AB193. SOH26AB_0118. “Does imaging surveillance frequency of patients post treatment for non-metastatic (stage II/III) colorectal cancer affect survival outcomes?”—a systematic review of the current literature
Radiology Posters

AB193. SOH26AB_0118. “Does imaging surveillance frequency of patients post treatment for non-metastatic (stage II/III) colorectal cancer affect survival outcomes?”—a systematic review of the current literature

Eoghan Meagher, Leon Walsh

Department of Radiology, University Hospital Limerick, Limerick, Ireland


Background: Colorectal cancer is the 3rd most commonly diagnosed cancer worldwide. Current surveillance regimens include combinations of imaging, circulating tumour markers, and colonoscopy to detect early recurrence. Follow-up after completed non-metastatic Colorectal cancer therapy is based on tradition more than evidence, and there are currently no Irish guidelines to guide follow-up practices. There is conflicting evidence pertaining to the frequency of follow-up and its impact on overall survival.

Methods: A systematic search using PubMed, Cochrane, Epistemonikos, Turning Research into Practice (TRIP), and Google Scholar databases was undertaken, and relevant research papers, systematic reviews, and guidelines published in the last 10 years were considered for review. Articles excluding imaging surveillance, or that included endoscopic or tumour marker follow-up only post curative treatment for colorectal cancer, were excluded. Using a validated critical appraisal tool, the most relevant articles were evaluated.

Results: The systematic search returned approximately 30 articles for review, and the most recent, relevant literature was considered for appraisal. The majority of relevant, up-to-date research articles and guidelines contradict more dated research and now support a less-frequent surveillance regimen. This has implications not only for patients but also on hospital costs and for the redistribution of already limited resources.

Conclusions: Recent research increasingly encourages a shift from more- to less-frequent follow-up testing (i.e., 5 to 2 occasions in the 1st 5 years) post treatment because there is no significant reduction in 5–10 years overall mortality or colorectal cancer-specific mortality in this cohort with more intense follow-up protocols.

Keywords: Colorectal cancer; follow-up; mortality; surveillance; survival


Acknowledgments

None.


Footnote

Funding: None.

Conflicts of Interest: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Ethical Statement: The authors are accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Open Access Statement: This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which permits the non-commercial replication and distribution of the article with the strict proviso that no changes or edits are made and the original work is properly cited (including links to both the formal publication through the relevant DOI and the license). See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.


doi: 10.21037/map-26-ab193
Cite this abstract as: Meagher E, Walsh L. AB193. SOH26AB_0118. “Does imaging surveillance frequency of patients post treatment for non-metastatic (stage II/III) colorectal cancer affect survival outcomes?”—a systematic review of the current literature. Mesentery Peritoneum 2026;10:AB193.

Download Citation