Retrospective study identifies risk factors for colorectal cancer after acute diverticulitis, highlighting gaps in follow-up protocols.
Introduction Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most preventable cancers and represents the third most common cancer globally. Emerging trends of association with diverticulitis highlight the need for updated follow-up protocols. This study aimed to examine the risk factors associated with CRC within 12 months of the index admission of acute diverticulitis to optimise the follow-up strategies. Methods Retrospective multicenter study included adult patients with CT-confirmed acute diverticulitis from four UK hospitals in 2022. Data on demographics, comorbidities, clinical presentation, vital signs, blood results, admission details, and colonic follow-up investigations were analysed. The primary outcome was CRC incidence within 12 months of index presentation; secondary outcomes examined associated factors with the CRC and follow-up patterns. Statistical analysis was performed using R version 4.4, with p-values <0.05 considered significant. Results Among 542 patients, the median age was 62 (51–73) years, with 204 (37.6%) males. CRC was diagnosed in 10 (1.8%) patients within a year. Hinchey grade Ib diverticulitis was significantly associated with CRC (OR 4.51, p=0.028). Male gender, age (18–40), and elevated CRP were associated with CRC but not statistically significant. Despite these findings, the follow-up strategies were inconsistent; only 53.7% had a colonic evaluation. Conclusion The incidence of CRC in this study was 1.8%, consistent with current literature. Hinchey 1b grade was a key predictor. These findings emphasise the importance of specialised radiological reviews to detect malignancy obscured by inflammation. The inconsistency of post-diverticulitis surveillance protocols underscores the need for a standardised strategy for early cancer detection.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Issa et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: