Endoscopic Removal of Colorectal Lesions-Recommendations by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer

Randomized Controlled Trial Investigating Cold Snare and Forceps Polypectomy Among Small POLYPs in Rates of Complete Resection: The TINYPOLYP Trial

INTRODUCTION

Optimizing complete resection during colonoscopy is important because residual neoplastic tissue may play a role in interval cancers. The US Multi-Society Task Force recommends diminutive (≤5 mm) and small (6-9 mm) polyps be removed by cold snare polypectomy (CSP). However, evidence is less clear whether CSP retains significant advantage over cold forceps polypectomy (CFP) for polyps ≤3 mm.

METHODS

This study is a single-center prospective noninferiority randomized clinical trial evaluating CFP and CSP for nonpedunculated polyps ≤3 mm. Patients 18 years and older undergoing colonoscopy for any indication were recruited. During each colonoscopy, polyps underwent block randomization to removal with CFP or CSP. After polypectomy, 2 biopsies were taken from the polypectomy margin. The primary noninferiority outcome was the complete resection rate, defined by absence of residual polyp in the margin biopsies.

RESULTS

A total of 179 patients were included. Patients had similar distribution in age, sex, race/ethnicity, as well as indication of procedure. A total of 279 polyps ≤3 mm were identified, with 138 in the CSP group and 141 in the CFP group. Mean polypectomy time was longer for CSP compared with CFP (42.3 vs 23.2 seconds, P < 0.001), although a higher proportion of polyps removed by CFP were removed in more than 1 piece compared with CSP (15.6 vs 3.6%, P < 0.001). There were positive margin biopsies in 2 cases per cohort, with a complete resection rate of 98.3% in both groups. There was no significant difference in cohorts in complete resection rates (difference in complete resection rates was 0.057%, 95% confidence interval: -4.30% to 4.53%), demonstrating noninferiority of CFP compared with CSP.

DISCUSSION

Use of CFP was noninferior to CSP in the complete resection of nonpedunculated polyps ≤3 mm. CSP required significantly more time to perform compared with CFP. CFP should be considered an acceptable alternative to CSP for removal of polyps ≤3 mm.

Histopathological effects of electrosurgical interventions in an in vivo porcine model of colonic endoscopic mucosal resection

OBJECTIVE

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) in the colon has been widely adopted, but there is limited data on the histopathological effects of the differing electrosurgical currents (ESCs) used. We used an in vivo porcine model to compare the tissue effects of ESCs for snare resection and adjuvant margin ablation techniques.

DESIGN

Standardised EMR was performed by a single endoscopist in 12 pigs. Two intersecting 15 mm snare resections were performed. Resections were randomised 1:1 using either a microprocessor-controlled current (MCC) or low-power coagulating current (LPCC). The lateral margins of each defect were treated with either argon plasma coagulation (APC) or snare tip soft coagulation (STSC). Colons were surgically removed at 72 hours. Two specialist pathologists blinded to the intervention assessed the specimens.

RESULTS

88 defects were analysed (median 7 per pig, median defect size 29×17 mm). For snare ESC effects, 156 tissue sections were assessed. LPCC was comparable to MCC for deep involvement of the colon wall. For margin ablation, 172 tissue sections were assessed. APC was comparable to STSC for deep involvement of the colon wall. Islands of preserved mucosa at the coagulated margin were more likely with APC compared with STSC (16% vs 5%, p=0.010).

CONCLUSION

For snare resection, MCC and LPCC did not produce significantly different tissue effects. The submucosal injectate may protect the underlying tissue, and technique may more strongly dictate the depth and extent of final injury. For margin ablation, APC was less uniform and complete compared with STSC.

Comparison of postpolypectomy bleeding events between cold snare polypectomy and hot snare polypectomy for small colorectal lesions: a large-scale propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Cold snare polypectomy (CSP), a safe procedure for removing colon polyps, has a low prevalence of postpolypectomy bleeding (PPB). Previous studies have failed to demonstrate differences in PPB rates between CSP and hot snare polypectomy (HSP), possibly because of their small sample sizes. This study analyzed PPB rates after CSP and HSP.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of colorectal lesions (diameter <10 mm) treated using endoscopic resection at our institution between January 2015 and December 2019. Resections were performed using CSP or HSP, depending on the endoscopist's preference. Endoscopic and histologic findings were recorded in the endoscopic database at our institution. Propensity score (PS) matching was performed to match patient age, lesion size, macroscopic features, location of the lesions, clipping after resection, and antithrombotic agent use. The CSP and HSP groups were compared to determine the adverse event (PPB) rates.

RESULTS

The CSP and HSP groups included 12,928 and 2408 lesions (total of 5371 patients), respectively. Univariate analysis revealed that the overall prevalence of PPB after HSP was higher than that after CSP (odds ratio [OR], 5.39; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.50-11.60). After PS matching (2135 lesions per group), the prevalence of PPB after HSP remained higher than that after CSP (OR, 6.0; 95% CI, 1.34-26.8).

CONCLUSIONS

For colorectal lesions <10 mm in diameter, the risk of PPB after CSP is significantly lower than that after HSP, after PS matching. CSP for lesions <10 mm could be safely performed compared with HSP.

Endoscopic resection of superficial bowel neoplasia: The unmet needs in the Egyptian practice

BACKGROUND

Management of superficial bowel neoplasia (SBN) in early stages is associated with better outcomes. The last few decades experienced a paradigm shift in the management of SBN with the introduction of advanced endoscopic resection techniques (ERTs). However, there are no clear data about the aspects of ERTs in Egypt despite the growing gastroenterology practice.

AIM

To investigate the knowledge, attitude, and practice of ERTs toward management of SBN among Egyptian practitioners and the suitability of the endoscopy units' infrastructures toward these techniques.

METHODS

An online 2-pages questionnaire was used. The first page comprised demographic data, and questions for all physicians, about the knowledge (11 questions) of and attitude (5 questions) toward ERTs as a therapeutic option for SBN. The second page investigated the practice of ERTs by endoscopists (6 questions) and the infrastructures of their endoscopy units (14 questions). The survey was disseminated through July 2021 and the data were collected in an excel sheet and later analyzed anonymously.

RESULTS

The complete responses were 833/2300 (36.2%). The majority of the participants were males (n = 560, 67.2%), middle-aged (n = 366, 43.9%), consultants (n = 464, 55.7%), gastroenterologists (n = 678, 81.4%), spending ≥ 15 years in practice (n = 368, 44.2%), and were working in university hospitals (n = 569, 68.3%). The majority correctly identified the definition of SBN (88.4%) and the terms polypectomy, endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) (92.1%, 90.2%, and 89.1% respectively). However, 26.9%, 43.2% and 49.5% did not recognize the clear indication of polypectomy, EMR, and ESD respectively. Although 68.1% of physicians are convinced about the ERTs for management of SBN; only 8.9% referred all candidate cases for ERTs. About 76.5% of endoscopists had formal training in the basic polypectomy techniques while formal training for EMR and ESD was encountered only in 31.9% and 7.2% respectively. About 71.6% and 88.4% of endoscopists did not perform EMR or ESD in the last one year. Consequently, the complication rate reported by endoscopists was limited to 18.1% (n = 103) of endoscopists. Only 25.8% of endoscopists feel confident in the management of ERTs-related complications and a half (49.9%) were not sure about their competency. Regarding the endoscopy units' infrastructures, only 4.2% of the centers had their endoscopes 100% armed with optical enhancements and 54.4% considered their institutions ready for managing ERTs-related complications. Only 18.3% (n = 104) of endoscopists treated their complicated cases surgically because the most frequent ERTs-related complications were procedural bleeding (26.7%), and perforations (17%).

CONCLUSION

A significant deficiency was reported in the knowledge and attitude of Egyptian practitioners caring for patients with SBN toward ERTs. The lack of trained endoscopists in both EMR and ESD in part is due to unsuitable infrastructures of many endoscopy units.

Endoscopic resection of superficial bowel neoplasia: The unmet needs in the Egyptian practice

BACKGROUND

Management of superficial bowel neoplasia (SBN) in early stages is associated with better outcomes. The last few decades experienced a paradigm shift in the management of SBN with the introduction of advanced endoscopic resection techniques (ERTs). However, there are no clear data about the aspects of ERTs in Egypt despite the growing gastroenterology practice.

AIM

To investigate the knowledge, attitude, and practice of ERTs toward management of SBN among Egyptian practitioners and the suitability of the endoscopy units’ infrastructures toward these techniques.

METHODS

An online 2-pages questionnaire was used. The first page comprised demographic data, and questions for all physicians, about the knowledge (11 questions) of and attitude (5 questions) toward ERTs as a therapeutic option for SBN. The second page investigated the practice of ERTs by endoscopists (6 questions) and the infrastructures of their endoscopy units (14 questions). The survey was disseminated through July 2021 and the data were collected in an excel sheet and later analyzed anonymously.

RESULTS

The complete responses were 833/2300 (36.2%). The majority of the participants were males (n = 560, 67.2%), middle-aged (n = 366, 43.9%), consultants (n = 464, 55.7%), gastroenterologists (n = 678, 81.4%), spending ≥ 15 years in practice (n = 368, 44.2%), and were working in university hospitals (n = 569, 68.3%). The majority correctly identified the definition of SBN (88.4%) and the terms polypectomy, endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) (92.1%, 90.2%, and 89.1% respectively). However, 26.9%, 43.2% and 49.5% did not recognize the clear indication of polypectomy, EMR, and ESD respectively. Although 68.1% of physicians are convinced about the ERTs for management of SBN; only 8.9% referred all candidate cases for ERTs. About 76.5% of endoscopists had formal training in the basic polypectomy techniques while formal training for EMR and ESD was encountered only in 31.9% and 7.2% respectively. About 71.6% and 88.4% of endoscopists did not perform EMR or ESD in the last one year. Consequently, the complication rate reported by endoscopists was limited to 18.1% (n = 103) of endoscopists. Only 25.8% of endoscopists feel confident in the management of ERTs-related complications and a half (49.9%) were not sure about their competency. Regarding the endoscopy units’ infrastructures, only 4.2% of the centers had their endoscopes 100% armed with optical enhancements and 54.4% considered their institutions ready for managing ERTs-related complications. Only 18.3% (n = 104) of endoscopists treated their complicated cases surgically because the most frequent ERTs-related complications were procedural bleeding (26.7%), and perforations (17%).

CONCLUSION

A significant deficiency was reported in the knowledge and attitude of Egyptian practitioners caring for patients with SBN toward ERTs. The lack of trained endoscopists in both EMR and ESD in part is due to unsuitable infrastructures of many endoscopy units.

A colonoscopic overtube system that creates a 'therapeutic zone' and permits retraction facilitates endoscopic submucosal dissection, was associated with fewer deep bowel wall injuries and instrument exchanges, and required less lifting solution vs classic endoscopic submucosal dissection in an ex vivo bovine model

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is the 'gold standard' for large flat polyps; nevertheless, the rate of adoption in the USA is low. In ESD, the polyp is 'surgically' detached with a needle knife after a submucosal lift; gravity and the dissection cap are used for retraction. ESD would be easier if active retraction were possible. In an ex vivo bovine colon model, this study assessed an overtube system (Boston Scientific ORISE Tissue Retraction System, TRS) that permits retraction and creates 'an operative field' for removal of rectal/sigmoid lesions.

METHOD

Classic ESD (C-ESD) was compared to TRS-facilitated ESD (TRS-ESD). Cleaned/preserved bovine large bowel was used, and two 2-cm 'lesions'/colon were branded onto the mucosal surface 25 and 35 cm from the anus. Submucosal saline lifts were made using a thin catheter and a standard needle knife. We tracked case length, number of instrument exchanges (to refresh lift), the volume of lift solution, the fullness of resection, and deep muscle injuries.

RESULTS

Fifty ESDs were carried out in 25 colons (25 C-ESD, 25 TRS-ESD). Complete resections were noted in all cases. The TRS method required fewer instrument exchanges (median 5) vs C-ESD (median 9, p < 0.0001) and less lift solution (median 39 ml) than the C-ESD cases (median 55 ml, p = 0.0003). TRS-ESD was associated with fewer deep muscle injuries (median 2) than C-ESD (median 3, p = 0.0191). Finally, the TRS group's median case length (34.5 min) was shorter than that of C-ESD (41 min, p = 0.0543).

CONCLUSION

The TRS system provides retraction and facilitates ESD regarding the number of lift injections, the volume of lift solution needed, and avoidance of muscle injuries. Of note, there is an apparent TRS learning curve, and the device mandates a distal-to-proximal approach and initial 360 degree mucosal incision. Further study is warranted.

Diagnosis and treatment of colorectal tumors: Differences between Japan and the West and future prospects

Dye‐based chromoendoscopy has long been used routinely for endoscopic diagnosis of gastrointestinal tumors including colorectal tumors in Japan. In the West, on the other hand, dye‐based chromoendoscopy was not so commonly used. However, with the development of narrow band imaging (NBI), image‐enhanced endoscopy diagnosis has rapidly increased in the West.

The most critical difference between Japan and the West is the histopathological evaluation of the lesions, which determines a major cause of differences in diagnostic and treatment strategies. In the West, intramucosal adenocarcinoma is not diagnosed until the cancer has invaded submucosal layer. In Japan, on the other hand, cancer is mainly diagnosed based on nuclear and structural atypia, and thus intramucosal adenocarcinoma is diagnosed in lesions that correspond to high‐grade adenoma in the West.

In the West, since intramucosal carcinoma is not diagnosed by pathology, all benign adenomas are treated by piecemeal endoscopic resection, and only cancer invading the superficial submucosal layer is indicated for endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). Because of the risk of lymph node metastasis in the deep submucosal invasion, the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines state that only superficial submucosal cancer is an indication for ESD. Unfortunately, it is impossible to selectively extract only superficial submucosal invasive cancer even with the use of magnified NBI and pit pattern observation. Therefore, we think that pathologists need to diagnose intramucosal adenocarcinoma with the potential to invade the submucosal layer based on the nuclear and structural atypia. Consequently, intramucosal adenocarcinoma and superficial submucosal cancers should be considered for en‐bloc ESD.

Management of Antiplatelet and Anticoagulant Agents before and after Polypectomy

Antithrombotic medications, including antiplatelet drugs and anticoagulants, are widely prescribed to prevent thromboembolic disease. There is limited evidence informing gastroenterologists of the management of patients on antithrombotic medications undergoing colonoscopy and polypectomy. A patient's risk of thromboembolism versus postpolypectomy bleeding should be carefully considered, incorporating patient preferences concerning benefits and harms of temporary antithrombotic interruption. We will review the available consensus guidelines, current literature, and strategies to mitigate the risk of bleeding following polypectomy. These will be interpreted in the framework of shared decision-making with the patient to arrive at the safest solution best aligned with the patient's preferences.

Endoscopic management of difficult laterally spreading tumors in colorectum

Due to the advent of the screening programs for colorectal cancer and the era of quality assurance colonoscopy the number the polyps that can be considered difficult, including large (> 20 mm) laterally spreading tumors (LSTs), has increased in the last decade. All LSTs should be assessed carefully, looking for suspicious areas of submucosal invasion (SMI), such as nodules or depressed areas, describing the morphology according to the Paris classification, the pit pattern, and vascular pattern. The simplest, most appropriate and safest endoscopic treatment with curative intent should be selected. For LST-granular homogeneous type, piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection should be the first option due to its biological low risk of SMI. LST-nongranular pseudodepressed type has an increased risk of SMI, and en bloc resection should be mandatory. Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection is useful in situations where submucosal injection alters the operative field, e.g., for the resection of scar lesions, with no lifting, adjacent tattoo, incomplete resection attempts, lesions into a colonic diverticulum, in ileocecal valve and lesions with intra-appendicular involvement. Endoscopic full thickness resection is very useful for the treatment of difficult to resect lesions of less than 20 up to 25 mm. Among the indications, we highlight the treatment of polyps with suspected malignancy because the acquired tissue allows an exact histologic risk stratification to assign patients individually to the best treatment and avoid surgery for low-risk lesions. Endoscopic submucosal dissection is the only endoscopic procedure that allows completes en bloc resection regardless of the size of the lesion. It should therefore be indicated in the treatment of lesions with risk of SMI.

Impact of including epinephrine in the submucosal injectate for colorectal EMR on postprocedural pain: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EMR is first-line therapy for colorectal laterally spreading lesions. Some colonoscopists include epinephrine in the submucosal injectate, which we observed increased postprocedure discomfort. Our aim was to determine whether inclusion of epinephrine in the submucosal injectate increases postprocedure pain after EMR.

METHODS

We performed a randomized, controlled, double-blind trial comparing epinephrine in submucosal injectate versus injectate alone for abdominal pain at 30 and 60 minutes after EMR.

RESULTS

Mean polyp diameter in both arms was >40 mm. There were no differences in procedure times or amounts of fluid injected. Mean pain was higher on a visual analog scale in the epinephrine group at 30 minutes (47 vs 14, P = .022) and at 60 minutes (44 vs 13, P = .035). Recovery room stay was longer in the epinephrine group (68 vs 53 minutes, P = .034).

CONCLUSIONS

Epinephrine in the submucosal injectate for EMR increases postprocedural pain, which could cause diagnostic confusion and prolong observation time in the recovery area. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT04065451.).

Effect of prophylactic endoscopic clip placement on clinically significant post-endoscopic mucosal resection bleeding in the right colon: a single-centre, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is a cornerstone in the management of large (≥20 mm) non-pedunculated colorectal polyps. Clinically significant post-EMR bleeding occurs in 7% of cases and is most frequently encountered in the right colon. We aimed to assess the use of prophylactic clip closure in preventing clinically significant post-EMR bleeding within the right colon.

METHODS

We conducted a randomised controlled trial at a tertiary centre in Australia. Patients referred for the EMR of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps in the right colon were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) into the clip or control (no clip) group, using a computerised random-number generator. The primary endpoint was clinically significant post-EMR bleeding, defined as haematochezia necessitating emergency department presentation, hospitalisation, or re-intervention within 14 days post-EMR, which was analysed on the basis of intention-to-treat principles. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02196649, and has been completed.

FINDINGS

Between Feb 4, 2016, and Dec 15, 2020, 231 patients were randomly assigned: 118 to the clip group and 113 to the control group. In the intention-to-treat analysis, clinically significant post-EMR bleeding was less frequent in the clip group than in the control group (four [3·4%] of 118 patients vs 12 [10·6%] of 113; p=0·031; absolute risk reduction 7·2% [95% CI 0·7-13·8]; number needed to treat 13·9). There were no differences between groups in adverse events, including delayed perforation (one [<1%] in the clip group vs one [<1%] in the control group) and post-EMR pain (four [3%] vs six [5%]). No deaths were reported.

INTERPRETATION

Prophylactic clip closure can be performed following the EMR of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps of 20 mm or larger in the right colon to reduce the risk of clinically significant post-EMR bleeding.

FUNDING

None.

Outcomes of Deep Mural Injury After Endoscopic Resection: An International Cohort of 3717 Large Non-Pedunculated Colorectal Polyps

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Although perforation is the most feared adverse event associated with endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), limited data exists concerning its management. Therefore, we sought to evaluate the short- and long-term outcomes of intra-procedural deep mural injury (DMI) in an international multi-center observational cohort of large (≥20 mm) non-pedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs).

METHODS

Consecutive patients who underwent EMR for a LNPCP ≥20 mm were evaluated. Significant DMI (S-DMI) was defined as Sydney DMI Classification type III (muscularis propria injury, target sign) or type IV/V (perforation without or with contamination, respectively). The primary outcome was successful S-DMI defect closure. Secondary outcomes included technical success (removal of all visible polypoid tissue during index EMR), surgical referral and recurrence at first surveillance colonscopy (SC1).

RESULTS

Between July 2008 to May 2020, 3717 LNPCPs underwent EMR. Median lesion size was 35mm (interquartile range (IQR) 25 to 45mm). Significant DMI was identified in 101 cases (2.7%), with successful defect closure in 98 (97.0%) using a median of 4 through-the-scope clips (TTSCs; IQR 3 to 6 TTSCs). Three (3.0%) patients underwent S-DMI-related urgent surgery. Technical success was achieved in 94 (93.1%) patients, with 46 (45.5%) admitted to hospital (median duration 1 day; IQR 1 to 2 days). Comparing LNPCPs with and without S-DMI, no differences in technical success (94 (93.1%) vs 3316 (91.7%); P = .62) or SC1 recurrence (12 (20.0%) vs 363 (13.6%); P = .15) were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant DMI is readily managed endoscopically and does not appear to affect technical success or recurrence.

Snare tip soft coagulation (STSC) after endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of large (> 20 mm) non pedunculated colorectal polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and study aims  Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of laterally spreading tumors (LSTs) > 20 mm in size can be challenging. Piecemeal EMR of these lesions results in high rates of adenoma recurrence at first surveillance colonoscopy (SC1). Snare tip soft coagulation (STSC) of post resection margins is a safe and effective technique to prevent adenoma recurrence. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of this technique. Patients and methods  Multiple databases were searched through April 2021 for studies that reported on outcomes of post EMR STSC for LSTs > 20 mm in size. Meta-analysis was performed to determine pooled odds of adenoma recurrence as well as pooled proportion of adverse events including intraprocedural and delayed bleeding as well as intraprocedural perforation events. Results  Six studies including two randomized controlled trials (RCT) and four cohort studies with 2122 patients were included in the final analysis. Overall pooled odds of adenoma recurrence at SC1 with post EMR STSC compared to no STSC was 0.27 (95 % 0.18-0.42; I2 = 0 %), P < 0.001. Pooled rate of adenoma recurrence at SC1 in post EMR STSC cohort was 6 %. Rates of intraprocedural bleeding, delayed bleeding and intraprocedural perforation were 10.3 %, 6.5 % and 2 % respectively. Conclusions  Our results show that thermal ablation of resection margins with STSC in LSTs > 20 mm is a safe and effective technique in reducing the incidence of adenoma recurrence.

Colectomy for polyps is associated with high risk for complications and low risk for malignancy: Time for endoluminal surgery?

BACKGROUND

Colectomy for nonmalignant polyps (NMP) is common in the United States. We aimed to study the rate of colectomies performed for NMP and postoperative outcomes. We hypothesized that the annual colectomy rate for NMP is high despite the rare occurrence of invasive cancer found on final pathology.

METHODS

We analyzed data from the ACS-NSQIP participant user file, colectomy module, from 2013 to 2019. Patients who underwent elective colectomy with a diagnosis of either NMP or colon cancer were included. Patient demographics, comorbidities, colectomy rates and trends over the study period, as well as 30-day postoperative complications and mortality rate were assessed.

RESULTS

67,921 colectomies were performed for the diagnosis of cancer or NMP [14,726 (19%) only NMP]. The postoperative overall morbidity was 21% and mortality was 0.5% (1% for patients older than 70). Only 489 (3.3%) of colectomies performed for NMP had cancer on final pathology. The percentage of colectomies performed for NMP decreased from 22% to 16% over the study period.

CONCLUSIONS

Colon resections for NMP are still common and are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. There is a low incidence of invasive cancer on final pathology. Advanced endoscopic interventions for NMP should be considered whenever possible and appropriate.

Interobserver reliability of methods to determine complete resection of adenomas in colonoscopy

BACKGROUND

Forceps margin biopsy and polypectomy specimen margins have both been used to assess for polypectomy resection adequacy. The interobserver reliability of the two methods has not been well described.

METHODS

The interpretability of polypectomy specimens for presence of residual neoplasia at the margin was assessed by two blinded pathologists. Next, the concordance of forceps margin biopsy interpretations between three blinded pathologists was evaluated by calculation of interobserver κ.

RESULTS

Rates of polypectomy specimen margin interpretability were low: 24/92 (26 %) for pathologist A, 28/92 (30.4 %) for pathologist B. Concordance of forceps margin biopsy interpretations (n = 129) between pathologists was high. Two internal pathologists showed substantial agreement in margin biopsy interpretations (κ 0.779; 95 %CL 0.543, 0.912). The concordance remained strong after biopsies were reviewed by a third, external pathologist (κ 0.829; 95 %CL 0.658, 0.924). There was complete agreement on 123/129 (95.3 %) between all three pathologists for presence of neoplasia.

CONCLUSION

The majority of polypectomy specimen margins were uninterpretable by pathologists for presence of residual neoplasia. Forceps margin biopsy shows strong interobserver reliability in adenomatous lesions.

Endoscopic resection outcomes and predictors of failed en bloc endoscopic mucosal resection of colorectal polyps ≤ 20 mm among advanced endoscopy trainees

Background and study aims  En bloc endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is preferred over piecemeal resection for polyps ≤ 20 mm. Data on colorectal EMR training are limited. We aimed to evaluate the en bloc EMR rate of polyps ≤ 20 mm among advanced endoscopy trainees and to identify predictors of failed en bloc EMR. Methods  This was a multicenter prospective study evaluating trainee performance in EMR during advanced endoscopy fellowship. A logistic regression model was used to identify the number of procedures and lesion cut-off size associated with an en bloc EMR rate of ≥ 80 %. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify predictors of failed en bloc EMR. Results  Six trainees from six centers performed 189 colorectal EMRs, of which 104 (55 %) were for polyps ≤ 20 mm. Of these, 57.7 % (60/104) were resected en bloc. Trainees with ≥ 30 EMRs (OR 6.80; 95 % CI: 2.80-16.50; P  = 0.00001) and lesions ≤ 17 mm (OR 4.56;95 CI:1.23-16.88; P  = 0.02) were more likely to be associated with an en bloc EMR rate of ≥ 80 %. Independent predictors of failed en bloc EMR on multivariate analysis included: larger polyp size (OR:6.83;95 % CI:2.55-18.4; P  = 0.0001), right colon location (OR:7.15; 95 % CI:1.31-38.9; P  = 0.02), increased procedural difficulty (OR 2.99; 95 % CI:1.13-7.91; P  = 0.03), and having performed < 30 EMRs (OR: 4.87; 95 %CI: 1.05-22.61; P  = 0.04). Conclusions  In this pilot study, we demonstrated that a relatively low proportion of trainees achieved en bloc EMR for polyps ≤ 20 mm and identified procedure volume and lesion size thresholds for successful en bloc EMR and independent predictors for failed en bloc resection. These preliminary results support the need for future efforts to define EMR procedure competence thresholds during training.

Effectiveness and safety of the different endoscopic resection methods for 10- to 20-mm nonpedunculated colorectal polyps: A systematic review and pooled analysis

BACKGROUND

We performed a systematic review and pooled analysis to assess the effectiveness and safety of different endoscopic resection methods for 10- to 20-mm nonpedunculated colorectal polyps.

METHODS

Articles in PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library related to the common endoscopic treatment of 10- to 20-mm nonpedunculated polyps published as of April 2020 were searched. Primary outcomes were the R0 resection rate and en bloc resection rate. Secondary outcomes were safety and the recurrence rate. Meta-regression and subgroup analysis were also performed.

RESULTS

A total of 36 studies involving 3212 polyps were included in the final analysis. Overall, the effectiveness of resection methods with a submucosal uplifting effect, including endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), cold EMR and underwater EMR (UEMR), was better than that of methods without a nonsubmucosal uplifting effect [R0 resection rate, 90% (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81-0.94, I² = 84%) vs 82% (95% CI 0.78-0.85, I² = 0%); en bloc resection rate 85% (95% CI 0.79-0.91, I² = 83%) vs 74% (95% CI 0.47-0.94, I² = 94%)]. Regarding safety, the pooled data showed that hot resection [hot snare polypectomy, UEMR and EMR] had a higher risk of intraprocedural bleeding than cold resection [3% (95% CI 0.01-0.05, I² = 68%) vs 0% (95% CI 0-0.01, I² = 0%)], while the incidences of delayed bleeding, perforation and post-polypectomy syndrome were all low.

CONCLUSIONS

Methods with submucosal uplifting effects are more effective than those without for resecting 10- to 20-mm nonpedunculated colorectal polyps, and cold EMR is associated with a lower risk of intraprocedural bleeding than other methods. Additional research is needed to verify the advantages of these methods, especially cold EMR.

Use of an endoscopic flexible grasper as a traction tool for excision of polyps: preclinical trial

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is challenging in the right colon. Traction devices can make it technically easier. In this study, we evaluated a flexible grasper with articulating tip and elbow-like bending (IgE) through a double-balloon surgical platform (DESP), compared with an earlier generation grasper without elbow-like bending (Ig). The reach of Ig/IgE was investigated at eight locations using a synthetic colon within a 3D model. Using a fresh porcine colorectum, 4 cm pseudo-polyps were created at the posterior wall of the ascending colon. Fifty-four ESD procedures were performed using three techniques: standard ESD (STD), ESD using Ig (DESP + Ig), and ESD using IgE (DESP + IgE). IgE was able to reach the full circumference at all the locations, whereas the medial walls proximal to the descending colon were out of Ig’s reach. Compared with the STD, both DESP + Ig and DESP + IgE showed significantly shorter procedure time (STD vs. DESP + Ig vs. DESP + IgE = median 48.9 min vs. 38.6 vs. 29.9) and fewer injuries (1.5 vs. 0 vs. 0). Moreover, the DESP + IgE had a shorter procedure time than the DESP + Ig (p = 0.0025). The IgE with DESP increased instrument reach compared to Ig, and likely represented a traction tool for excision of large pseudo-polyps in the right colon.

Endoscopic resection of large Paris 0-Ip pedunculated polyps: video demonstration of recent U.S. Multi-Society Task Force recommendations on resection and removal for general endoscopists

Video 1Illustration of general principles as well as different techniques that can be used for the ligation and resection of pedunculated polyps.

Efficacy of cold endoscopic mucosal resection vs conventional endoscopic mucosal resection in treatment of nonpedunculated colorectal polyps sized 5-10 mm

BACKGROUND

Cold snare polypectomy (CSP) has been gradually applied to remove small colorectal polyps (6-9 mm). Cold endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is based on CSP technology combined with submucosal injection of water. Studies have reported that the histological complete resection rate of cold EMR of 6-9 mm colorectal adenoma is significantly better than that of CSP. However, there are few studies on the efficacy of cold EMR vs conventional EMR.

AIM

To compare the efficacy and safety of cold EMR and conventional EMR for 5-10 mm colorectal adenomas.

METHODS

From August 2019 to December 2020, consecutive hospitalized patients who underwent colorectal polypectomy at the Digestive Endoscopy Center of our hospital were screened for eligible polyps. Eligible polyps were randomized to be treated with either cold EMR or conventional EMR according to a random number table (1:1). The histological complete resection rate, immediate postpolypectomy bleeding, and delayed postpolypectomy bleeding were analyzed.

RESULTS

One hundred and eighty-one patients with 195 eligible polyps were included, including 90 patients with 98 polyps in the cold EMR group and 91 patients with 97 polyps in the conventional EMR group. The en bloc resection rate of polyps in the overall population was 98.5%, and there was no perforation. The overall rate of histological complete resection was 91.8% in the cold EMR group and 95.9% in the EMR group (difference: 4.1%; 95%CI: -3.9-12.3). Subgroup analysis by polyp size showed that the histological complete resection rates were 94.6% and 100% for 5-7 mm polyps (difference: 5.4%; 95%CI: -8.3-19.5), and 90.2% and 93.8% for 8-10 mm polyps (difference: 3.6%; 95%CI: -7.8-15.4). The immediate postpolypectomy bleeding rates of the cold EMR and conventional EMR groups were 2.0% and 1.0%, and the delayed postpolypectomy bleeding rates were 0% and 1%, respectively; there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Cold EMR is a safe and effective treatment for 5-10 mm colorectal adenoma, with a histological complete resection rate not inferior to that of conventional endoscopic mucosal resection.

Endoscopic polypectomy devices

Video 1Use of submucosal injection prior to en-bloc endoscopic mucosal resection.Video 2Use of a detachable loop ligating device prior to hot snare resection of a pedunculated polyp.

Accuracy and inter-observer agreement of the nice and kudo classifications of superficial colonic lesions: a comparative study

PURPOSE

For superficial colonic lesions, the NICE and Kudo classifications are used in the in vivo prediction of histology and as guide to therapy. The NICE system derives information from unmagnified NBI endoscopic images. The Kudo one necessitates a magnification, but, as this tool is not commonly available, it is applied also to characterize unmagnified pictures to compare their diagnostic performances.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective comparison of the NICE versus the Kudo classification for the differential diagnosis of colonic polyps taking histology as the gold standard. The inter-observer agreement for both classifications among 11 colonoscopists was also evaluated. Short unmagnified NBI videoclips of 64 colonic polyps were sent twice to the participants. In the first round, they classified the lesions according to the NICE classification; 4 months later, the same videos were assessed with the Kudo system. The diagnosis provided by the participants was grouped in non-neoplastic, non-invasive neoplasia, invasive neoplasia.

RESULTS

Overall, the diagnostic accuracy was 82% (95%CI: 79-85) with the NICE system and 81% (95%CI: 78-84) with the Kudo one (ρ = 0.78). The accuracy of the NICE classification for non-neoplastic lesions was greater compared with the Kudo's (ρ = 0.03). Sensitivity sub-analyses revealed a higher ability of the NICE in distinguishing between neoplastic vs. non-neoplastic lesions (ρ = 0.01). The overall inter-rater agreement did not differ when the classifications were compared.

CONCLUSION

The NICE and the Kudo classifications might be considered comparable. Our data could allow the use of the NBI Kudo classification even in those centers where magnification is not available.

Endoscopic mucosal resection of large colonic laterally spreading tumors using a dedicated viscous solution for submucosal injection (ORISE gel): a short case series (with video)

OBJECTIVE

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of large (>20 mm) laterally spreading tumors (LSTs) was usually rescheduled to guarantee experienced operator and enough endoscopic schedule time. The use of viscous solutions allows a reduction in repeated injections, snare resections and procedural time. The aim was to describe the outcome of EMR of large LSTs performed at the time of index colonoscopy, using ORISE gel (Boston Scientific).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed retrieving patients who underwent EMR of large colonic LSTs at the time of index colonoscopy. EMR was performed after dynamic injection of ORISE gel to create a submucosal cushion. Procedural parameters, together with pathological and endoscopic outcomes, were analyzed.

RESULTS

Five patients [three males, median age 65 (45-70) years] were included. Median LST size was 35 mm (25-40). Median procedure time was 8 min (range 3-13). En bloc resection was achieved in one out of five cases; four out of five were planned as piecemeal resections. A median of 10 mL (10-20) of viscous solution was injected. R0 resection was achieved in the single case who underwent en bloc EMR, whereas it was not assessable in the case of piecemeal resections. One self-limiting bleeding was observed.

CONCLUSION

The use of ORISE gel allows a well-tolerated and rapid performance of EMR of large colonic LSTs even at the time of index colonoscopy. In our opinion, in these specific situations, the use of viscous solutions is advisable and also affordable.

Overutilization of surgical resection for benign colorectal polyps: analysis from a tertiary care center

Background and study aims  Adequate removal of precancerous polyps is an independent factor in colorectal cancer prevention. Despite advances in polypectomy techniques, there is an increasing rate of surgery for benign polyps. We assessed whether surgical resection is properly utilized for benign colorectal polyps. Patients and methods  We identified 144 patients with surgical resection for benign colorectal polyps. Polyp location, size and the indication for and type of surgery were obtained. For the purposes of this analysis, we assumed that gastroenterologists should assess polyp size accurately, endoscopically resect polyps < 2 cm, and treat incompletely excised polyps on follow-up. Results  A total of 118 patients (82 %) were referred to surgery without attempted endoscopic removal. In 26 (22 %) of 118, the macroscopic polyp size was < 2 cm (23 in right, 3 in the left colon) and 18 (15 %; 14 in the right, four in the left colon) were found to have had size overestimation during endoscopy. Twenty-two (15 %) of 144 underwent surgical resection for incomplete endoscopic resection of adenomas (16 in the right, 6 in the left colon); 12 (54.5 %) had a residual polyp size of < 2 cm (10 in the right colon; 2 in the left colon). In-hospital mortality was 0.7 % and morbidity was 20.1 %. Conclusions  Of the patients, 41 % could have potentially avoided surgical intervention (37 polyps < 2 cm and/or size overestimations precluding endoscopic polypectomy and 22 incomplete resections). When including polyps with size ≥ 2 to < 4 cm, the percentage of patients with avoidable surgery reached 80 %. This confirms the need to develop standardized quality metrics for endoscopic polypectomies and for better overall training of endoscopists performing these procedures. Given the risks of surgery, referral to an experienced gastroenterologist should be considered as a first step.

Surgical resection after endoscopic resection in patients with T1 colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Additional surgical resection (ASR) after endoscopic resection (ER) in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) allows a complete staging and may decrease the recurrence rate, but no meta-analysis is available. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of ER vs. ER + ASR as a treatment for patients with T1 (stage 1) CRC.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search from databases (PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library) for cohort studies published up to November 2019. The outcomes were overall survival (OS), local recurrence, recurrence, disease-specific survival, recurrence-free survival, and metastasis.

RESULTS

Seven studies were included. There were 1205 patients in the ASR group and 993 patients in the ER group. Compared with ER, ASR was associated with better OS (OR = 0.31, 95% CI: 0.18-0.53, P < 0.001) and a borderline significant difference in lower local recurrence rates (OR = 0.29, 95% CI: 0.08-1.01, P = 0.052), but no differences were observed in recurrences, disease-specific survival, recurrence-free survival, and distant metastasis. A sensitivity analysis was performed; excluding each study sequentially from the pooled analysis did not affect the overall conclusion of the study.

CONCLUSION

Compared with ER, ASR after ER could improve the overall survival for patients with T1 CRC.

Interobserver agreement of the Paris and simplified classifications of superficial colonic lesions: a Western study

Background and study aims  The Paris classification of superficial colonic lesions has been widely adopted, but a simplified description that subgroups the shape into pedunculated, sessile/flat and depressed lesions has been proposed recently. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy and inter-rater agreement among 13 Western endoscopists for the two classification systems. Methods  Seventy video clips of superficial colonic lesions were classified according to the two classifications, and their size estimated. The interobserver agreement for each classification was assessed using both Cohen k and AC1 statistics. Accuracy was taken as the concordance between the standard morphology definition and that made by participants. Sensitivity analyses investigated agreement between trainees (T) and staff members (SM), simple or mixed lesions, distinct lesion phenotypes, and for laterally spreading tumors (LSTs). Results  Overall, the interobserver agreement for the Paris classification was substantial (κ = 0.61; AC1 = 0.66), with 79.3 % accuracy. Between SM and T, the values were superimposable. For size estimation, the agreement was 0.48 by the κ-value, and 0.50 by AC1. For single or mixed lesions, κ-values were 0.60 and 0.43, respectively; corresponding AC1 values were 0.68 and 0.57. Evaluating the several different polyp subtypes separately, agreement differed significantly when analyzed by the k-statistics (0.08-0.12) or the AC1 statistics (0.59-0.71). Analyses of LSTs provided a κ-value of 0.50 and an AC1 score of 0.62, with 77.6 % accuracy. The simplified classification outperformed the Paris classification: κ = 0.68, AC1 = 0.82, accuracy = 91.6 %. Conclusions  Agreement is often measured with Cohen's κ, but we documented higher levels of agreement when analyzed with the AC1 statistic. The level of agreement was substantial for the Paris classification, and almost perfect for the simplified system.

Colorectal EMR outcomes in octogenarians versus younger patients referred for removal of large (≥20 mm) nonpedunculated polyps

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Data are limited on safety and outcomes of colorectal EMR in octogenarians (≥80 years old). We sought to review outcome data for patients aged ≥80 in a prospectively collected database of patients referred for large polyp removal.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated a database of patients referred for large (≥20 mm) nonpedunculated polyp removal. From 2000 to 2019, we compared the rates of follow-up, recurrence, adverse events, and synchronous neoplasia detection between younger patients and patients aged ≥80.

RESULTS

There were 167 patients aged ≥80 years and 1686 <80 years. Patients in the elderly group returned for surveillance less often (67.1% vs 75.1%, P = .024), had greater first follow-up recurrence rates (27.5% vs 13.8%, P < .001), but had similar adverse event rates (1.8% vs 2.8%, P = .619) compared with younger patients. Rates of synchronous neoplasia were similar and high in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

EMR is safe and well tolerated for large polyp removal in patients over 80 years old. Patients aged ≥80 years are less likely to present for follow-up after EMR. They had a higher recurrence rate and a similarly high prevalence of synchronous precancerous lesions. Follow-up after EMR should be encouraged in the elderly, and an attempt to clear the colon of synchronous disease at the time of the initial EMR may be warranted.

Adverse events and residual lesion rate after cold endoscopic mucosal resection of serrated lesions ≥10 mm

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Cold EMR is being increasingly used for large serrated lesions. We sought to measure residual lesion rates and adverse events after cold EMR of large serrated lesions.

METHODS

In a single academic center, we retrospectively examined a database of serrated class lesions ≥10 mm removed with cold EMR for safety and efficacy.

RESULTS

Five hundred sixty-six serrated lesions ≥10 mm in size were removed from 312 patients. We successfully contacted 223 patients (71.5%) with no reported serious adverse events that required hospitalization, repeat endoscopy, or transfusion. The residual lesion rate per lesion at first follow-up colonoscopy was 18 of 225 (8%; 95% confidence interval, 5-12.1). Lesions with residual were larger at polypectomy compared with lesions without recurrence (median, 23 mm versus 16 mm, P = .017).

CONCLUSION

Cold EMR appears to be safe and effective for the removal of large serrated lesions.

Evaluating learning curves and competence in colorectal EMR among advanced endoscopy fellows: a pilot multicenter prospective trial using cumulative sum analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Data on colorectal EMR (C-EMR) training are lacking. We aimed to evaluate C-EMR training among advanced endoscopy fellows (AEFs) by using a standardized assessment tool (STAT).

METHODS

This multicenter prospective study used a STAT to grade AEF training in C-EMR during their 12-month fellowship. Cumulative sum analysis was used to establish learning curves and competence for cognitive and technical components of C-EMR and overall performance. Sensitivity analysis was performed by varying failure rates. AEFs completed a self-assessment questionnaire to assess their comfort level with performing C-EMR at the completion of their fellowship.

RESULTS

Six AEFs (189 C-EMRs; mean per AEF, 31.5 ± 18.5) were included. Mean polyp size was 24.3 ± 12.6 mm, and mean procedure time was 22.6 ± 16.1 minutes. Learning curve analyses revealed that less than 50% of AEFs achieved competence for key cognitive and technical C-EMR endpoints. All 6 AEFs reported feeling comfortable performing C-EMR independently at the end of their training, although only 2 of them achieved competence in their overall performance. The minimum threshold to achieve competence in these 2 AEFs was 25 C-EMRs.

CONCLUSIONS

A relatively low proportion of AEFs achieved competence on key cognitive and technical aspects of C-EMR during their 12-month fellowship. The relatively low number of C-EMRs performed by AEFs may be insufficient to achieve competence, in spite of their self-reported readiness for independent practice. These pilot data serve as an initial framework for competence threshold, and suggest the need for validated tools for formal C-EMR training assessment.

Endoscopic clipping for gastrointestinal bleeding: emergency and prophylactic indications

Endoscopic clipping has become a common practice among endoscopists. Several models are available, most frequently being introduced via the working channel of the endoscope (through-the-scope); however, larger clips can also be mounted onto the distal tip of the endoscope (over-the-scope). The main indications for endoclip placement include providing effective mechanical hemostasis for bleeding lesions and allowing endoscopic closure of gastrointestinal perforations. Endoclips can also be used prophylactically after endoscopic resection; however, this practice is still controversial. This review discusses the main indications for endoscopic clipping in the esophagus, stomach, duodenum and colon to manage acute bleeding lesions, and the criteria to be used in the prevention of delayed post-polypectomy bleeding.

Predicting and managing complications following colonoscopy: risk factors and management of advanced interventional endoscopy with a focus on colorectal ESD

INTRODUCTION

Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been introduced widely in Western and Asian countries. The management of the perforation during ESD is crucial.

AREAS COVERED

The rate of intraprocedural perforation, risk factors, prevention, and management of perforation during ESD and EMR were discussed in this review. The perforation rate in ESD and EMR depending on the lesion size is also discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

The knowledge regarding the risk factor and techniques to manage perforation is important during colorectal ESD and EMR. The development of novel suturing techniques devices is key for colorectal ESD in the future.