Gastrointestinal symptoms in low-dose aspirin users: a comparison between plain and buffered aspirin

Contains fulltext : 127588.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Aspirin is associated with gastrointestinal side effects such as gastric ulcers, gastric bleeding and dyspepsia. High-dose effervescent calcium carbasalate (ECC), a buffered formulation of aspirin, is associated with reduced gastric toxicity compared with plain aspirin in healthy volunteers, but at lower cardiovascular doses no beneficial effects were observed. AIM: To compare the prevalence of self-reported gastrointestinal symptoms between low-dose plain aspirin and ECC. METHODS: A total of 51,869 questionnaires were sent to a representative sample of the Dutch adult general population in December 2008. Questions about demographics, gastrointestinal symptoms in general and specific symptoms, comorbidity, and medication use including bioequivalent doses of ECC (100 mg) and plain aspirin (80 mg) were stated. We investigated the prevalence of self-reported gastrointestinal symptoms on ECC compared with plain aspirin using univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: A total of 16,715 questionnaires (32 %) were returned and eligible for analysis. Of these, 911 (5 %) respondents reported the use of plain aspirin, 633 (4 %) ECC and 15,171 reported using neither form of aspirin (91 %). The prevalence of self-reported gastrointestinal symptoms in general was higher in respondents using ECC (27.5 %) compared with plain aspirin (26.3 %), but did not differ significantly with either univariate (OR 1.06, 95 %CI 0.84-1.33), or multivariate analysis (aOR 1.08, 95 %CI 0.83-1.41). Also, none of the specific types of symptoms differed between the two aspirin formulations. CONCLUSIONS: In this large cohort representative of the general Dutch population, low-dose ECC is not associated with a reduction in self-reported gastrointestinal symptoms compared with plain aspirin

Colorectal Cancer: To Screen or Not to Screen: That is the Question.

Contains fulltext : 74413.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)9 juli 2009Promotores : Jansen, J.B.M.J., Verbeek, A.L.M. Co-promotores : Laheij, R.J.F., Adang, E.M.M.171 p

Colorectal cancer screening: uptake of sigmoidoscopy

Item does not contain fulltex

Bevolkingsonderzoek naar darmkanker

Contains fulltext : 88638.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access

Daling maagkankersterfte.

Item does not contain fulltext1 p

Implementation of colorectal cancer screening.

Item does not contain fulltex

Different seasons with decreased performance of immunochemical faecal occult blood tests in colorectal cancer screening

Contains fulltext : 96818.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access

[Colorectal cancer screening: immunological test for faecal occult blood preferred],[Colorectal cancer screening: immunological test for faecal occult blood preferred]

Contains fulltext : 79821.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)In 2003, the European Commission advised the Member States to start colorectal cancer screening. More than 12 million Europeans have been tested to date, not only by means of faecal occult blood testing but often also by opportunistic endoscopy. Nearly all of the screening programmes concerned were opportunistic in nature. The Dutch government is currently considering the implementation of an organised screening programme for the detection of colorectal cancer. The question no longer seems to be whether a screening programme should be started but rather which screening test should be used. We argue that an immunological faecal occult blood test is to be preferred over other screening tests, such as endoscopy

Still no meta-analysis of screening colonoscopy for colorectal cancer?

Contains fulltext : 81486.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access