MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций
Медицинская библиотека · The European journal of surgery = Acta chirurgica · 1995

Follow-up after colorectal cancer: current practice in The Netherlands.

Bruinvels D J, Stiggelbout A M, Klaassen M P, Kievit J, Dik J, Habbema F, Van de Velde C J

СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

OBJECTIVE

To assess the current practice of follow-up after operations for colorectal cancer in The Netherlands in comparison with other countries.

DESIGN

Postal survey.

SETTING

All surgical departments in The Netherlands.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Attitudes of surgeons towards detection and treatment of recurrences after colorectal cancer.

RESULTS

Of the 139 questionnaires sent out, 136 (98%) were returned. History taking, physical examination, and colonoscopy for local recurrence and metachronous tumours were used by 90% of the hospitals. Attitudes towards screening for hepatic and pulmonary metastases and regional recurrence varied considerably between hospitals. Similar findings were found in seven surveys from other countries.

CONCLUSION

There is no consensus among surgeons regarding the follow-up of patients with colorectal cancer. Randomised controlled trials comparing different follow-up strategies and cost-effectiveness analyses are needed to identify groups of patients that will benefit most from follow-up. Identification of these patients may lead to more agreement between surgeons.

Для цитирования: Bruinvels D J, Stiggelbout A M, Klaassen M P, Kievit J, Dik J, Habbema F, Van de Velde C J. Follow-up after colorectal cancer: current practice in The Netherlands.. The European journal of surgery = Acta chirurgica. 1995.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

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.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.