Colorectal carcinoma missed on double contrast barium enema study: a problem in perception

Kelvin, FM; Gardiner, Richard; Vas, Wenzel; Gw, Stevenson

doi:10.2214/ajr.137.2.307

Cited by 103 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…About one third (33.9%) of the radiological studies for diagnostic work-ups were misdiagnosed and these errors were identified in 54.6% of our patients. As also reported in previous studies (5,10,11), these radiological errors caused long delays in diagnosis (Table 1). Furthermore, these errors often reduced the quality of life of our patients.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 83%

“…The decision of misdiagnosis was based on the consensus of two radiologists (N. Tooyama and M. Takahashi) who were not aware of the patients' histories or symptoms. According to the criteria of Kelvin et al (11), radiological errors were classified as purely perceptive (lesions visible in retrospect), purely technical (lesions not seen in retrospect), interpretative (lesions observed at the time of study but malignancy not included in the differential diagnosis), and technical and perceptive (technical inadequacy contributing to perceptive error). The reasons for these delays were also evaluated.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Treatment delay and radiological errors in patients with bone metastases

Ichinohe

Takahashi

Tooyama

2003

Braz J Med Biol Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During routine investigations, we are surprised to find that therapy for bone metastases is sometimes delayed for a considerable period of time. To determine the extent of this delay and its causes, we reviewed the medical records of symptomatic patients seen at our hospital who had been recently diagnosed as having bone metastases for the last four years. The treatment delay was defined as the interval between presentation with symptoms and definitive treatment for bone metastases. The diagnostic delay was defined as the interval between presentation with symptoms and diagnosis of bone metastases. The results of diagnostic radiological examinations were also reviewed for errors. The study population included 76 males and 34 females with a median age of 66 years. Most bone metastases were diagnosed radiologically. Over 75% of patients were treated with radiotherapy. The treatment delay ranged from 2 to 307 days, with a mean of 53.3 days. In 490 radiological studies reviewed, we identified 166 (33.9%) errors concerning 62 (56.4%) patients. The diagnostic delay was significantly longer for patients with radiological errors than for patients without radiological errors (P < 0.001), and much of it was due to radiological errors. In conclusion, the treatment delay in patients with symptomatic bone metastases was much longer than expected, and much of it was caused by radiological errors. Considerable efforts should therefore be made to more carefully examine the radiological studies in order to ensure prompt treatment of bone metastases.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 83%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Treatment delay and radiological errors in patients with bone metastases

Ichinohe

Takahashi

Tooyama

2003

Braz J Med Biol Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The majority of these studies showed sensitivity for cancer of 85% to 97%. [137][138][139][140][141][142][143][144][145][146][147][148][149][150] Review of the literature concerning the performance of DCBE for polyps is more difficult due to the described biases and heterogeneity of study design; in particular, the target lesion and thresholds considered clinically significant often varied based upon size and/or morphology. Two studies involving truly asymptomatic individuals were performed in surveillance groups with a history of prior adenoma removal.…”

Section: Screening and Surveillance For The Early Detection Of Colorementioning

confidence: 99%

Screening and Surveillance for the Early Detection of Colorectal Cancer and Adenomatous Polyps, 2008: A Joint Guideline from the American Cancer Society, the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology

Levin

Lieberman

McFarland

et al. 2008

CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians

1,557

916

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the United States, colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer diagnosed among men and women and the second leading cause of death from cancer. CRC largely can be prevented by the detection and removal of adenomatous polyps, and survival is significantly better when CRC is diagnosed while still localized. In 2006 to 2007, the American Cancer Society, the US Multi Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology came together to develop consensus guidelines for the detection of adenomatous polyps and CRC in asymptomatic average-risk adults. In this update of each organization's guidelines, screening tests are grouped into those that primarily detect cancer early and those that can detect cancer early and also can detect adenomatous polyps, thus providing a greater potential for prevention through polypectomy. When possible, clinicians should make patients aware of the full range of screening options, but at a minimum they should be prepared to offer patients a choice between a screening test that is effective at both early cancer detection and cancer prevention through the detection and removal of polyps and a screening test that primarily is effective at early cancer detection. It is the strong opinion of these 3 organizations that colon cancer prevention should be the primary goal of screening. (CA Cancer J Clin 2008;58:130-160.)

show abstract

“…[76][77][78][79][80][81][82][83][84][85][86][87][88] Many studies assessing the detection rate of colon cancer using DCBE analyzed all patients in an institution-or population-based database who had been diagnosed with colon cancer and had been assessed with a prior DCBE within a certain period of time. In most studies, the sensitivity for DCBE in detecting colon cancer was reported as 85% to 97%.…”

Section: ) Dcbementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In most studies, the sensitivity for DCBE in detecting colon cancer was reported as 85% to 97%. [76][77][78][79][80][81][82][83][84][85][86][87][88] However, a recent study showed a rate of new or missed colon cancer after DCBE of 22.4%, demonstrating that the diagnostic performance of DCBE was affected by several factors, including the quality of the study or the person who performed the study. 89 Comparing different studies regarding the performance of DCBE in diagnosing polyps is more difficult owing to heterogeneous study designs.…”

Section: ) Dcbementioning

confidence: 99%

Korean Guidelines for Colorectal Cancer Screening and Polyp Detection

Lee

Hong

Kim

et al. 2012

J Korean Soc Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

According to the statistical yearbook of the Ministry of Health and Welfare, crude colorectal cancer incidence rates in Korea in 2008 were 54.7 and 36.9 per 100,000 among males and females, respectively. Colorectal cancer is thus the second most common cancer in males and the fourth most common Clin Endosc 2012;45:25-43 Copyright © 2012 The Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 25 cancer in females. 1 The mortality rates (the number of deaths per 100,000 people, %) of colorectal cancer in 2008 were 15.4% among males and 12.1% among females. Colorectal cancer is thus the fourth most common cause of cancer death among Korean males and the second most common cause of cancer death among Korean females. The age-standardized mortality rates of colorectal cancer continue to increase, unlike those of other common cancers, including lung cancer, liver cancer and stomach cancer, whose mortality rates have decreased in recent years. Increases in the incidence of colorectal cancer may be partly due to Westernization of many Koreans' lifestyles. Greater public awareness of colorectal cancer and the addition of colorectal cancer in 2004 to the national cancer screening program are likely also responsible in part for the increased incidence rates. Participation rates in the national colorectal screening program increased from ap Now colorectal cancer is the second most common cancer in males and the fourth most common cancer in females in Korea. Since most of colorectal cancers occur after the prolonged transformation of adenomas into carcinomas, early detection and removal of colorectal adenomas are one of the most effective methods to prevent colorectal cancer. Considering the increasing incidence of colorectal cancer and polyps in Korea, it is very important to establish Korean guideline for colorectal cancer screening and polyp detection. The guideline was developed by the Korean Multi-Society Take Force and we tried to establish the guideline by evidence-based methods. Parts of the statements were draw by systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Herein we discussed epidemiology of colorectal cancers and adenomas in Korea and optimal methods for screening of colorectal cancer and detection of adenomas including fecal occult blood tests, radiologic tests, and endoscopic examinations.

show abstract

Colorectal carcinoma missed on double contrast barium enema study: a problem in perception

Cited by 103 publications

References 0 publications

Treatment delay and radiological errors in patients with bone metastases

Treatment delay and radiological errors in patients with bone metastases

Screening and Surveillance for the Early Detection of Colorectal Cancer and Adenomatous Polyps, 2008: A Joint Guideline from the American Cancer Society, the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology

Korean Guidelines for Colorectal Cancer Screening and Polyp Detection

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About