 |
|
Prevalence of Isolated Advanced Proximal Neoplasia
|
|
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings. |
|
|
|
Lewis et al,1 in their meta-analysis, report a prevalence of isolated advanced proximal neoplasia ranging from 2% to 5%, with a pooled estimate of 2.4%. However, the prevalence rates from the individual studies were calculated by including only subjects who had negative flexible sigmoidoscopy findings. This calculation is biased, since it does not reflect when a patient is counseled regarding the differences between flexible sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy in the decision-making process. The appropriate time for a patient to be counseled about the yields of the 2 tests is prior to the initiation of either test. Thus, the correct prevalence is the prevalence of isolated advanced proximal neoplasia in all subjects presenting for screening. Using that denominator, the prevalence of isolated advanced proximal neoplasia in the screening colonoscopy studies is 1.2%2 and 2.1%, respectively,3 not 2% and 3% as reported in Figure 4 B. By including only subjects with negative sigmoidoscopy . . . [Full Text of this Article]
Robert E. Schoen, MD, MPH
Pittsburgh, Pa
RELATED ARTICLES
Prevalence of Isolated Advanced Proximal Neoplasia—Reply
James D. Lewis, Kimmie Ng, Kenneth E. Hung, Warren B. Bilker, Jesse A. Berlin, Colleen Brensinger, and Anil K. Rustgi
Arch Intern Med. 2003;163(17):2103-2104.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Detection of Proximal Adenomatous Polyps With Screening Sigmoidoscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Screening Colonoscopy
James D. Lewis, Kimmie Ng, Kenneth E. Hung, Warren B. Bilker, Jesse A. Berlin, Colleen Brensinger, and Anil K. Rustgi
Arch Intern Med. 2003;163(4):413-420.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
|
