Advanced Search

Study Preview



Study Title and Description

The Necessity of a Colonoscopy after an Acute Diverticulitis Event in Adults Less Than 50 Years Old.



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 The Necessity of a Colonoscopy after an Acute Diverticulitis Event in Adults Less Than 50 Years Old.
Author Alcantar DC., Rodriguez C., Fernandez R., Kumar S., Junia C.
Country Internal Medicine, Macneal Hospital, Berwyn, USA.
Year 2019
Numbers Pubmed ID: 31720142

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 2007
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
2017
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Inclusion criteria Patients between the ages of 18 and 49 years with acute diverticulitis.
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Exclusion criteria Patients without CT verification of diverticulitis, and patients greater than 50 years old were excluded.
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Specific population? ... Age criteria (define) ... 18-49
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Note/Comment about Design (or overall study)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Country USA
  • 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? Complicated vs uncomplicated D
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |


Baseline Characteristics
Question Colonoscopy Total Comments
AnswerFollow-up AnswerFollow-up
Participant race/ethnicity characteristics Male 60.3
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Participant age, continuous 40.7
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Age >=50, % NR
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Participants with Un/Complicated Diverticulitis Complicated diverticulitis 22.5
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Uncomplicated diverticulitis 77.5
  • 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


Enter a numeric value or title (required) years

N Analyzed 111
Counts 0
Percentage 0
Outcome: Colorectal cancer      Population: Uncomplicated diverticulitis
Time Point Measure Colonoscopy


Enter a numeric value or title (required) years

N Analyzed 86
Counts 0
Percentage 0
Outcome: Colorectal cancer      Population: Complicated diverticulitis
Time Point Measure Colonoscopy


Enter a numeric value or title (required) years

N Analyzed 25
Counts 0
Percentage 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.