Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Proctoscopy”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
PubMed1976

An evaluation of procedures used in staging carcinoma of the cervix.

A review of 227 cases of invasive carcinoma of the cervix was undertaken to determine the efficacy of procedures using in the staging of this disease. All patients had a pretreatment chest radiography and intravenous pyelogram. 96.5% had pretreatment cystoscopy, 98.6% had pretreatment proctoscopy, and 92% had a pretreatment barium enema. These patients were retrospectively staged on the findings of physical examination only. Each additional procedure was then evaluated by comparison with the initial staging. Cystoscopy and chest film findings each would have changed the clinical stage in fewer than 1% of cases, barium enema in 1.4%, and proctoscopy in 2.2%. No patient had a positive barium enema without a positive proctoscopy, while two patients had positive proctoscopies with negative barium enemas. The overall yield of positive findings by pretreatment intravenous pyelography was 7.3%. Lymphangiography, although inconsistently done, yielded positive findings in all stages. Chest radiographs, intravenous pyelography, proctoscopy, and lymphangiography are recommended as part of the pretreatment workup of patients with carcinoma of the cervix. Routine barium enema is no longer recommended, and cystoscopy is only recommended in patients with clinical stage IIB disease or greater.

Barium Sulfate↗
PubMed2002

A pilot study of topical intrarectal application of amifostine for prevention of late radiation rectal injury.

PURPOSE: Clinical symptomatic late injury to the rectal wall occurs in about one-third of patients with prostate cancer treated with external beam irradiation. Reducing the physical dose to the anterior rectal wall without a similar reduction in the posterior peripheral zone is difficult because of the proximity of the prostate to the anterior rectal wall. On the basis of our previous observations in an animal model that intrarectal application of amifostine resulted in very high concentrations of amifostine and its active metabolite WR-1065 in the rectal wall, a Phase I dose-escalation clinical trial was undertaken. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twenty-nine patients with localized prostate cancer were accrued. Eligibility criteria included histologically confirmed adenocarcinoma, Karnofsky performance status >or=70, and no pelvic lymphadenopathy or distant metastases. The total dose to the prostate was 70.2 Gy in 20 patients and 73.8 Gy in 9 patients. Therapy was delivered using a 4-field technique with three-dimensional conformal planning. Amifostine was administered intrarectally as an aqueous solution 30 min before irradiation on the first 15 days of therapy. Amifostine was escalated in cohorts from 500 to 2500 mg. Proctoscopy was performed before therapy and at 9 months after completion. Most patients underwent repeat proctoscopy at 18 months. On Days 1 and 10 of radiotherapy, serum samples were collected for pharmacokinetic studies. The clinical symptoms (Radiation Therapy Oncology Group scale) and a proctoscopy score were assessed during follow-up. RESULTS: All patients completed therapy with no amifostine-related toxicity at any dose level. The application was feasible and well tolerated. No substantial systemic absorption occurred. With a median follow-up of 26 months, 9 patients (33%) developed rectal bleeding (8 Grade 1, 1 Grade 2). At 9 months, 16 and 3 patients developed Grade 1 and Grade 2 telangiectasia, respectively. This was mostly confined to the anterior rectal wall. No visible mucosal edema, ulcerations, or strictures were noted. No significant differences were found between the proctoscopy findings at 9 and 18 months. Four patients (14%) developed symptoms suggestive of radiation damage that, on sigmoidoscopy, proved to be secondary to unrelated processes. These included preexisting nonspecific proctitis (n = 1), diverticular disease of the sigmoid colon (n = 1), rectal polyp (n = 1), and ulcerative colitis (n = 1). Symptoms developed significantly more often in patients receiving 500-1000 mg than in patients receiving 1500-2500 mg amifostine (7 [50%] of 14 vs. 2 [15%] of 13, p = 0.0325, one-sided chi-square test). CONCLUSION: Intrarectal application of amifostine is feasible and well tolerated. Systemic absorption of amifostine and its metabolites is negligible, and close monitoring of patients is not required with rectal administration. Proctoscopy is superior to symptom score as a method of assessing radiation damage of the rectal wall. The preliminary efficacy data are encouraging, and further clinical studies are warranted.

Adenocarcinoma↗
PubMed2000

Is Hartmann's procedure safe in Crohn's disease? Report of three cases.

INTRODUCTION: Crohn's disease-associated colorectal cancer may occur in an area of defunctioning bowel. Some patients with Crohn's colitis undergo subtotal colectomy, ileostomy, and low Hartmann's procedure in an effort to preserve the rectum. This procedure has also been advocated for patients with severe anorectal Crohn's disease, in whom nonhealing of the perineal wound after proctectomy occurs with alarming frequency. The authors present a review of the literature and three cases of cancer developing in the defunctioning rectal stump despite surveillance proctoscopy. METHODS: Twenty-five patients underwent low Hartmann's procedure for severe anorectal Crohn's disease. Surveillance proctoscopy was performed as follow-up. Development of cancer in the rectal remnant or anus or recurrence of symptoms was managed by resection and adjuvant therapy. RESULTS: One patient developed squamous-cell carcinoma of the anal canal, underwent resection and adjuvant therapy, and was disease free at the time of this study. Two patients developed adenocarcinoma of the rectum. Both underwent resection and adjuvant therapy. One patient died and the other developed a recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: The authors recommend interval perineal proctectomy in all patients undergoing low Hartmann's procedure for severe anorectal Crohn's disease in whom rectal preservation is not possible. Regularly scheduled interim surveillance proctoscopy performed every two years, with biopsies of macroscopically normal-appearing and abnormal-appearing rectal mucosa and curetting of fistulous tracts, is also recommended to decrease the possibility of missing occult malignancies.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Assessing the predictive value of clinical complete response to neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer: an analysis of 488 patients.

BACKGROUND: Patients with transmural or node-positive rectal cancer benefit from the addition of chemoradiation to surgical resection. Administration of the chemoradiation (combined modality therapy) preoperatively has gained popularity in recent years. Some patients undergo apparent complete tumor regression after preoperative combined modality therapy, and controversy exists about the proper management of these patients. Some investigators have proposed that such patients should simply be observed and not undergo resection. STUDY DESIGN: The purpose of this study was to determine the significance of clinical complete response to preoperative combined modality therapy. Specifically, we have attempted to determine the frequency with which a clinical complete response (based on the absence of detectable tumor on preoperative digital rectal examination and proctoscopy) correlates with a pathologic complete response (based on the absence of cancer cells in the resected specimen). A retrospective review of the clinical and pathologic characteristics of 488 patients from the Memorial Sloan-Kettering prospective colorectal database who received preoperative chemoradiation followed by resection for primary rectal cancer was performed. The indications for preoperative therapy included clinical or ultrasound T3 or T4 tumors or node-positive disease. RESULTS: The clinical complete response rate to preoperative therapy was 19%. All patients underwent resection subsequent to preoperative therapy regardless of response. The pathologic complete response rate among all patients was 10%. The pathologic complete response rate among clinical complete responders was 25%. Clinical complete response was a significant predictive factor for pathologic complete response, but the majority (75%) of clinical complete responders had persistent foci of tumor that were not detectable on preoperative examination or proctoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical complete response to preoperative therapy as determined by preoperative digital rectal examination and proctoscopy or EUA is not an accurate predictor of pathologic complete response. A significant percentage of clinical complete responders have persistent deep tumors or nodal involvement. We do not recommend making treatment decisions based solely on the absence of clinically palpable or visible tumor after chemoradiation. Our data suggest that all acceptable-risk patients with a diagnosis of primary rectal cancer should undergo resection, regardless of their response to preoperative therapy.

Adult↗