ライフサイエンスコーパス: sigmoidoscopy

1 All subjects underwent a visceral stressor (sigmoidoscopy).

2 es and are 10-fold less common with flexible sigmoidoscopy.

3 val for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening by sigmoidoscopy.

4 blood testing (FOBT), but not about flexible sigmoidoscopy.

5 had been adequately examined at the initial sigmoidoscopy.

6 d the use of fecal occult blood testing plus sigmoidoscopy.

7 creening with a fecal occult-blood test plus sigmoidoscopy.

8 f these neoplasms would not be detected with sigmoidoscopy.

9 enhancing provider utilization of screening sigmoidoscopy.

10 new Medicare reimbursement rate for flexible sigmoidoscopy.

11 ic tubular adenomas (TAs) found at screening sigmoidoscopy.

12 olon following a positive screening flexible sigmoidoscopy.

13 control studies support the use of screening sigmoidoscopy.

14 distal adenomas or cancers found at flexible sigmoidoscopy.

15 e screening with fecal occult blood tests or sigmoidoscopy.

16 k relative first, and $3208 for conventional sigmoidoscopy.

17 he size and number of distal polyps found by sigmoidoscopy.

18 ity: fecal occult blood testing and flexible sigmoidoscopy.

19 were detected with repeated FIT compared to sigmoidoscopy.

20 copy (aOR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.47-0.70), but not sigmoidoscopy.

21 o, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.29 to 0.76) but not after sigmoidoscopy.

22 40 674 (71%) people underwent flexible sigmoidoscopy.

23 million upper endoscopies, 313,000 flexible sigmoidoscopies, 178,400 upper endoscopic ultrasound exa

24 Of 3496 consecutive patients referred for sigmoidoscopy, 311 had neoplastic rectosigmoid polyps; 1

25 The participation rate was 52% for sigmoidoscopy, 58% in the first FIT round, and 68% for 3

26 crease to approximately 9.5 million flexible sigmoidoscopies (95% CI, 8.4-10.5) and 22.4 million colo

27 Among 4490 patients who underwent sigmoidoscopy, a neoplastic lesion was detected in 401 (

28 blood test screening plus periodic flexible sigmoidoscopy about every 5 years for asymptomatic, aver

29 fter diagnosis of IDA and (2) colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy after diagnosis of hematochezia.

30 At the time of sigmoidoscopy, all polyps were biopsied and characterize

31 noscopy or sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy alone, sigmoidoscopy alone and alongside no screening.

32 If flexible sigmoidoscopy alone had been performed, advanced neoplas

33 ere nonsignificantly more likely to complete sigmoidoscopy alone or in combination with another test

34 IT), multitarget stool DNA testing, flexible sigmoidoscopy alone or with FIT, computed tomography col

35 Neither DCBE nor rigid sigmoidoscopy alone was sufficiently sensitive to be use

36 ns identified if they had undergone flexible sigmoidoscopy alone, as compared with 66.3 percent of ma

37 en identified if they had undergone flexible sigmoidoscopy alone.

38 onal life-year gained compared with flexible sigmoidoscopy alone.

39 ately 2.8 million (95% CI, 2.4-3.1) flexible sigmoidoscopies and 14.2 million (95% CI, 12.1-16.4) col

40 Approximately 2.8 million flexible sigmoidoscopies and 14.2 million colonoscopies were esti

41 s performed 24.9% (95% CI, 20.3-29.5) of all sigmoidoscopies and 2.0% (95% CI, 1.4-2.6) of all colono

42 d perform an additional 6.7 million flexible sigmoidoscopies and 8.2 million colonoscopies in 1 year.

43 confidence interval [CI], 37.2-50.2) of all sigmoidoscopies and 82.5% (95% CI, 80.3-84.7) of all col

44 0.59 (95% CI, 0.45 to 0.76) after screening sigmoidoscopy and 0.32 (95% CI, 0.24 to 0.45) after scre

45 oup (10,283 randomized to receive a flexible sigmoidoscopy and 10,289 to receive flexible sigmoidosco

46 on group), 83.5% underwent baseline flexible sigmoidoscopy and 54.0% were screened at 3 or 5 years.

47 ed 139,291 individuals: 69,195 randomized to sigmoidoscopy and 70,096 to FIT.

48 Rigid sigmoidoscopy and an anorectal examination were also use

49 the end of the treatment period was based on sigmoidoscopy and clinical scores.

50 e size and histology of polyps identified by sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy were noted.

51 3 years for FOBT and 5, 10, or 20 years for sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy.

52 icacy, including fecal occult blood testing, sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy.

53 cancer and cancer precursor lesions include sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy.

54 The comparative effectiveness of sigmoidoscopy and fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) for

55 doscopy or combination of once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy and fecal occult blood testing (FOBT).

56 flexible sigmoidoscopy screening or flexible sigmoidoscopy and FOBT reduced colorectal cancer inciden

57 flexible sigmoidoscopy only vs the flexible sigmoidoscopy and FOBT screening groups.

58 sigmoidoscopy and 10,289 to receive flexible sigmoidoscopy and FOBT).

59 Controls (n = 228) were screened with sigmoidoscopy and found not to have colorectal adenomas.

60 atment, there was significant improvement in sigmoidoscopy and histopathology scores in the budesonid

61 ntrol studies supported the effectiveness of sigmoidoscopy and possibly colonoscopy in reducing colon

62 eated a new library of 57 videos of flexible sigmoidoscopy and stratified them based on disease sever

63 tegies included conventional serial flexible sigmoidoscopy and two different APC gene testing approac

64 , 0.60 (95% CI, 0.53 to 0.68) after negative sigmoidoscopy, and 0.44 (95% CI, 0.38 to 0.52) after neg

65 ance of fecal occult blood testing, flexible sigmoidoscopy, and barium enema.

66 ealth plan members had colonoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy, and DCBE less often (ratio of change, 0.7

67 ect to the deductible (colonoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy, and DCBE).

68 Incidence rates of colonoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy, and fecal occult blood test were 27.9, 0.

69 Common procedures included colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, and rectal resection.

70 endoscopists may perform screening flexible sigmoidoscopy as safely and as effectively as gastroente

71 was lower in the first FIT round compared to sigmoidoscopy at 1.4% vs 2.4% (OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.53-0.

72 ormance of endoscopic ultrasound or flexible sigmoidoscopy at 3- to 6-month intervals for the first 2

73 men and women aged 50-75 years who underwent sigmoidoscopy at a health maintenance organization in so

74 s (colonoscopy indicated up to age 77 years, sigmoidoscopy at age 78 years, and FIT at ages 79 and 80

75 s (colonoscopy indicated up to age 80 years, sigmoidoscopy at age 81 years, and FIT at ages 82 and 83

76 Participants received flexible sigmoidoscopy at baseline and 3 or 5 y after.

77 randomly assigned to usual care or flexible sigmoidoscopy at baseline and again at 3 years or 5 year

78 ncluded no evaluation, colonoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy, barium enema, anoscopy, or any feasible c

79 The cost of flexible sigmoidoscopy-based screening for colorectal cancer coul

80 and 363 control subjects from this previous sigmoidoscopy-based study.

81 men would be missed with the use of flexible sigmoidoscopy but detected by colonoscopy.

82 Sigmoidoscopy by an endoscopist blinded to treatment ass

83 pared on receipt of screening colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy by using conditional logistic regression t

84 FOBT followed by colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy can be considered as an efficient and effe

85 ctal cancer with fecal occult blood tests or sigmoidoscopy can reduce mortality rates.

86 n and women 50-75 years old who visited free sigmoidoscopy clinics at a health maintenance organizati

87 re reimbursement rate for screening flexible sigmoidoscopy (code 45330, $87.84).

88 Blood Test (FOBT) followed by colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy alone, sigmoidoscopy alone an

89 ilable methods (fecal occult blood, flexible sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy, and double contrast barium e

90 Based on sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy, and pathology reports, occur

91 t blood testing in the past year or flexible sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy, or barium enema in the past

92 or men, the model included a cancer-negative sigmoidoscopy/colonoscopy in the last 10 years, polyp hi

93 For women, the model included sigmoidoscopy/colonoscopy, polyp history, history of CRC

94 e incremental cost-effectiveness of flexible sigmoidoscopy compared with no evaluation or with any st

95 ness of screening with colonoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy, computed tomography colonography, the gua

96 INTERPRETATION: A single flexible sigmoidoscopy continues to provide substantial protectio

97 d 173 control patients (34.0%) had screening sigmoidoscopy, corresponding to an AOR of 0.50 (CI, 0.36

98 eoplasms and, if applied following screening sigmoidoscopy, could reduce the need for colonoscopy by

99 Colonoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy, CTC, and stool tests have differing level

100 n 75 years; lack of (virtual) colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy data within 2 years, or presence of cancer

101 individuals, use of colonoscopy and flexible sigmoidoscopy decreased significantly between pre- and p

102 prevalence odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs of sigmoidoscopy-detected, distal adenomas for quintiles of

103 g tests, including fecal occult blood tests, sigmoidoscopy, double-contrast barium enema, and colonos

104 in the NHS who had undergone colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy during follow-up between 1980 and 1998.

105 regarding the role of colonoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy, endoscopic ultrasound, fecal testing and

106 ars, colonoscopy every 10 years, or flexible sigmoidoscopy every 10 years plus fecal immunochemical t

107 dels): colonoscopy every 10 years (270 LYG); sigmoidoscopy every 10 years with annual FIT (256 LYG);

108 s of colonoscopy every 10 years, annual FIT, sigmoidoscopy every 10 years with annual FIT, and CTC ev

109 T-fecal DNA test every 3 years, and flexible sigmoidoscopy every 5 to 10 years.

110 Annual Hemoccult II and flexible sigmoidoscopy every 5 years alone were less effective.

111 Aspirin therapy in patients screened with sigmoidoscopy every 5 years and fecal occult blood testi

112 blood testing (FOBT) combined with flexible sigmoidoscopy every 5 years and using colonoscopy every

113 on of annual fecal occult blood testing with sigmoidoscopy every 5 years are viable alternatives.

114 ively expensive; annual rehydrated FOBT plus sigmoidoscopy every 5 years had an incremental CE ratio

115 screening with a sensitive FOBT, or flexible sigmoidoscopy every 5 years with a midinterval sensitive

116 testing or fecal immunochemical testing, and sigmoidoscopy every 5 years with midinterval Hemoccult S

117 s: annual fecal occult blood tests, flexible sigmoidoscopy every 5 years, or colonoscopy every 10 yea

118 ive than the combination of annual FOBT plus sigmoidoscopy every 5 years.

119 compared with annual unrehydrated FOBT plus sigmoidoscopy every 5 years.

120 older who had a negative screening flexible sigmoidoscopy examination between 1994 and 1996 and were

121 RC in the first 5 years following a negative sigmoidoscopy examination to gauge the potential benefit

122 y and less effective than FOBT plus flexible sigmoidoscopy, except in the CRC-SPIN model assuming 100

123 fecal occult-blood test with rehydration and sigmoidoscopy fails to detect advanced colonic neoplasia

124 rated fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) plus sigmoidoscopy (followed by colonoscopy if either a low-

125 Cost analysis of flexible sigmoidoscopy, followed by colonoscopy as warranted, in

126 have only reported follow-up after flexible sigmoidoscopy for a maximum of 12 years.

127 Subjects undergoing sigmoidoscopy for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening were

128 er than 50 years of age undergoing screening sigmoidoscopy for colorectal cancer.

129 Colonoscopy has largely replaced sigmoidoscopy for CRC screening, but long-term results f

130 er than 50 years of age undergoing screening sigmoidoscopy for CRC.

131 th primary rectal cancer undergoing flexible sigmoidoscopy for response assessment after neoadjuvant

132 ons supports ongoing use of colonoscopy over sigmoidoscopy for screening examinations.

133 ts without evidence of a left-sided polyp by sigmoidoscopy, frequency-matched to cases on race and ge

134 s and controls who received colonoscopies or sigmoidoscopies from fiscal year 1997 to a date 6 months

135 gate how endoscopist performance at flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) affects adenoma detection and CRC inc

136 Flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) is recommended for mass screening for

137 d tomographic (CT) colonography and flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) screening and the factors predicting

138 varying estimates of the benefit of flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) screening for colorectal cancer (CRC)

139 ic subjects who underwent screening flexible sigmoidoscopy (FSG) within the Prostate, Lung, Colorecta

140 size of the abnormality detected at flexible sigmoidoscopy (FSG).

141 ere 33 (0.05%) serious adverse events in the sigmoidoscopy group compared to 47 (0.07%) in the FIT gr

142 alone, but the combination of DCBE and rigid sigmoidoscopy had a sensitivity of 0.96 and a specificit

143 Fecal occult-blood testing and sigmoidoscopy have been recommended for screening for co

144 Sigmoidoscopy identified 70.3 percent of all subjects wi

145 screening with a fecal occult-blood test and sigmoidoscopy identified 75.8 percent of subjects with a

146 Colonoscopy was recommended after sigmoidoscopy if any polyp of >=10 mm, >=3 adenomas, any

147 Colonoscopy was recommended after sigmoidoscopy if any polyp of 10 mm, 3 adenomas, any adv

148 oidoscopy with anoscopy followed by flexible sigmoidoscopy if needed, the middle 95th percentile of t

149 sions were considered detectable by flexible sigmoidoscopy if they were in the distal colon or if the

150 hern Californians aged 50-74 years who had a sigmoidoscopy in 1991-1993.

151 udy examines the cost of performing flexible sigmoidoscopy in a primary care practice and compares th

152 y and less effective than FOBT plus flexible sigmoidoscopy in all three models in both 100% and 50% a

153 cer (T3/4 or N1) were evaluated with DRE and sigmoidoscopy in order to determine the following tumor

154 a colonoscopy in the past 10 years, or (3) a sigmoidoscopy in the past 5 years were considered adhere

155 ult blood test in the past 2 years, flexible sigmoidoscopy in the past 5 years, or colonoscopy in the

156 self-reported compliance rates for screening sigmoidoscopy increased by 36% (baseline, 24%; year 1, 6

157 Flexible sigmoidoscopy is a safe and practical test and, when off

158 irety, suggesting colonic biopsy obtained by sigmoidoscopy is adequate for histologic confirmation wh

159 n asymptomatic subjects undergoing screening sigmoidoscopy is advisable.

160 Sigmoidoscopy is an effective screening strategy for col

161 Case-control studies have shown that sigmoidoscopy is associated with a reduction in mortalit

162 mm or less in diameter that are detected by sigmoidoscopy is controversial.

163 se of nurse endoscopists to perform flexible sigmoidoscopy is expanding, increasing the availability

164 enomas with low-grade dysplasia are found on sigmoidoscopy is uncertain.

165 oscopy beyond the expected reach of flexible sigmoidoscopy is very low and may not justify the added

166 although current techniques (e.g., flexible sigmoidoscopy) lack the requisite sensitivity.

167 Combining fecal occult blood testing and sigmoidoscopy may decrease mortality and can increase di

168 Screening with flexible sigmoidoscopy may reduce mortality rates from colorectal

169 colorectal cancer has been suggested because sigmoidoscopy misses nearly half of persons with advance

170 Screening by sigmoidoscopy more frequently than every 5 years would l

171 (RCTs) evaluating 1-time or 2-time flexible sigmoidoscopy (n = 458,002) were associated with decreas

172 fibre intake of 33971 participants who were sigmoidoscopy-negative for polyps, with 3591 cases with

173 luated the effect of screening with flexible sigmoidoscopy on colorectal-cancer incidence and mortali

174 trates a significant and sustained effect of sigmoidoscopy on CRC incidence and mortality for 15 year

175 There was no difference between the flexible sigmoidoscopy only vs the flexible sigmoidoscopy and FOB

176 History of screening sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy (routine/average risk or po

177 ) were diagnosed with colorectal adenomas at sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy and histologically confirme

178 The capacity for screening with flexible sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy depends on the proportion o

179 Age at initiation of sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy for screening (routine scre

180 ng at age 50, using either FOBT and flexible sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy in each racial or ethnic gr

181 l test in the previous 2 years or a flexible sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy in the previous 10 years.

182 8207 practices reported performing flexible sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy in the United States.

183 We investigated whether sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy is associated with a decrea

184 oor patient attendance to scheduled flexible sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy may contribute to deficient

185 .3%) of the 276 patients underwent follow-up sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy.

186 een the unscreened population using flexible sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy.

187 wise prevented effectively by screening with sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy.

188 randomized 1:1 to receive once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy or combination of once-only flexible sigmo

189 n 2012 and 2019 to either once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy or FIT screening every second year.

190 within this group, with less invasive tests (sigmoidoscopy or occult blood tests) for lower-risk pers

191 Screening with only sigmoidoscopy or only colonoscopy provided 6.8 QALYs eac

192 Use of cystoscopy (8.1%) and sigmoidoscopy or proctoscopy (8.6%) was significantly lo

193 were not observed among patients undergoing sigmoidoscopy or serial lower endoscopies.

194 A), fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) and/or sigmoidoscopy, or colonoscopy (COLO) in persons at avera

195 Fecal occult blood tests (FOBTs), flexible sigmoidoscopy, or colonoscopy screening beginning at age

196 computed tomographic colonography, flexible sigmoidoscopy, or colonoscopy).

197 testing (FOBT) but not colonoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy, or double-contrast barium enema (DCBE).

198 One-time colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, or fecal immunochemical test (FIT) screen

199 Completed CRC screening via colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, or FIT.

200 ecommends using a stool-based test, flexible sigmoidoscopy, or optical colonoscopy as a screening tes

201 ing strategy depends on the cost of flexible sigmoidoscopy, patient age when screening starts, and pe

202 t-based training with different results: for sigmoidoscopy, patient-based training was more effective

203 ere randomized to undergo screening flexible sigmoidoscopy performed by a nurse endoscopist or by a g

204 e incidence of complications during flexible sigmoidoscopy performed by nurse endoscopists and by gas

205 cy of missed polyps was determined by repeat sigmoidoscopy, performed by a gastroenterologist blinded

206 e incremental cost-effectiveness of flexible sigmoidoscopy plus barium enema compared with colonoscop

207 A strategy of flexible sigmoidoscopy plus barium enema yielded the greatest lif

208 cordant screening with colonoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy plus either sensitive unrehydrated fecal o

209 surveys to 75 individuals who underwent the sigmoidoscopy procedure.

210 Colonoscopy and sigmoidoscopy provide protection against colorectal canc

211 Screening flexible sigmoidoscopy reduces incidence and mortality of colorec

212 attitudes and quarterly review of screening sigmoidoscopy referrals using appointment logs to assess

213 0,748 colonoscopy reports, and 9767 flexible sigmoidoscopy reports to the central databank.

214 s that the time required to perform flexible sigmoidoscopy represents an opportunity cost because the

215 eening using FOBT followed by colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy resulted in 7.7 quality-adjusted life year

216 ent of participants, all of whom had a UCDAI sigmoidoscopy score >/=2 as read by the site investigato

217 ative Colitis Disease Activity Index (UCDAI) sigmoidoscopy score >/=2, that evaluated the efficacy of

218 Patients (total Mayo Score 6-12, recto-sigmoidoscopy score >=2) with inadequate response or int

219 friability, and a > or =1-point reduction in sigmoidoscopy score from baseline).

220 High clinical activity indices (CAI) and sigmoidoscopy scores (SS) were associated with enterobac

221 idence and mortality after a single flexible sigmoidoscopy screening and 17 years of follow-up.

222 cancer incidence and mortality from flexible sigmoidoscopy screening are sustained over the long term

223 years, randomly assigned to receive flexible sigmoidoscopy screening as part of the Prostate, Lung, C

224 tested the hypothesis that only one flexible sigmoidoscopy screening between 55 and 64 years of age c

225 We analysed data from six pilot flexible sigmoidoscopy screening centres to examine factors affec

226 d analysis of all large randomized trials of sigmoidoscopy screening demonstrates a significant and s

227 ng populations and a western lifestyle.19,20 Sigmoidoscopy screening done with people aged 55-64 year

228 In Norway, once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy screening or flexible sigmoidoscopy and FO

229 n 358 204 men and women randomly assigned to sigmoidoscopy screening or usual care in 4 randomized si

230 first diagnosis of colorectal adenomas in a sigmoidoscopy screening population and failed to find a

231 We did a retrospective analysis of flexible sigmoidoscopy screening procedures performed in individu

232 cancer screening and only modestly improved sigmoidoscopy screening rates among patients in primary

233 ed clinical screening trials have shown that sigmoidoscopy screening reduces colorectal cancer (CRC)

234 Key performance indicators for flexible sigmoidoscopy screening should be defined, including sta

235 Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Screening Trial (overall, 12.1%; range, 8.

236 is multicentre randomised trial (UK Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Screening Trial), done between Nov 14, 199

237 copy screening or usual care in 4 randomized sigmoidoscopy screening trials conducted in Norway, Ital

238 to that observed in the distal colon in the sigmoidoscopy screening trials.

239 s less than what was achieved by introducing sigmoidoscopy screening where no screening existed.

240 ) to an intervention group (offered flexible sigmoidoscopy screening) or a control group (not contact

241 to the intervention group (offered flexible sigmoidoscopy screening) or the control group (not conta

242 ted with colonoscopy screening compared with sigmoidoscopy screening, but the additional preventive e

243 ved with colonoscopy screening compared with sigmoidoscopy screening.

244 inar combined with implementation of on-site sigmoidoscopy services is an effective strategy for enha

245 inar combined with implementation of on-site sigmoidoscopy services performed by university-based gas

246 small tubular adenoma on screening flexible sigmoidoscopy should undergo colonoscopic examination of

247 Age-specific screening using sigmoidoscopy starting at ages 50 to 55 years and colono

248 tified at the time of colonoscopy (study 1), sigmoidoscopy (study 2), or at follow-up lower endoscopy

249 a net weight loss during the 10 years before sigmoidoscopy, subjects with net weight gains of 1.5-4.5

250 Compared to sigmoidoscopy, the detection rate for CRC was similar in

251 usion of women who reported having screening sigmoidoscopy, the relative risk for colorectal cancer s

252 For sigmoidoscopy, this association was seen for left CRC, b

253 Among patients undergoing screening sigmoidoscopy, those with single tubular adenomas of 5 m

254 ia was similar among patients with no TAs at sigmoidoscopy, those with TAs less than 1 cm in diameter

255 n England in 2013, offering one-off flexible sigmoidoscopy to all men and women aged 55 years in addi

256 The number needed to switch from sigmoidoscopy to colonoscopy screening was 560 (95% CI,

257 Sigmoidoscopy to the descending colon in the low-risk gr

258 Polyps found on sigmoidoscopy underwent biopsy, and colonoscopy was reco

259 Trends in colonoscopy and sigmoidoscopy use among Medicare beneficiaries without c

260 d Ovarian cancer screening trial of flexible sigmoidoscopy versus usual care (55-74 years old, no his

261 tention to screen with 1- or 2-time flexible sigmoidoscopy vs no screening was associated with a decr

262 nefit of colonoscopy screening compared with sigmoidoscopy was 12 (95% CI, 10-14) fewer CRC cases and

263 f whose index lesion on screening fiberoptic sigmoidoscopy was a benign adenoma.

264 Use of screening sigmoidoscopy was also significantly greater at the inte

265 Screening with flexible sigmoidoscopy was associated with a significant decrease

266 The diagnostic yield of flexible sigmoidoscopy was calculated by estimating the proportio

267 Sigmoidoscopy was defined in this study as examination o

268 olonoscopy was indicated up to age 83 years, sigmoidoscopy was indicated at age 84 years, and FIT was

269 Diet in the year before sigmoidoscopy was measured with a food frequency questio

270 Flexible sigmoidoscopy was most commonly performed for routine sc

271 Fecal occult blood testing or flexible sigmoidoscopy was ordered for 47.2% of intervention part

272 Sigmoidoscopy was performed revealing mucosal edema, hyp

273 Colonoscopy and sigmoidoscopy were associated with a reduced incidence o

274 Screening colonoscopy and sigmoidoscopy were associated with reduced colorectal-ca

275 ith the performance of office-based flexible sigmoidoscopy were derived from the published literature

276 , double-contrast barium enema, and flexible sigmoidoscopy were rarely performed.

277 xtamucosal bacteria on biopsies taken during sigmoidoscopy were studied in a subgroup by fluorescence

278 and moderately-to-severely active disease on sigmoidoscopy) were randomized in a 2:2:2:3:3 ratio to r

279 Participants were examined by flexible sigmoidoscopy when the study began and then were randoml

280 stic sensitivity analysis comparing flexible sigmoidoscopy with anoscopy followed by flexible sigmoid

281 ce shows that periodic screening by flexible sigmoidoscopy with appropriate referral of patients with

282 a [IBS-D]), and 15 age-matched HCs underwent sigmoidoscopy with biopsies.

283 ideo) was significantly related to receiving sigmoidoscopy with or without another test (odds ratio,

284 may limit the adoption of screening flexible sigmoidoscopy with or without biopsy in primary care pra

285 le classified screening since baseline as 1) sigmoidoscopy with or without other tests, 2) another te

286 IT), multitarget stool DNA testing, flexible sigmoidoscopy with or without stool testing, computed to

287 of Americans 50 years and older by flexible sigmoidoscopy with referral of subjects with adenomas to

288 nts of rectal bleeding, stool frequency, and sigmoidoscopy), with no worsening in any individual clin

289 ars of age either to screening with flexible sigmoidoscopy, with a repeat screening at 3 or 5 years,

290 sed, the physician's total cost for flexible sigmoidoscopy without biopsy was $86.86, which is simila

291 Sigmoidoscopy would have detected 21 of 24 (87.5% [CI, 6

292 For a pedigree of 5 at-risk relatives, sigmoidoscopy would have to cost less than $85.60 (profe

293 ing in both years, defined as colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy (year 1) or fecal occult blood testing (FO

294 g (FOBT) in year 1 and FOBT, colonoscopy, or sigmoidoscopy (year 2).

295 st-effectiveness ratios ranged from flexible sigmoidoscopy yielding an increased life expectancy at r