29
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Management of T1 colorectal cancers after endoscopic treatment based on the risk stratification of lymph node metastasis : Management of T1 colorectal cancers

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references25

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Measurement of observer agreement.

          Statistical measures are described that are used in diagnostic imaging for expressing observer agreement in regard to categorical data. The measures are used to characterize the reliability of imaging methods and the reproducibility of disease classifications and, occasionally with great care, as the surrogate for accuracy. The review concentrates on the chance-corrected indices, kappa and weighted kappa. Examples from the imaging literature illustrate the method of calculation and the effects of both disease prevalence and the number of rating categories. Other measures of agreement that are used less frequently, including multiple-rater kappa, are referenced and described briefly.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum (JSCCR) guidelines 2010 for the treatment of colorectal cancer.

            Colorectal cancer is a major cause of death in Japan, where it accounts for the largest number of deaths from malignant neoplasms in women and the third largest number in men. Many new treatment methods have been developed over the last few decades. The Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum (JSCCR) guidelines 2010 for the treatment of colorectal cancer (JSCCR Guidelines 2010) have been prepared to show standard treatment strategies for colorectal cancer, to eliminate disparities among institutions in terms of treatment, to eliminate unnecessary treatment and insufficient treatment, and to deepen mutual understanding between health-care professionals and patients by making these Guidelines available to the general public. These Guidelines have been prepared by consensuses reached by the JSCCR Guideline Committee, based on a careful review of the evidence retrieved by literature searches and in view of the medical health insurance system and actual clinical practice settings in Japan. Therefore, these Guidelines can be used as a tool for treating colorectal cancer in actual clinical practice settings. More specifically, they can be used as a guide to obtaining informed consent from patients and choosing the method of treatment for each patient. As a result of the discussions held by the Guideline Committee, controversial issues were selected as Clinical Questions, and recommendations were made. Each recommendation is accompanied by a classification of the evidence and a classification of recommendation categories based on the consensus reached by the Guideline Committee members. Here we present the English version of the JSCCR Guidelines 2010.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Risk factors for an adverse outcome in early invasive colorectal carcinoma.

              Various histologic findings exist for managing patients with malignant polyps. Our goal was to determine the criteria for a conservative approach to patients with locally excised early invasive carcinoma. In 292 early invasive tumors (local resection followed by laparotomy [80 tumors, group A], local resection only [41 tumors, group B], and primarily laparotomy [171 tumors, group C], potential parameters for nodal involvement were analyzed. The status of the endoscopic resection margin also was examined for the risk for intramural residual tumor. Unfavorable tumor grade, definite vascular invasion, and tumor budding were the combination of qualitative factors that most effectively discriminated the risk for nodal involvement in patients in groups A-C. The nodal involvement rate was 0.7%, 20.7%, and 36.4% in the no-risk, single-risk, and multiple-risks group, respectively. Thirty-two and 9 patients from group B were assigned to the no-risk and one-risk group, respectively; extramural recurrence occurred in 2 patients with risk factors. Considering quantitative risk parameters for submucosal invasion (i.e., width > or =4000 microm or depth > or =2000 microm), nodal involvement (including micrometastases) was not observed in the redefined no-risk group that accounted for about 25% of the patients from groups A and C. An insufficiency of endoscopic resection could be evaluated most precisely based on the coagulation-involving tumor, rather than the 1-mm rule for the resection margin. Provided that the criterion of sufficient excision is satisfied, the absence of an unfavorable tumor grade, vascular invasion, tumor budding, and extensive submucosal invasion would be the strict criteria for a wait-and-see policy.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology
                Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology
                Wiley-Blackwell
                08159319
                June 2016
                June 30 2016
                : 31
                : 6
                : 1126-1132
                Article
                10.1111/jgh.13257
                26641025
                fe66475f-2c13-4e72-89f6-0750f9a26a12
                © 2016

                http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article