RESUMO
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Endoscopy and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are used routinely in the diagnostic and preoperative work-up of rectal cancer. We aimed to compare colonoscopy and MRI in determining rectal tumor height. METHODS: Between 2002 and 2012, all patients with rectal cancer with available MRIs and endoscopy reports were included. All MRIs were reassessed for tumor height by two abdominal radiologists. To obtain insight in techniques used for endoscopic determination of tumor height, a survey among regional endoscopists was conducted. RESULTS: A total of 211 patients with rectal cancer were included. Tumor height was significantly lower when assessed by MRI than by endoscopy with a mean difference of 2.5 cm (95% CI: 2.1-2.8). Although the agreement between tumor height as measured by MRI and endoscopy was good (intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) 0.7 (95% CI: 0.7-0.8)), the 95% limits of agreement varied from -3.0 cm to 8.0 cm. In 45 patients (21.3%), tumors were regarded as low by MRI and middle-high by endoscopy. MRI inter- and intraobserver agreements were excellent with an ICC of 0.8 (95% CI: 0.7-0.9) and 0.9 (95% CI: 0.9-1.0), respectively. The survey showed no consensus among endoscopists as to how to technically measure tumor height. CONCLUSION: This study showed large variability in rectal tumor height as measured by colonoscopy and MRI. Since MRI measurements showed excellent inter- and intraobserver agreement, we suggest using tumor height measurement by MRI for diagnostic purposes and treatment allocation.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS) is a common gastro-intestinal disorder in primary and secondary care, characterised by abdominal pain, discomfort, altered bowel habits and/or symptoms of bloating and distension. In general the efficacy of drug therapies is poor. Hypnotherapy as well as Cognitive Behaviour Therapy and short Psychodynamic Therapy appear to be useful options for patients with refractory IBS in secondary care and are cost-effective, but the evidence is still limited. The IMAGINE-study is therefore designed to assess the overall benefit of hypnotherapy in IBS as well as comparing the efficacy of individual versus group hypnotherapy in treating this condition. METHODS/DESIGN: The design is a randomised placebo-controlled trial. The study group consists of 354 primary care and secondary care patients (aged 18-65) with IBS (Rome-III criteria). Patients will be randomly allocated to either 6 sessions of individual hypnotherapy, 6 sessions of group hypnotherapy or 6 sessions of educational supportive therapy in a group (placebo), with a follow up of 9 months post treatment for all patients. Ten hospitals and four primary care psychological practices in different parts of The Netherlands will collaborate in this study. The primary efficacy parameter is the responder rate for adequate relief of IBS symptoms. Secondary efficacy parameters are changes in the IBS symptom severity, quality of life, cognitions, psychological complaints, self-efficacy as well as direct and indirect costs of the condition. Hypnotherapy is expected to be more effective than the control therapy, and group hypnotherapy is expected not to be inferior to individual hypnotherapy. DISCUSSION: If hypnotherapy is effective and if there is no difference in efficacy between individual and group hypnotherapy, this group form of treatment could be offered to more IBS patients, at lower costs. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN: ISRCTN22888906.
