The Korean journal of internal medicine · 2018
Korean physicians' policies for postoperative surveillance of colorectal cancer.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Baek Sun Kyung, Lee Sang-Cheol, Kim Jong Gwang, Um Jun Won, Lee Suk-Hwan, Jang Byung Ik, Park Jae Jun, Kim Tae Won
Аннотация
BACKGROUND/AIMS: We explored Korean physicians' policies for surveillance of colorectal cancer (CRC) after curative surgery.
METHODS: Web-based self-report questionnaires were developed. Invitations to participate were emailed to physicians who diagnosed and treated CRC from October 1 to November 15, 2015. The questionnaire consisted of the role doctors played in the surveillance, examination of surveillance, and duration of postoperative surveillance according to CRC stage or primary site of the cancer.
RESULTS: Ninety-one physicians participated in the online survey, and 78 completed the survey. Sixty-seven participants (13%) answered "up to 5 years" for stage I surveillance duration; and 11 (13%) responded with a duration of > 5 years for stage I. A total of 61 (75%) responded with a surveillance duration of up to 5 years for stage II; and 19 (24%) responded with a duration of > 5 years for stage II. Sixty-seven (97%) and 61 (91%) physicians monitored patients with stage II/III every 3 or 6 months by laboratory examination and by abdominopelvic computed tomography scan for the first year, respectively. A total of 43 (53%) responded with a surveillance duration of up to 5 years for stage IV; and 46 (46%) responded with a duration of > 5 years for stage IV after curative resection.
CONCLUSIONS: Korean physicians mostly followed up CRC using intensive postoperative surveillance. In preference to monitoring over a comparatively shorter period of time, the physicians tended to prefer monitoring patients post-operatively over a > 5 year period, particularly in cases of advanced-stage CRC.
METHODS: Web-based self-report questionnaires were developed. Invitations to participate were emailed to physicians who diagnosed and treated CRC from October 1 to November 15, 2015. The questionnaire consisted of the role doctors played in the surveillance, examination of surveillance, and duration of postoperative surveillance according to CRC stage or primary site of the cancer.
RESULTS: Ninety-one physicians participated in the online survey, and 78 completed the survey. Sixty-seven participants (13%) answered "up to 5 years" for stage I surveillance duration; and 11 (13%) responded with a duration of > 5 years for stage I. A total of 61 (75%) responded with a surveillance duration of up to 5 years for stage II; and 19 (24%) responded with a duration of > 5 years for stage II. Sixty-seven (97%) and 61 (91%) physicians monitored patients with stage II/III every 3 or 6 months by laboratory examination and by abdominopelvic computed tomography scan for the first year, respectively. A total of 43 (53%) responded with a surveillance duration of up to 5 years for stage IV; and 46 (46%) responded with a duration of > 5 years for stage IV after curative resection.
CONCLUSIONS: Korean physicians mostly followed up CRC using intensive postoperative surveillance. In preference to monitoring over a comparatively shorter period of time, the physicians tended to prefer monitoring patients post-operatively over a > 5 year period, particularly in cases of advanced-stage CRC.