Patient surveillance after curative-intent surgery for rectal cancer
- Authors:
- Published online on: September 1, 2005 https://doi.org/10.3892/ijo.27.3.815
- Pages: 815-822
Metrics: Total
Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Abstract
The follow-up of patients with rectal cancer after potentially curative resection has significant financial and clinical implications for patients and society. The ideal regimen for monitoring patients is unknown. We evaluated the self-reported practice patterns of a large, diverse group of experts. There is little information available describing the actual practice of clinicians who perform potentially curative surgery on rectal cancer patients and follow them after recovery. The 1795 members of the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons were asked, via a detailed questionnaire, how often they request 14 discrete follow-up modalities in their patients treated for cure with TNM stage I, II, or III rectal cancer over the first five post-treatment years. 566/1782 (32%) responded and 347 of the respondents (61%) provided evaluable data. Members of the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons typically follow their own patients postoperatively rather than sending them back to their referral source. Office visit and serum CEA level are the most frequently requested items for each of the first five postoperative years. Endoscopy and imaging tests are also used regularly. Considerable variation exists among these highly experienced, highly credentialed experts. The surveillance strategies reported here rely most heavily on relatively simple and inexpensive tests. Endoscopy is employed frequently; imaging tests are employed less often. The observed variation in the intensity of postoperative monitoring is of concern.