Colorectal Cancer Screening: Colonoscopy versus Fecal Occult Blood
Colorectal Cancer Screening: Colonoscopy versus Fecal Occult Blood
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51473/rcmos.v1i1.2026.1926Keywords:
Colorectal cancer, Screening, Early diagnosis. , Colonoscopy, Fecal occult blood, FOBTAbstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) represents one of the leading causes of global morbidity and mortality, and screening strategies are essential to reduce its incidence and mortality. This systematic review compared the performance of colonoscopy and fecal occult blood tests, including the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) and the guaiac fecal occult blood test (gFOBT), based on recent evidence. Colonoscopy demonstrated higher sensitivity for CRC detection (95–98%) and advanced adenomas (88–94%), in addition to mortality reduction of
up to 70%, establishing it as the most effective method. However, it is an invasive and more costly examination, with lower population adherence and a risk of complications, such as perforation (0.05–0.1%) and post-polypectomy bleeding (0.2–1.0%). In contrast, fecal tests
showed lower sensitivity, particularly for advanced adenomas (22–40%), but exhibited higher
population adherence and feasibility for screening programs. FIT demonstrated a 33–45%
reduction in mortality when applied regularly, with no direct risk of complications and lower initial demand for specialized resources. The analyzed data suggest that the ideal method
should balance accuracy, safety, adherence, and resource availability. In many settings, a combined strategy — using fecal tests as triage and reserving colonoscopy for positive cases — optimizes early detection and reduces logistical burdens. In conclusion, both methods play relevant roles, and their integration constitutes the most efficient approach for populationbased colorectal cancer screening programs.
Downloads
References
BAXTER, N. N. et al. Association of colonoscopy and death from colorectal cancer. Annals of Internal Medicine, v. 150, n. 1, p. 1–8, 2009. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-150-1-200901060-00306
Disponível em: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2878996/
FAVORITI, P. et al. Worldwide burden of colorectal cancer: a review. Updates in
Surgery, 2016. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-016-0359-y DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-016-0359-y
LEE, J. K. et al. Accuracy of fecal immunochemical tests for colorectal cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis. Annals of Internal Medicine, 2014.
Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.7326/M13-1484 DOI: https://doi.org/10.7326/M13-1484
QUINTERO, E. et al. Colonoscopy versus fecal immunochemical testing in colorectalcancer screening. New England Journal of Medicine, 2012.
Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1108895 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1108895
RABENECK, L. et al. Bleeding and perforation after outpatient colonoscopy and their risk factors in usual clinical practice. Gastroenterology, v. 135, n. 6, p. 1899–1906, 2008. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2008.08.058 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2008.08.058
WARREN, J. L. et al. Adverse events after outpatient colonoscopy in the Medicare population. Annals of Internal Medicine, v. 150, n. 12, p. 849–857, 2009. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-150-12-200906160-00008 DOI: https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-150-12-200906160-00008
WINAWER, S. J. et al. Colorectal cancer screening and surveillance: clinical guidelines update. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 2018.
Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21452 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21452
ZAUBER, A. G. et al. Colonoscopic polypectomy and long-term prevention of colorectalcancer deaths. New England Journal of Medicine, 2012.
Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1100370 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1100370
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Roberta Debortoli Moreira, Fernanda Ayres da Silva, Joanna da Costa Tonin, Morgana Sipert, Jocelito Pessotto Junior (Autor)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). This means you are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
The use of this material is conditioned upon proper attribution to the original author(s), providing a link to the license, and indicating if changes were made. The license does not require permission from the author or the publisher as long as these conditions are met.
The Creative Commons license logo is displayed permanently in the footer of the journal.
The copyright of the manuscript can be retained by the authors without restrictions and can be requested at any time, even after publication in the journal.
How to Cite
