Advanced Search

Study Preview



Study Title and Description

Routine lower gastrointestinal endoscopy for radiographically confirmed acute diverticulitis. In whom and when is it indicated?



Key Questions Addressed
3 KQ 3: What are the benefits and harms of colonoscopy (or other colon imaging test) following an episode of acute diverticulitis? KQ 3a. What is the incidence of malignant and premalignant colon tumors found by colonoscopy, and what is the incidence of colon cancer mortality among patients undergoing screening? KQ 3b. What are the procedure-related and other harms of colonoscopy or CT colonography? KQ 3c. What is the frequency of inadequate imaging due to intolerance or technical feasibility? • Do the benefits and harms vary by patient characteristics, course of illness, or other factors?
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |

Primary Publication Information
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
TitleData
Title Routine lower gastrointestinal endoscopy for radiographically confirmed acute diverticulitis. In whom and when is it indicated?
Author Seoane Urgorri A., Zaffalon D., Pera Román M., Batlle García M., Riu Pons F., Dedeu Cusco JM., Pantaleón Sánchez M., Bessa Caserras X., Barranco Priego L., Álvarez-González MA.
Country Unidad de Endoscopia/Servicio de Digestivo, Hospital del Mar, España.
Year 2018
Numbers Pubmed ID: 29900742

Secondary Publication Information
There are currently no secondary publications defined for this study.


Extraction Form: KQ 3: Colonoscopy
Arms
Number Title Description Comments
1 Colonoscopy
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |

Design Details
Question... Follow Up Answer Follow-up Answer
Study design Single group, with subgroup analyses
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
if not an RCT, what was the directionality? Retrospective
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Funder Not reported (or unclear)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Start and end years of the study 2005
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
2013
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Inclusion criteria Colonoscopy performed after CT-confirmed diagnosis of acute diverticulitis.
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Exclusion criteria Endoscopy within 2 years prior to episode of acute diverticulitis
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Specific population? No (anyone with Hx diverticulitis)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Note/Comment about Design (or overall study)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Country Spain
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Comparison of colonoscopy vs. no colonoscopy? No
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Comparison of diverticulitis vs health control? No
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Subgroup analyses? Age <> 50
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Complicated vs uncomplicated D
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Other 1 ... Suspicious CT
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |


Baseline Characteristics
Question Colonoscopy Total Comments
AnswerFollow-up AnswerFollow-up
Participant race/ethnicity characteristics Male 48
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Not reported
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Participant age, continuous 59
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
15
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Age >=50, % NR
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Participants with Un/Complicated Diverticulitis Complicated diverticulitis 27
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Uncomplicated diverticulitis 73
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Note/Comment about baseline characteristics No data entered.
Alarm symptoms NR
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |



Results & Comparisons


Results Data
Outcome: Serrated polyp      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure Colonoscopy


NA N/A

N Analyzed 216
Counts 2
Percentage 0.9
P between subgroups
Outcome: Advanced adenoma      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure Colonoscopy


NA N/A

N Analyzed 216
Counts 10
Percentage 4.6
Outcome: Advanced adenoma      Population: Complicated diverticulitis
Time Point Measure Colonoscopy


NA N/A

N Analyzed 60
Counts
Percentage 8.6
P between subgroups 0.1
Outcome: Advanced adenoma      Population: Uncomplicated diverticulitis
Time Point Measure Colonoscopy


NA N/A

N Analyzed 156
Counts
Percentage 3.2
P between subgroups
Outcome: Colorectal cancer      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure Colonoscopy


NA N/A

N Analyzed 216
Counts 2
Percentage 0.9
P between subgroups
Outcome: Colorectal cancer      Population: Complicated diverticulitis
Time Point Measure Colonoscopy


NA N/A

N Analyzed 60
Counts 2
Percentage 3.3
P between subgroups 0.07
Outcome: Colorectal cancer      Population: Uncomplicated diverticulitis
Time Point Measure Colonoscopy


NA N/A

N Analyzed 156
Counts 0
Percentage 0
P between subgroups
Outcome: Advanced Colonic Neoplasia      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure Colonoscopy


NA N/A

N Analyzed 216
Counts 12
Percentage 5.5
P between subgroups
Outcome: Advanced Colonic Neoplasia      Population: Complicated diverticulitis
Time Point Measure Colonoscopy


NA N/A

N Analyzed 60
Counts
Percentage 11.7
P between subgroups 0.02
Outcome: Advanced Colonic Neoplasia      Population: Uncomplicated diverticulitis
Time Point Measure Colonoscopy


NA N/A

N Analyzed 156
Counts
Percentage 3.2
P between subgroups
Outcome: Advanced Colonic Neoplasia      Population: >50
Time Point Measure Colonoscopy


NA N/A

N Analyzed NR
Counts
Percentage 7.8
P between subgroups 0.02
Outcome: Advanced Colonic Neoplasia      Population: <=50
Time Point Measure Colonoscopy


NA N/A

N Analyzed NR
Counts
Percentage 0
P between subgroups
Outcome: Procedural complication      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure Colonoscopy


NA N/A

N Analyzed 216
Counts 0
Percentage
P between subgroups
Outcome: Poor quality colonoscopy      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure Colonoscopy


NA N/A

N Analyzed 216
Counts 73
Percentage 33.8
P between subgroups


Quality Dimensions
Dimension Value Notes Comments
Q23: NHLBI - Were eligibility/selection criteria for the study population prespecified and clearly described? Yes
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Q25: NHLBI - Were the outcome measures prespecified, clearly defined, valid, reliable, and assessed consistently across all study participants? Yes
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
If this study was an NRCS or a single-group study, did the study report adjusted results that were for differences between groups (in the case of NRCSs) or differences between subgroups (in the case of single group studies)? No
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |

Quality Rating
No quality rating data was found.