diagnosed colorectal disease: patients who have had polyps (described in a separate article in this issue of the Journal [4]), inflammatory bowel disease (described in a joint article in this issue of the Journal [5]) and colorectal cancer (described in this article) [6].

In November 1998, a multidisciplinary European expert panel convened in Lausanne, Switzerland, to discuss and develop criteria for the appropriate use of gastrointestinal endoscopy, a widely-used procedure, regarded as highly accurate and safe. The RAND appropriateness method was chosen for this purpose, because it allows the development of appropriateness criteria based on published evidence and supplemented by explicit expert opinion. A detailed description of the RAND appropriateness method, including the literature search process [7], and of the whole process, as well as the global results of the panel [8], are published as separate articles in this issue of the Journal. The literature review was based on a systematic search of Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library conducted up to the end of 1997 and completed with some key articles published in 1998. Updating and revision of the literature review is currently ongoing.

This article contains three parts; 1. the review of the literature that was used by the panelists to support their ratings of appropriateness of use of colonoscopic surveillance after curative intent resection of colorectal cancer; 2. an overview of the main panel results; 3. a summary of the published evidence and of the panel based appropriateness criteria.

1 The European Panel on Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (EPAGE, Lausanne, Switzerland)

References

  • 1 Parkin D M, Whelan S L, Ferlay J, Raymond L, Young J. International Agency for Research on Cancer. WHO and International Association of cancer registries (eds). Cancer incidence in five continents.  Lyon; VII. IARC Scientific Publications 1997 143
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 2 Cooper G S, Yuan Z, Landefeld C S, Johanson J F, Rimm A A. A national population-based study of incidence of colorectal cancer and age. Implications for screening in older Americans.  Cancer. 1995;  75 775-781
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Capocaccia R, De Angelis R, Frova L, Gatta G, Sant M, Micheli A, Berrino F, Conti E, Gafa L, Roncucci L, et al. Estimation and projections of colorectal cancer trends in Italy.  Int J Epidemiol. 1997;  26 924-932
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Bochud M, Burnand B, Froehlich F, Dubois R W, Vader J P, Gonvers J J. Appropriateness of colonoscopy: Surveillance after polypectomy.  Endoscopy. 1999;  31 654-663
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Froehlich F, Larequi-Lauber T, Gonvers J J, Dubois R W, Burnand B, Vader J P. Appropriateness of colonoscopy: Inflammatory bowel disease.  Endoscopy. 1999;  31 647-653
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Winawer S J, Fletcher R H, Miller L, Godlee F, Stolar M H, Mulrow C D, Woolf S H, Glick S N, Ganiats T G, Bond J H, et al. Colorectal cancer screening - clinical guidelines and rationale (1997; 112: 594).  Gastroenterology.. 1997;  112 1060-1063
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Vader J P, Burnand B, Froehlich F, Dubois R W, Bochud M, Gonvers J J. The European Panel on Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (EPAGE): Project and methods.  Endoscopy. 1999;  31 672-678
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Vader J P, Froehlich F, Dubois R W, Beglinger C, Wietlisbach V, Pittet V, Ebel N, Gonvers J J, Burnand B. The European Panel on the Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (EPAGE): Conclusions and WWW site.  Endoscopy. 1999;  31 678-694
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Kemppainen M, Raiha I, Sourander L. A marked increase in the incidence of colorectal cancer over two decades in SouthWest Finland.  Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 1997;  50 147-151
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Chu K C, Tarone R E, Chow W H, Hankey B F, Ries L A. Temporal patterns in colorectal cancer incidence, survival, and mortality from 1950 through 1990.  Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 1994;  86 997-1006
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Fuchs C S, Giovannucci E L, Colditz G A, Hunter D J, Speizer E E, Willett W C. A prospective study of family history and the risk of colorectal cancer.  N Engl J Med. 1994;  33 1669-1674
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Devesa S S, Chow W H. Variation in colorectal cancer incidence in the United States by subsite of origin.  Cancer. 1993;  71 3819-3826
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Dunlop M G. Science, medicine, and the future - colorectal cancer.  BMJ. 1997;  314 1882-1885
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Orrom W J, Brzezinski W S, Wiens E W. Heredity and colorectal cancer. A prospective, community-based, endoscopic study.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1990;  33 490-493
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Fleshner P, Slater G, Aufses A HJ. Age and sex distribution of patients with colorectal cancer (see comments).  Dis Colon Rectum. 1989;  32 107-111
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Sant M, Capocaccia R, Verdecchia A, Gatta G, Micheli A, Mariotto A, Hakulinen T, Berrino F. Comparisons of colon-cancer survival among European countries: The Eurocare Study.  Int J Cancer. 1995;  63 43-48
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Greene F L. Distribution of colorectal neoplasms. A left to right shift of polyps and cancer.  Am Surg. 1983;  49 62-65
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Tornqvist A, Ekelund G, Leandoer L. Early diagnosis of metachronous colorectal carcinoma.  Aust N Z J Surg. 1981;  51 442-445
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Griffin P M, Liff J M, Greenberg R S, Clark W S. Adenocarcinomas of the colon and rectum in persons under 40 years old. A population-based study.  Gastroenterology. 1991;  100 1033-1040
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Alley P G, McNee R K. Age and sex differences in right colon cancer.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1986;  29 227-229
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Slattery M L, Kerber R A. Family history of cancer and colon cancer risk: the Utah Population Database (published erratum appears in J Natl Cancer Inst Dec 7, 1994: 86: 1802).  J Natl Cancer Inst. 1994;  86 1618-1626
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Kemppainen M, Raiha I, Rajala T, Sourander L. Characteristics of colorectal cancer in elderly patients.  Gerontology. 1993;  39 222-227
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Lautenbach E, Forde K A, Neugut A I. Benefits of colonoscopic surveillance after curative resection of colorectal cancer.  Annals of Surgery. 1994;  220 206-211
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Raftery T L, Samson N. Carcinoma of the colon: a clinical correlation between presenting symptoms and survival.  American Surgeon. 1980;  46 600-606
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Beard C M, Spencer R J, Weiland L H, O'Fallon W M, Melton L J. Trends in colorectal cancer over a half century in Rochester, Minnesota, 1940 to 1989.  Ann Epidemol. 1995;  5 210-214
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Chak A, Post A B, Cooper G S. Clinical variables associated with colorectal cancer on colonoscopy: a prediction model.  Am J Gastroenterol. 1996;  91 2483-2488
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Hermanek P, Wiebelt H, Staimmer D, Riedl S. Prognostic factors of rectum carcinoma - experience of the German Multicentre Study SGCRC. German Study Group Colo-Rectal Carcinoma.  Tumori. 1995;  81 60-64
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Lindsay D C, Freeman J G, Cobden I, Record C O. Should colonoscopy be the first investigation for colonic disease?.  British Medical Journal Clinical Research Ed. 1988;  1988 167-169
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 29 Rex D K, Rahmani E Y, Haseman J H, Lemmel G T, Kaster S, Buckley J S. Relative sensitivity of colonoscopy and barium enema for detection of colorectal cancer in clinical practice (see comments).  Gastroenterology. 1997;  112 17-23
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Winawer S J, Flehinger B J, Schottenfeld D, Miller D G. Screening for colorectal cancer with fecal occult blood testing and sigmoidoscopy.  Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 1993;  85 1311-1318
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 31 Steine S, Stordahl A, Lunde O C, Loken K, Laerum E. Double-contrast barium enema versus colonoscopy in the diagnosis of neoplastic disorders: aspects of decision-making in general practice.  Family Practice. 1993;  10 288-291
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 32 Thorson A G, Christensen M A, Davis S J. The role of colonoscopy in the assessment of patients with colorectal cancer.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1986;  29 306-311
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 33 Rex D K, Cutler C S, Lemmel G T, Rahmani E Y, Clark D W, Helper D J, Lehman G A, Mark D G. Colonoscopic miss rates in adenomas determined by back-to-back colonoscopies (see comments).  Gastroenterology. 1997;  112 24-28
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 34 Ekman C A, Gustavson J, Henning A. Value of a follow-up study of recurrent carcinoma of the colon and rectum.  Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1977;  145 895-897
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 35 Richard C S, McLeod R S. Follow-up of patients after resection for colorectal cancer: a position paper of the canadian society of surgical oncology and the canadian society of colon and rectal surgeons.  Canadian Journal of Surgery. 1997;  40 90-100
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 36 Ovaska J T, Jarvinen H J, Mecklin J P. The value of a follow-up programme after radical surgery for colorectal carcinoma.  Scan J Gastroenterol. 1989;  24 416-422
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 37 Kjeldsen B J, Kronborg O, Fenger C, Jorgensen O D. A prospective randomized study of follow-up after radical surgery for colorectal cancer.  Br J Surg. 1997;  84 666-669
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 38 Mandel J S, Bond J H, Church T R, Snover D C, Bradley G M, Schuman L M, Ederer F. Reducing mortality from colorectal cancer by screening for fecal occult blood. Minnesota colon cancer control study.  N Engl J Med. 1993;  328 1365-1371
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 39 Kikuchi R, Takano M, Takagi K, Fujimoto N, Nozaki R, Fujiyoshi T, Uchida Y. Management of early invasive colorectal cancer. Risk of recurrence and clinical guidelines.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1995;  38 1286-1295
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 40 Vernava A M, Longo W E, Virgo K S, Coplin M A, Wade T P, Johnson F E. Current follow-up strategies after resection of colon cancer. Results of a survey of members of the American society of colon and rectal surgeons.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1994;  37 573-583
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 41 Weinstock L B, Shatz B A. Endoscopic abnormalities of the anastomosis following resection of colonic neoplasm.  Gastrointest Endosc. 1994;  40 558-561
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 42 Luchtefeld M A, Ross D S, Zander J D, Folse J R. Late development of metachronous colorectal cancer.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1987;  30 180-184
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 43 Barkin J S, Cohen M E, Flaxman M, Lindblad A S, Mayer R J, Kalser M H, Steinberg S M. Value of routine follow-up endoscopy program for the detection of recurrent colorectal carcinoma.  Am J Gastroenterol. 1988;  83 1355-1360
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 44 Eckardt V F, Stamm H, Kanzler G, Bernhard G. Improved survival after colorectal cancer in patients complying with a postoperative endoscopic surveillance program.  Endoscopy. 1994;  26 523-527
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 45 Bruinvels D J, Stiggelbout A M, Kievit J, van Houwelingen H C, Habbema J D, van de Velde C J. Follow-up of patients with colorectal cancer. A meta-analysis.  Annals of Surgery. 1994;  219 174-182
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 46 Galandiuk S, Wieand H S, Moertel C G, Cha S S, Fitzgibbons R JJ, Pemberton J H, Wolff B G. Patterns of recurrence after curative resection of carcinoma of the colon and rectum.  Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1992;  174 27-32
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 47 Barillari P, Ramacciato G, Manetti G, Bovino A, Sammartino P, Stipa V. Surveillance of colorectal cancer: effectiveness of early detection of intraluminal recurrences on prognosis and survival of patients treated for cure.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1996;  39 388-393
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 48 Adloff M, Arnaud J P, Ollier J C, Schloegel M. Can the prognosis of patients treated surgically in cancer of the rectum or colon be improved by follow-up? Prospective study of 909 patients.  Chirurgie. 1989;  115 228-236
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 49 Tornqvist A, Ekelund G, Leandoer L. The value of intensive follow-up after curative resection for colorectal carcinoma.  Br J Surg. 1982;  69 725-728
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 50 Kjeldsen B J, Kronborg O, Fenger C, Jorgensen O D. The pattern of recurrent colorectal cancer in a prospective randomised study and the characteristics of diagnostic tests (in Process Citation).  Int J Colorectal Dis. 1997;  12 329-334
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 51 Kronborg O. Optimal follow-up in colorectal cancer patients: what tests and how often?.  Semin Surg Oncol. 1994;  10 217-224
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 52 Moertel C G, Fleming T R, Macdonald J S, Haller D G, Laurie J A, Tangen C. An evaluation of the carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) test for monitoring patients with resected colon cancer.  JAMA. 1993;  270 943-947
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 53 Minton J P, Hoehn J L, Gerber D M, Horsley J S, Connolly D P, Salwan F, Fletcher W S, Cruz A BJ, Gatchell F G, Oviedo M. Results of a 400-patient carcinoembryonic antigen second-look colorectal cancer study.  Cancer. 1985;  55 1284-1290
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 54 Ohlsson B, Breland U, Ekberg H, Graffner H, Tranberg K G. Follow-up after curative surgery for colorectal carinoma. Randomized comparison with no follow-up.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1995;  38 619-626
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 55 Makela J T, Laitinen S O, Kairaluoma M I. Five-year follow-up after radical surgery for colorectal cancer. Results of a prospective randomized trial.  Archives of Surgery. 1995;  130 1062-1067
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 56 Schoemaker D, Black R, Giles L, Toouli J. Yearly colonoscopy, liver CT, and chest radiography do not influence 5-year survival of colorectal cancer patients.  Gastroenterology. 1998;  114 7-14
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 57 Ovaska J, Jarvinen H, Kujari H, Perttila I, Mecklin J P. Follow-up of patients operated on for colorectal carcinoma.  American Journal of Surgery. 1990;  159 593-596
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 58 Pugliese V, Aste H, Saccomanno S, Bruzzi P, Bonelli L, Santi L. Outcome of follow-up programs in patients previously resected for colorectal cancer.  Tumori. 1984;  70 203-208
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 59 Mentges B, Stahlschmidt M, Bruckner R. Effectiveness of after-care in colonic cancer.  Langenbecks Arch Chir. 1987;  370 223-234
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 60 Rex D K. Surveillance colonoscopy after resection of colorectal polyps and cancer.  ASGE Clinical Update. 1998;  6 1-4
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar

1 The European Panel on Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (EPAGE, Lausanne, Switzerland)

Dr. Bernard Burnand

IUMSP

Bugnon 17

CH-1005 Lausanne

Switzerland

Phone: + 41-21-3144954

Email: Bernard.Burnand@inst.hospvd.ch