A randomized, controlled trial to assess a novel colorectal cancer screening strategy: The conversion strategy - A comparison of sequential sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy with immediate conversion from sigmoidoscopy to colonoscopy in patients with an abnormal screening sigmoidoscopy
Ma. Stern et al., A randomized, controlled trial to assess a novel colorectal cancer screening strategy: The conversion strategy - A comparison of sequential sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy with immediate conversion from sigmoidoscopy to colonoscopy in patients with an abnormal screening sigmoidoscopy, AM J GASTRO, 95(8), 2000, pp. 2074-2079
OBJECTIVE: Our study was a randomized, controlled trial to assess a novel s
trategy that provides comprehensive colorectal cancer screening in a single
visit versus traditional sigmoidoscopy and, where appropriate, colonoscopy
on a subsequent day.
METHODS: Consecutive patients referred for screening were randomized to con
trol. or so-called "conversion" groups. Patients in the control group were
prepared for sigmoidoscopy with oral phospho-soda. Those with an abnormal s
igmoidoscopy were scheduled for colonoscopy on a future day after oral poly
ethylene glycol preparation. In the conversion group, patients were prepare
d with oral phosphosoda. Patients with a polyp >5 mm or multiple diminutive
polyps were converted from sigmoidoscopy to colonoscopy, allowing comprehe
nsive screening in a single visit; Clinical outcomes were assessed by postp
rocedure physician and patient questionnaires.
RESULTS: Two hundred thirty-five patients were randomized (control = 121, c
onversion = 114). In the control group, 28% had an indication for colonosco
py. Three of 33 (9%) with an abnormal sigmoidoscopy did not return for colo
noscopy. At colonoscopy, 27% had a proximal adenoma. In the conversion grou
p, 28% had an abnormal sigmoidoscopy and underwent conversion to colonoscop
y. Forty-one percent undergoing colonoscopy in the conversion group had a p
roximal adenoma. Physicians reported no differences in preparation or proce
dure difficulty, whereas patients reported no differences in the level of c
omfort or overall satisfaction between groups. When queried regarding prefe
rences for future screening, 96% chose the conversion strategy.
CONCLUSIONS: The conversion strategy led to similar outcomes compared to tr
aditional screening while improving compliance with colonoscopy in patients
with an abnormal sigmoidoscopy. (C) 2000 by Am. Cell. of Gastroenterology.