Skip to main content
. 2016 Aug 4;103(10):1259–1268. doi: 10.1002/bjs.10233

Table 8.

Distant recurrence rates in randomized trials

  Distant recurrence
  Intensive follow-up Less intensive follow-up
CEASL30 32 of 108 (29·6) n.r.
Mäkelä et al.16 10 of 52 (19) 10 of 54 (19)
Ohlsson et al.17 9 of 53 (17) 12 of 54 (22)
Kjeldsen et al.19,20 34 of 290 (11·7) 48 of 307 (15·6)
Pietra et al.22 15 of 104 (14·4) 21 of 103 (20·4)
Schoemaker et al.21 n.r. n.r.
Secco et al.23 38 of 192 (19·8) 47 of 145 (32·4)
GILDA4 59 of 615 (9·6) 42 of 613 (6·9)
Rodriguez-Moranta et al.2 20 of 127 (15·7) 19 of 132 (14·4)
Wattchow et al.24 n.r. n.r.
Wang et al.27 n.r. n.r.
Augestad et al.25 3 of 55 (5) 4 of 55 (7)
FACS3,34 39 of 901 (4·3) 18 of 301 (6·0)
CEAwatch31 n.r. n.r.
COLOFOL28 n.r. n.r.
Total 259 of 2497 (10·4) 221 of 1764 (12·5)  

Values in parentheses are percentages. n.r., Not reported.