Gastroenterology
Volume 130, Issue 6 , Pages 1872-1885, May 2006

Guidelines for Colonoscopy Surveillance After Polypectomy: A Consensus Update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer and the American Cancer Society

  • Sidney J. Winawer

      Affiliations

    • Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress requests for reprints to: Sidney J. Winawer, MD, Gastroenterology and Nutrition Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York 10021. fax: (212) 639-2766
  • ,
  • Ann G. Zauber

      Affiliations

    • Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
  • ,
  • Robert H. Fletcher

      Affiliations

    • Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
  • ,
  • Jonathon S. Stillman

      Affiliations

    • Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
  • ,
  • Michael J. O’Brien

      Affiliations

    • Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
  • ,
  • Bernard Levin

      Affiliations

    • University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
  • ,
  • Robert A. Smith

      Affiliations

    • American Cancer Society, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
  • ,
  • David A. Lieberman

      Affiliations

    • Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon, USA
  • ,
  • Randall W. Burt

      Affiliations

    • Huntsman Cancer Institute at the University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
  • ,
  • Theodore R. Levin

      Affiliations

    • Kaiser Permanente Medical Center, Walnut Creek, California, USA
  • ,
  • John H. Bond

      Affiliations

    • University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
  • ,
  • Durado Brooks

      Affiliations

    • American Cancer Society, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
  • ,
  • Tim Byers

      Affiliations

    • University of Colorado, Denver, Colorado, USA
  • ,
  • Neil Hyman

      Affiliations

    • University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont, USA
  • ,
  • Lynne Kirk

      Affiliations

    • University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA
  • ,
  • Alan Thorson

      Affiliations

    • Creighton University, Omaha, Nebraska, USA
  • ,
  • Clifford Simmang

      Affiliations

    • University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA
  • ,
  • David Johnson

      Affiliations

    • Eastern Virginia School of Medicine, Norfolk, Virginia, USA
  • ,
  • Douglas K. Rex

      Affiliations

    • Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA

Adenomatous polyps are the most common neoplastic findings discovered in people who undergo colorectal screening or who have a diagnostic work-up for symptoms. It was common practice in the 1970s for these patients to have annual follow-up surveillance examinations to detect additional new adenomas and missed synchronous adenomas. As a result of the National Polyp Study report in 1993, which showed clearly in a randomized design that the first postpolypectomy examination could be deferred for 3 years, guidelines published by a gastrointestinal consortium in 1997 recommended that the first follow-up surveillance take place 3 years after polypectomy for most patients. In 2003 these guidelines were updated and colonoscopy was recommended as the only follow-up examination, stratification at baseline into low risk and higher risk for subsequent adenomas was suggested. The 1997 and 2003 guidelines dealt with both screening and surveillance. However, it has become increasingly clear that postpolypectomy surveillance is now a large part of endoscopic practice, draining resources from screening and diagnosis. In addition, surveys have shown that a large proportion of endoscopists are conducting surveillance examinations at shorter intervals than recommended in the guidelines. In the present report, a careful analytic approach was designed to address all evidence available in the literature to delineate predictors of advanced pathology, both cancer and advanced adenomas, so that patients can be stratified more definitely at their baseline colonoscopy into those at lower risk or increased risk for a subsequent advanced neoplasia. People at increased risk have either 3 or more adenomas, high-grade dysplasia, villous features, or an adenoma 1 cm or larger in size. It is recommended that they have a 3-year follow-up colonoscopy. People at lower risk who have 1 or 2 small (<1 cm) tubular adenomas with no high-grade dysplasia can have a follow-up evaluation in 5–10 years, whereas people with hyperplastic polyps only should have a 10-year follow-up evaluation, as for average-risk people. There have been recent studies that have reported a significant number of missed cancers by colonoscopy. However, high-quality baseline colonoscopy with excellent patient preparation and adequate withdrawal time should minimize this and reduce clinicians concerns. These guidelines were developed jointly by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer and the American Cancer Society to provide a broader consensus and thereby increase the use of the recommendations by endoscopists. The adoption of these guidelines nationally can have a dramatic impact on shifting available resources from intensive surveillance to screening. It has been shown that the first screening colonoscopy and polypectomy produces the greatest effects on reducing the incidence of colorectal cancer in patients with adenomatous polyps.

Abbreviations used in this paper:  CI, confidence interval , FOBT, fecal occult blood testing , HNPCC, hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer , HR, hazard ratio , OR, odds ratio , RCT, randomized controlled trial , RR, relative risk , SIR, standardized incidence ratio

 

 This article is being published jointly in 2006 in CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians (online: May 30, 2006; print: May/June 2006) and Gastroenterology (online: May 2006; print: May 2006) by the American Cancer Society and the American Gastroenterology Association. ©2006 American Cancer Society, Inc. and American Gastroenterology Association, Inc. Copying with attribution allowed for any noncommercial use of the work.

PII: S0016-5085(06)00561-0

doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2006.03.012

Gastroenterology
Volume 130, Issue 6 , Pages 1872-1885, May 2006