Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Diagnostik und Screening

Koloproktologie UPDATE, Berlin, 13.06.2009

  • Update
  • Published:
coloproctology Aims and scope

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Weiterführende Literatur

  1. Moayyedi P, Achkar E. Does fecal occult blood testing really reduce mortality? A reanalysis of systematic review data. Am J Gastroenterol 2006;101:380–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Black C, Hagstrom D, Welch H. All-cause mortality in randomised trials of cancer screening. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002;94:167–73.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Weiterführende Literatur

  1. Hoepffner N, Shastri YM, Hanisch E, et al. Comparative evaluation of a new bedside faecal occult blood test in a prospective multicentre study. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2006;23:145–54.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Levi Z, Rozen P, Hazazi R, et al. A quantitative immunochemical fecal occult blood test for colorectal neoplasia. Ann Intern Med 2007;146:244–55.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Allison JE, Sakoda LCV, Levin TR, et al. Screening for colorectal neoplasms with new fecal occult blood tests: update on perfomance characteristics. J Natl Cancer Inst 2007;99:1462–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Weiterführende Literatur

  1. Maier AG, Barton PP, Neuhold NR, et al. Peritumoral tissue reaction at transrectal US as a possible cause of overstaging in rectal cancer: histopathologic correlation. Radiology 1997;203:785–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Kruskal JB, Kane RA, Sentovich SM, et al. Pitfalls and sources of error in staging rectal cancer with endorectal US. Radiographics 1997;17:609–26.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Kim JC, Yu CS, Jung HY, et al. Source of errors in the evaluation of early rectal cancer by endoluminal ultrasonography. Dis Colon Rectum 2001;44:1302–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Weiterführende Literatur

  1. Brenner H, Chang-Claude J, Seiler CM, et al. Does a negative screening colonoscopy ever need to be repeated? Gut 2006;55:1145–50.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Singh H, Turner D, Xue L, et al. Risk of developing colorectal cancer following a negative colonoscopy examination: evidence for a 10-year interval between colonoscopies. JAMA 2006;295:2366–73.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Weiterführende Literatur

  1. Pickhardt PJ, Choi JR, Hwang I, et al. Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy to screen for colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults. N Engl J Med 2003;349:2191–200.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Burling D, Halligan S, Slater A, et al. Potentially serious adverse events at CT colonography in symptomatic patients: national survey of the United Kingdom. Radiology 2006;239:464–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Kim DH, Pickhardt PJ, Taylor AJ, et al. CT colonography versus colonoscopy for the detection of advanced neoplasia. N Engl J Med 2007;357:1403–12.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Bethesda Allgemeines Krankenhaus, Klinik für Chirurgie, Hamburg, Germany

    Marco Sailer

  2. Bethesda Allgemeines Krankenhaus, Klinik für Chirurgie, Glindersweg 80, 21029, Hamburg, Germany

    Marco Sailer

Authors
  1. Marco Sailer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marco Sailer.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sailer, M. Diagnostik und Screening. Coloproctol 31, 230–236 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00053-009-0028-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00053-009-0028-4

Search

Navigation