<abstract xml:lang="en" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p><bold>Background.</bold> Though the post treatment surveillance of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) treated with curative intent is common practice, its value is controversial. In the absence of conclusive clinical data, various modalities for the routine follow-up of patients with CRC have been proposed. In practice, the guidelines across countries and regions differ and are influenced by different health care policies, resource availability and doubts about effectiveness of follow-up.</p><p><bold>Conclusions.</bold> The results of metaanalyses of available clinical trials demonstrated a survival benefit of intensified monitoring, but the questions regarding the optimal frequency of visits and the examinations to be performed remain unanswered. Furthermore, intensive monitoring of CRC survivors may be difficult to be administrated, causes discomfort and morbidity to the patient and can have serious cost-implications to the healthcare system. However, as it seems from available data, a comprehensive surveillance program does not affect the quality of patients' life. Ongoing large prospective multi-institutional randomised trials might elucidate some of the crucial questions and existing dilemmas to establish adequate surveillance strategy for CRC patients.</p></abstract>

Background. Though the post treatment surveillance of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) treated with curative intent is common practice, its value is controversial. In the absence of conclusive clinical data, various modalities for the routine follow-up of patients with CRC have been proposed. In practice, the guidelines across countries and regions differ and are influenced by different health care policies, resource availability and doubts about effectiveness of follow-up.Conclusions. The results of metaanalyses of available clinical trials demonstrated a survival benefit of intensified monitoring, but the questions regarding the optimal frequency of visits and the examinations to be performed remain unanswered. Furthermore, intensive monitoring of CRC survivors may be difficult to be administrated, causes discomfort and morbidity to the patient and can have serious cost-implications to the healthcare system. However, as it seems from available data, a comprehensive surveillance program does not affect the quality of patients' life. Ongoing large prospective multi-institutional randomised trials might elucidate some of the crucial questions and existing dilemmas to establish adequate surveillance strategy for CRC patients.

Post-treatment surveillance in colorectal cancer

Institute of Oncology Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia

Radiology and Oncology

{"article-title":"Post-treatment surveillance in colorectal cancer"}

Background. Though the post treatment surveillance of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) treated with curative intent is common practice, its value is...

Post-treatment surveillance in colorectal cancer

Publié en ligne: 03 mai 2010

Pages: 135 - 141

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/v10019-010-0018-8

Mots clés
surveillance, colorectal cancer

This content is open access.

Post-treatment surveillance in colorectal cancer

Publié en ligne: 03 mai 2010

Pages: 135 - 141

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/v10019-010-0018-8

Mots cléssurveillance, colorectal cancer

This content is open access.

Mots clés
surveillance, colorectal cancer