Advanced Search

Study Preview



Study Title and Description

Prevalence of colorectal cancer in acute uncomplicated diverticulitis and the role of the interval colonoscopy.



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 Prevalence of colorectal cancer in acute uncomplicated diverticulitis and the role of the interval colonoscopy.
Author Soh NYT., Chia DKA., Teo NZ., Ong CJM., Wijaya R.
Country Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Year 2018
Numbers Pubmed ID: 29663068

Secondary Publication Information
UI Title Author Country Year
Correction to: Prevalence of colorectal cancer in acute uncomplicated diverticulitis and the role of the interval colonoscopy. Soh NYT., Chia DKA., Teo NZ., Ong CJM., Wijaya R. Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore. 2018
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |



Extraction Form: KQ 3: Colonoscopy
Arms
Number Title Description Comments
1 Colonoscopy
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
2 No Colonoscopy Defaulted follow up
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |

Design Details
Question... Follow Up Answer Follow-up Answer
Study design NRCS (scopy vs. no scopy)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
if not an RCT, what was the directionality? Prospective
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Funder Not reported (or unclear)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Start and end years of the study 2007
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
2011
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Inclusion criteria first episode of CT-proven acute diverticulitis with no complications
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Exclusion criteria
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Specific population? Hx uncomplicated diverticulitis only
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Note/Comment about Design (or overall study)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Country Singapore
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Comparison of colonoscopy vs. no colonoscopy? Yes
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Comparison of diverticulitis vs health control? No
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Subgroup analyses? R vs L sided
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |


Baseline Characteristics
Question Colonoscopy No Colonoscopy Total Comments
AnswerFollow-up AnswerFollow-up AnswerFollow-up
Participant race/ethnicity characteristics Male 52
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Participant age, continuous 50.9
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
18
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
96
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Age >=50, % No data entered.
Participants with Un/Complicated Diverticulitis Uncomplicated diverticulitis 100 Uncomplicated diverticulitis 100 Uncomplicated diverticulitis 100
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Note/Comment about baseline characteristics No data entered.
Alarm symptoms No data entered.



Results & Comparisons


Results Data
Outcome: Colorectal cancer      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure Colonoscopy No Colonoscopy


Enter a numeric value or title (required) years

N Analyzed 135 92
Counts 2 2
Percentage 1.5 2.2
Outcome: Advance Adenoma      Population: All Participants
Time Point Measure Colonoscopy No Colonoscopy


Enter a numeric value or title (required) years

N Analyzed 135 92
Counts 2 0
Percentage 1.5 0


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.