Laparoscopic colectomy using cancer principles is appropriate for colonoscopically unresectable adenomas of the colon

Combined endoscopic robotic surgery for complex colonic polyp resection: case series

BACKGROUND

The study objective was to evaluate combined endoscopic and robotic surgery, a novel surgical technique modifying traditional combined endoscopic laparoscopic surgery through robotic assistance, and characterize a series of patients who underwent the modified operative technique.

METHODS

A retrospective case series was performed. The first thirty-seven consecutive patients who underwent combined endoscopic robotic surgery by a single colorectal surgeon from March 2018 to October 2019 were included. Main outcome measures included operative time, intra-operative complication, 30-day post-operative complication, and hospital length of stay.

RESULTS

Combined endoscopic and robotic surgery was performed in 37 cases, 32 (86.5%) of which saw the technique through to completion. Median operative room time was 73 min (range 31-184 min). No intraoperative complications occurred and 2 (6.3%) experienced 30-day post-operative complications. Median hospital length of stay was 1.1 days (range 0.2-2.0 days). Median polyp size was 35 mm (range 20-130 mm). Polyps were resected from the following locations: cecum (37.5%), ascending colon (28.1%), transverse colon (21.9%), descending colon (3.1%), sigmoid colon (6.3%), and rectum (3.1%). Pathology demonstrated 77.4% tubular adenoma, 12.9% sessile serrated adenoma, 6.5% dysplasia, and 3.2% signet cell adenocarcinoma.

CONCLUSION

Combined endoscopic robotic surgery was associated with decreased operative time, complication rates, and hospital length of stay compared to literature-reported statistics for combined endoscopic laparoscopic surgery. Increased confidence with 3-dimensional visualization and intracorporeal suturing using combined endoscopic and robotic surgery was noted. Additional studies are needed to further define the role of robotics in combined endoscopic surgery.

Laparoscopic wedge resection as an alternative to laparoscopic oncological colon resection for benign endoscopically unresectable colon polyps

AIM

The aim of this study was to investigate, by comparing clinical and histological outcomes, whether laparoscopic (hybrid) wedge resection (LWR) could be a less invasive and safe alternative to laparoscopic oncological colon resection (OCR) for patients with an endoscopically unresectable, suspected benign, colon polyp.

METHOD

All patients with an endoscopically unresectable colon polyp who were referred for surgery between 2009 and 2018 and without biopsy-proven colon cancer were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Patients with macroscopic features of malignancy during endoscopy were excluded. Clinical and histological results for patients who underwent OCR or LWR were reviewed.

RESULTS

One hundred-and-twenty-two patients were included. Ninety-seven patients underwent OCR and 25 LWR. Major complications occurred in 16.7% (n = 16) of the OCR group compared with 4.0% (n = 1) of the LWR group (p = 0.06). In the OCR group the anastomotic leakage rate was 6.3% (n = 6) and the mortality rate 3.1% (n = 3). No anastomotic leakage or deaths occurred in the LWR group. The median length of hospital stay after OCR was 5 days [interquartile range (IQR) 5-9 days)] compared with 2 days (IQR 2-4 days) after LWR (p < 0.0001). Definite pathology showed a malignancy rate of 4.2% (n = 4) in the OCR group and 4.0% (n = 1) (without high-risk features) in the LWR group.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that LWR was associated with significantly lower complication rates and acceptable oncological risks compared with OCR. Therefore we suggest that LWR is a safe alternative treatment, next to other endoscopic options. The treatment that is most suitable for an individual patient should be discussed in a multidisciplinary meeting.

European guidelines from the EHTG and ESCP for Lynch syndrome: an updated third edition of the Mallorca guidelines based on gene and gender

BACKGROUND

Lynch syndrome is the most common genetic predisposition for hereditary cancer but remains underdiagnosed. Large prospective observational studies have recently increased understanding of the effectiveness of colonoscopic surveillance and the heterogeneity of cancer risk between genotypes. The need for gene- and gender-specific guidelines has been acknowledged.

METHODS

The European Hereditary Tumour Group (EHTG) and European Society of Coloproctology (ESCP) developed a multidisciplinary working group consisting of surgeons, clinical and molecular geneticists, pathologists, epidemiologists, gastroenterologists, and patient representation to conduct a graded evidence review. The previous Mallorca guideline format was used to revise the clinical guidance. Consensus for the guidance statements was acquired by three Delphi voting rounds.

RESULTS

Recommendations for clinical and molecular identification of Lynch syndrome, surgical and endoscopic management of Lynch syndrome-associated colorectal cancer, and preventive measures for cancer were produced. The emphasis was on surgical and gastroenterological aspects of the cancer spectrum. Manchester consensus guidelines for gynaecological management were endorsed. Executive and layperson summaries were provided.

CONCLUSION

The recommendations from the EHTG and ESCP for identification of patients with Lynch syndrome, colorectal surveillance, surgical management of colorectal cancer, lifestyle and chemoprevention in Lynch syndrome that reached a consensus (at least 80 per cent) are presented.

Ileocecal Valve Sparing Resection for the Treatment of Benign Cecal Polyps Unsuitable for Polypectomy

Background:

Not all benign-appearance polyps are amenable to endoscopic removal and colectomy is required in some cases. This study aims to compare the early outcomes of cecal wedge resection with ileocecal valve sparring versus standard right colectomy in patients with endoscopically unresectable cecal polyps referred for surgery.

Methods:

From Apr 2010 to Aug 2019, all consecutive patients who underwent cecal wedge resection or right colectomy in ten European centers for a presumed endoscopically benign polyp unsuitable for endoscopic resection were retrospectively analyzed. The primary endpoint was morbidity. Secondary endpoints were operative time and length of hospital stay.

Results:

One hundred and ten patients were included: 25 patients underwent cecal wedge resection and 85 a right colectomy. There were 56 men (51%) and 90% of the procedures were performed laparoscopically. 29 lesions were located at the appendix orifice (26.4%). Mortality was nil. There were no significant differences between both procedures for morbidity rate (20% versus 24.7%) or reoperation (4% versus 4.7%). Cecal wedge was related to shorter operative time (63 min versus 150 min, P = .008) and shorter hospital stay (5 days versus 6 days, P = .049). Only 1 patient had a salvage right colectomy after cecal wedge for a pTis adenoma.

Conclusions:

For benign-appearance cecal polyps unsuitable for endoscopic ablation, cecal wedge resection is safe and should be considered as an attractive alternative to right colectomy.

Evaluation of a progressive algorithmic approach for the treatment of unresectable colon polyps using colon conservation techniques

BACKGROUND

The majority of endoscopically unresectable colon polyps (EUCP) are treated by segmental colectomy. However, up to 90% of EUCP do not harbor malignancy, making colectomy an unnecessary procedure. To minimize unnecessary segmental colectomy, we established a progressive treatment algorithm utilizing colon conservation techniques (CCT). In our progressive CCT algorithm, patients with EUCP first underwent endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). If unsuccessful, they progressed to combined endo-laparoscopic surgery (CELS) and ultimately to segmental colectomy, if necessary.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients treated by our progressive CCT algorithm from August 2015 to April 2019. Demographic information, polyp characteristics, and clinical outcomes were analyzed. We also compared the outcomes of our CCT algorithm group to 156 patients undergoing segmental colectomy for EUCP at related institutions from August 2015 to August 2018.

RESULTS

A total of 102 EUCP in 97 patients were treated with our progressive CCT algorithm. Of these, 76 of 102 (75.5%) EUCP were removed without requiring segmental colectomy, with 42 EUCP removed via ESD and 34 via CELS. Interval surveillance colonoscopy confirmed that 72 of 97 (74.2%) patients with EUCP treated by CCT completely avoided segmental colectomy. Polyps > 5 cm in size was a significant predictor of CCT failure (OR 3.83, P = 0.03). When compared to an external cohort of patients undergoing segmental colectomy for EUCP, the CCT algorithm was associated with longer operative time, but shorter length of stay, with no difference in postoperative complications. The estimated total healthcare cost of the CCT algorithm was lower than segmental colectomy ($10,956.77 versus $16,692.94), with more dramatic cost savings seen in ESD ($4,492.70) and CELS ($8,507.06).

CONCLUSIONS

An established progressive CCT algorithm can result in high colon conservation rate and decrease associated health care costs compared to segmental colectomy. It is a reasonable treatment strategy for patients with EUCP.

Can Vascular Endothelial Growth Factors and CD34 Expression Implement NICE (Narrow-Band Imaging International Colorectal Endoscopic) Classification in Colorectal Polypoid Lesion Diagnosis?

BACKGROUND

Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) is a subfamily of growth factors involved in angiogenesis; CD34+ cells are normally found in endothelial progenitor cells and endothelial cells of blood vessels. Colonic adenomatous polyps may not always be completely removable endoscopically, and a preoperative diagnosis might still be necessary. The aim of the study was to evaluate whether VEGF-A, VEGF-C and CD34 mRNA expression along colorectal carcinogenesis steps can implement NICE (Narrow-Band Imaging International Colorectal Endoscopic) classification in the diagnosis of malignancy in colorectal polypoid lesions.

METHODS

Seventy-one subjects with colonic adenoma or cancer who underwent screening narrow-band imaging (NBI) colonoscopy were prospectively enrolled in the MICCE1 project (Treviso center). Polyps were classified according to the NICE classification. Real-time RT-PCR for VEGF-A, VEGF-C and CD34 mRNA expression was performed. Nonparametric statistics, receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis and logistic multiple regression analysis were used.

RESULTS

VEGF-A and CD34 mRNA expression was significantly higher in sessile adenomas than in polypoid ones (p < 0.001 and p = 0.01, respectively). VEGF-A, VEGF-C and CD34 mRNA expression was significantly higher in adenocarcinoma than in adenoma (p = 0.01, p = 0.01 and p = 0.01, respectively). The accuracy of VEGF-A, VEGF-C and CD34 mRNA expression for prediction of malignancy was 0.79 (95% CI 0.65-0.90), 0.81 (95% CI 0.66-0.91) and 0.80 (95% CI 0.65-0.90), respectively, while the accuracy of the NICE classification was 0.85 (95% CI 0.72-0.94). The determination coefficient R2, which indicates the amount of the variability explained by a regression model, for NICE classification alone was 0.24 (p < 0.001). A regression model that included NICE classification and VEGF-C mRNA expression showed an R2 = 0.39 as well as a model including NICE classification and CD34 mRNA levels.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that VEGF-C and CD34 mRNA levels might be useful to stratify colorectal polyps in different risk of progression classes by implementing the accuracy of the NICE classification. Studies on in vivo detection of these markers are warranted.

Variation in colectomy rates for benign polyp and colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Removal of pre-cancerous polyps on screening colonoscopy is a mainstay of colorectal cancer (CRC) prevention. Complex polyps may require surgical removal with colectomy, an operation with a 17% morbidity and 1.5% mortality rate. Recently, advanced endoscopic techniques have allowed some patients with complex polyps to avoid the morbidity of colectomy. However, the rate of colectomy for benign polyp in the United States is unclear, and variation in this rate across geographic regions has not been studied. We compared regional variation in colectomy rates for CRC versus benign polyp.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective population-based study of Medicare beneficiaries undergoing colectomy for CRC or benign polyp, using the 100% Medicare Provider Analysis and Review files from 2010 to 2015. We used multivariable linear regression to obtain population-based colectomy rates for CRC and benign polyp at the hospital referral region (HRR) level, adjusted for age, sex, and race.

RESULTS

Of 280,815 patients, 157,802 (65.8%) underwent colectomy for CRC compared to 81,937 (34.2%) for benign polyp. Across HRRs, colectomy rates varied 5.8-fold for cancer (0.32-1.84 per 1000 beneficiaries). However, there was a 69-fold variation for benign polyp (0.01-0.69). While the rate of colectomy for CRC was correlated with the rate of colectomy for benign polyp (slope = 0.61, 95% CI 0.48-0.75), HRRs with the lowest or highest rates of colectomy for CRC did not necessarily have similarly low or high rates for benign polyp.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of colectomy for benign polyp is much more variable compared to CRC, suggesting overuse of colectomy for benign polyp in some regions. This variation may stem from provider-level differences, such as endoscopists' referral practice or skill or surgeons' decision to perform colectomy, or from limited access to advanced endoscopists. Interventions to increase endoscopic resection of benign polyps may spare some patients the morbidity and cost of surgery.

The impact of the national bowel screening program in the Netherlands on detection and treatment of endoscopically unresectable benign polyps

Background

In January 2014, a national bowel cancer screening program started in the Netherlands. The program is being implemented in phases until 2019. Due to this program, an increase in patients referred for a colorectal resection for benign, but endoscopically unresectable polyps, is expected. So far, most resections are performed according to oncological principles despite no pre-operative histological diagnosis of malignancy. The aim of this study was to analyze the increase in referred patients during the first year of the screening program and to compare pathological results and clinical outcome of resections of patients undergoing resection for benign polyps before and after implementation of screening.

Methods

Patients referred for colorectal resection without biopsy-proven cancer between January 2009 and January December 2014 were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Patients with endoscopically macroscopic features of carcinoma were excluded.

Results

Seventy-six patients were included. Forty-seven patients (61.8%) were operated on in the 5 years prior to implementation of the screening program, and 29 patients (38.2%) were operated during the first year of implementation of the screening program. The overall malignancy rate before the introduction of the program was 14.1 and 6.6% after it had started (p = .469). All resections were performed laparoscopically; the conversion rate was 3.9% (n = 3). The overall mortality rate was 2.7% (n = 2), major complications (Clavien–Dindo > 3b) occurred in 11.8% (n = 9) of patients. The anastomotic leakage rate was 3.9% (n = 3).

Conclusions

The number of patients referred for benign polyps tripled after introduction of the screening program. With an overall major morbidity and mortality rate of 11.8%, it seems valid to discuss whether an endoscopic excision with advanced techniques with or without laparoscopic assistance would be preferable in this patient group, accepting a 6.6% reoperation rate for additional oncological resection with lymph node sampling in patients in whom a malignancy is found on histological analysis of the complete polyp.

The Difficult Colorectal Polyp

Difficult colorectal polyps represent lesions that pose a challenge to traditional endoscopic snare polypectomy. These polyps have historically been managed by surgical resection. Currently, several less invasive options are available to avoid colectomy. Repeat colonoscopy and snare polypectomy by an expert endoscopist, endoscopic mucosal resection, endoscopic submucosal dissection, and combined endoscopic and laparoscopic surgery have been developed to remove difficult polyps without the need for formal surgical resection. Patients with rectal polyps have the advantage of additional transanal minimally invasive techniques to enhance their resectability. Today, most colorectal polyps can be managed without the need for formal surgical resection.

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery for colorectal polyps: experience of ten years

Background. Laparoscopy or its combination with endoscopy is the next step for “difficult” polyps. The purpose of the paper was to review the outcomes of the laparoscopic approach to the management of “difficult” colorectal polyps.

Materials and methods. From 2006 to 2016, 58 patients who underwent laparoscopic treatment for “difficult” polyps that could not be treated by endoscopy at the National Cancer Institute, Lithuania, were included. The demographic data, the type of surgery, length of post-operative stay, complications, and final pathology were reviewed prospectively.

Results. The mean patient was 65.9 ± 8.9 years of age. Laparoscopic mobilization of the colonic segment and colotomy with removal of the polyp was performed in 15 (25.9%) patients, laparoscopic segmental bowel resection in 41 (70.7%) cases: anterior rectal resection with partial total mesorectal excision in 18 (31.0%), sigmoid resection in nine (15.5%), left hemicolectomy in seven (12.1%), right hemicolectomies in two (3.4%), ileocecal resection in two (3.4%), resection of transverse colon in two (3.4%), and sigmoid resection with transanal retrieval of specimen in one (1.7%). Two patients (3.4%) underwent laparoscopic-assisted endoscopic polypectomy. The mean post-operative hospital stay was 5.7 ± 2.4 days. There were four complications (6.9%). All patients recovered after conservative treatment. The mean polyp size was 3.5 ± 1.9 cm. Final histopathology revealed hyperplastic polyps (n = 2), tubular adenoma (n = 9), tubulovillous adenoma (n = 31), carcinoma in situ (n = 12), and invasive cancer (n = 4).

Conclusions. For the management of endoscopically unresectable polyps, laparoscopic surgery is currently the technique of choice.

Colorectal polypoid lesions and expression of vascular endothelial growth factor in a consecutive series of endoscopic and surgical patients

Colorectal cancer incidence in patients undergoing screening protocols is decreasing because of the higher rate of discovered preneoplastic colonic lesions; however, adenomatous polyps may not always be removable endoscopically and surgery may still be necessary. The aim of this study was to assess the vascular endothelial growth factor expression in the different steps of colorectal carcinogenesis to explore its potential role as a marker of malignancy in polypoid lesions. A total of 92 subjects with colonic adenoma or cancer who underwent screening colonoscopy or surgery were prospectively enrolled. Real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction for VEGF-A messenger RNA expression and immunohistochemistry for VEGF-A were performed. Immunoassays for VEGF-A, VEGF-C, VEGFR-1, VEGFR-2, and VEGFR-3 were also performed. Non-parametric statistics, receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, and logistic multiple regression analysis were used. VEGF-A messenger RNA expression was higher in patients with high-grade dysplasia or colorectal cancer than in those with low-grade dysplasia adenomas (p = 0.01). At immunohistochemistry, VEGF-A expression was significantly higher in colorectal cancer patients compared to dysplastic adenomas (p < 0.001), and the accuracy of VEGF-A expression for prediction of malignancy was 91.7 (95% confidence interval = 78.7-97.9). VEGF-C protein expression was lower in colorectal cancer patients than in simple adenomas (p = 0.02). VEGF-A levels were directly correlated to polyp size (rho = 0.73, p = 0.0062). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that malignancy and polyp size were independent predictors of VEGF-A mucosal levels. This study demonstrated that the VEGF-A expression changes along the colorectal carcinogenesis pathway showing a neat step up at the passage from high-grade dysplasia to invasive cancer. This feature might potentially be useful to stratify colorectal polyps in different risks of progression classes. Moreover, the high level of VEGF-A expression predicted the presence of lymphovascular invasion with good accuracy.

Colonic Polyps: Treatment

Colonic polyps are considered to be precursors of colon cancer based on several different molecular pathway models and should be resected with a principle of complete excisional biopsy. Several techniques are available for excisional biopsy, ranging from endoscopic techniques such as snare polypectomy, endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) to surgical colonic resection and colonic endolaparoscopic surgery (CELS). This article focuses on these modalities with contemporary recommendations for choice of modality based on the size and features of the polyp encountered upon endoscopy. In addition, the morphologically apparent risk factors for polyps harboring invasive malignancy are discussed along with implications for management. Current literature on the comparative risks and benefits of EMR, ESD, CELS, and surgical resection is reviewed, as well as recommendations regarding cancer risk and subsequent surveillance.

Laparoscopic right colectomy vs laparoscopic-assisted colonoscopic polypectomy for endoscopically unresectable polyps: a randomized controlled trial

AIM

A randomized controlled trial (RCT) was conducted to test the null hypothesis that there is no difference in complication rates and length of stay (LOS) between laparoscopic right colectomy (LRC) and laparoscopic-assisted colonoscopic polypectomy (LACP) for endoscopically unresectable polyps of the right colon.

METHOD

A single-centre RCT (NCT01986699) was conducted on patients with polyps of the right colon deemed by the gastroenterologist to be unresectable. Patients underwent a repeat colonoscopy with biopsy by an interventional endoscopist and were allocated to LRC or LACP. Patients with a nonlift sign, dysplasia, adenocarcinoma, inflammatory bowel disease or familial adenomatous polyposis were excluded from the trial. The study was powered to detect a 73% difference in the LOS which required 17 patients in each arm with an α error of 0.05 and a power of 95%.

RESULTS

Thirty-four patients were comparable for age (P = 0.919), gender (P = 0.364), body mass index (P = 0.634), American Society of Anesthesiologists class (P = 0.388) and previous abdominal surgery (P = 0.366). There was no significant difference in the preoperative morphology (P = 0.485), location (P = 0.297), size (P = 0.690) or histology of the polyps (P = 0.779). LRC patients experienced a longer operating time (180 vs 90 min; P = 0.001), required more intravenous infusion (3.1 vs 2.0 l; P = 0.025), took significantly longer to pass flatus (2.88 vs 1.44 days; P < 0.001), resumed solid food later (3.94 vs 1.69 days; P < 0.001) and had a longer postoperative LOS (4.94 vs 2.63 days; P < 0.001). Postoperative complications (P = 0.656), readmissions (P = 0.5) and reoperations (P = 0.5) did not differ. Final size (P = 0.339) and histology (P = 0.104) of the polyps did not differ. There were four cancers in the LRC arm. At follow-up colonoscopy with biopsy of the scar in 10 patients at 15.3 months, one patient had recurrence of the polyp at the site of the previous LACP.

CONCLUSION

LACP and LRC had similar complication rates, but LOS was shorter after LACP.

Update on Difficult Polypectomy Techniques

Endoscopists often encounter colon polyps that are technically difficult to resect. These lesions traditionally were managed surgically, with significant potential morbidity and mortality. Recent advances in endoscopic techniques and instruments have allowed endoscopists to safely and effectively remove colorectal lesions with high technical and clinical success and potentially avoid invasive surgery. Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) has gained acceptance as the first-line therapy for large colorectal lesions. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been reported to be associated with higher rate of en bloc resection and less risk of short-time recurrence, but with an increased risk of adverse events. Therefore, the role of colorectal ESD should be restricted to lesions with high-risk morphologic features of submucosal invasion. In this article, we review the recent literature on the endoscopic management of difficult colorectal neoplasms.

Does Cancer Risk in Colonic Polyps Unsuitable for Polypectomy Support the Need for Advanced Endoscopic Resections?

BACKGROUND

There is a continuing debate on the best approach for endoscopically benign large polyps that are unsuitable for conventional endoscopic resection. This study aimed to estimate the cancer risk in patients with endoscopically benign unresectable colonic polyps referred for surgery.

STUDY DESIGN

We assessed patients with an endoscopic diagnosis of benign adenoma deemed not amenable to endoscopic removal, who underwent colectomy between 1997 and 2012. Patients with preoperative diagnoses of cancer, inherited polyposis syndrome, inflammatory bowel disease, and synchronous pathology requiring surgery were excluded.

RESULTS

There were 439 patients (220 [50.1%] men; median age 67 years [range 27 to 97 years]) who underwent colectomy. Of 439 patients, 346 (79%) underwent preoperative endoscopy at our institution. Most of the polyps were located in the right colon (394 of 439, 89.7%), with the majority in the cecum (199 of 394, 45.3%). Polyp morphology was as follows: sessile (n = 252, 57.4%), pedunculated (n = 109, 24.8%), and flat (n = 78, 17.8%). Endoscopic pathology revealed high-grade dysplasia in 88 (20%) patients. Mean colonoscopic and postoperative polyp sizes were 3.0 cm (range 0.3 to 10 cm) and 2.7 cm (range 0 to 11 cm), respectively (p < 0.001). Final surgical pathology revealed cancer in 37 patients (8%). Polyp location, morphology, and histologic types were similar between the benign and malignant polyps. Cancer stages were: stage I (23 patients), stage II (11 patients), and stage III (3 patients).

CONCLUSIONS

For the majority of endoscopically benign colonic polyps, an oncologic colonic resection may be unnecessary, so advanced endoscopic resection techniques or laparoscopic-assisted polypectomy should be considered. When bowel resection is needed, the resection should be performed, obeying oncologic principles and techniques.

Hybrid Laparoendoscopic Approaches to Endoscopically Unresectable Colon Polyps

Secondary prevention of colorectal cancer relies on effective screening through colonoscopy and polypectomy. Resection of some polyps can present technical challenges particularly when polyps are large, flat, or behind colonic folds. Laparoscopy as an adjunct to endoscopy can aid in removing difficult colonic polyps without subjecting patients to radical segmental colectomy. Hybrid laparoendoscopic techniques are increasingly reported in literature as alternatives to segmental colectomy for the treatment of polyps that have a high likelihood of being benign. Laparoscopic-assisted colonoscopic polypectomy is the most frequently utilized technique; it harnesses the power of laparoscopy to aid endoscopic polypectomy by flattening folds, mobilizing flexures, and providing retraction. Colonoscopy-assisted laparoscopic wedge and transluminal resection are often reported in older studies and use the visualization provided by intraoperative colonoscopy to guide colonic resection that is limited to the area of the polyp. Laparoscopic-assisted endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) is a relatively recent technique that provides laparoscopic monitoring of EFTR of polyp as well as endoscopic closure of the ensuing defect. Minimally invasive segmental colectomy based on oncologic principles should be utilized when none of the previous techniques are suitable or when malignancy is strongly suspected. The combined use of laparoscopy and endoscopy can expand the endoscopist's armamentarium when dealing with the most challenging polyps, while serving the patients' best interest by limiting the extent of colon resection.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection vs laparoscopic colorectal resection for early colorectal epithelial neoplasia

AIM: To compare the short term outcome of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) with that of laparoscopic colorectal resection (LC) for the treatment of early colorectal epithelial neoplasms that are not amenable to conventional endoscopic removal.

METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study. The clinical data of all consecutive patients who underwent ESD for endoscopically assessed benign lesions that were larger than 2 cm in diameter from 2009 to 2013 were collected. These patients were compared with a cohort of controls who underwent LC from 2005 to 2013. Lesions that were proven to be malignant by initial endoscopic biopsies were excluded. Mid and lower rectal lesions were not included because total mesorectal excision, which bears a more complicated postoperative course, is not indicated for lesions without histological proof of malignancy. Both ESD and LC were performed by the same surgical unit with a standardized technique. The patients were managed according to a standard protocol, and they were closely monitored for complications after the procedures. All hospital records were reviewed, and the following data were compared between the ESD and LC groups: patient demographics, size and location of the lesions, procedure time, short-term clinical outcomes and pathology results.

RESULTS: From 2005 to 2013, 65 patients who underwent ESD and 55 patients who underwent LC were included in this study. The two groups were similar in terms of sex (P = 0.41) and American Society of Anesthesiologist class (P = 0.58), although patients in the ESD group were slightly older (68.6 ± 9.4 vs 64.6 ± 9.9, P = 0.03). ESD could be accomplished with a shorter procedure time (113 ± 66 min vs 153 ± 43 min, P < 0.01) for lesions of comparable size (3.0 ± 1.2 cm vs 3.4 ± 1.4 cm, P = 0.22) and location (colon/rectum: 59/6 vs colon/rectum: 52/3, P = 0.43). ESD appeared to be associated with a lower short-term complication rate, but the difference did not reach statistical significance (10.8% vs 23.6%, P = 0.06). In the LC arm, a total of 22 complications occurred in 13 patients. A total of 7 complications occurred in the ESD arm, including 5 perforations and 2 episodes of bleeding. All perforations were observed during the procedure and were successfully managed by endoscopic clipping without emergency surgical intervention. Patients in the ESD arm had a faster recovery than patients in the LC arm, which included shorter time to resume normal diet (2 d vs 4 d, P = 0.01) and a shorter hospital stay (3 d vs 6 d, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION: ESD showed better short-term clinical outcomes in this study. Further prospective randomized studies will be required to evaluate the efficacy and superiority of colorectal ESD over LC.

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery for colorectal polyps: single institution experience

Introduction

Because of their difficult location or size, some polyps are impossible to remove with a flexible colonoscope and must be surgically removed. Laparoscopy is a great alternative.

Aim

To assess outcomes of a laparoscopic approach for the management of difficult colorectal polyps.

Material and methods

From 2006 to 2014, patients with polyps that could not be treated by endoscopy were included. Demographic data, histology of the biopsy, type of surgery, length of postoperative stay, complications and final pathology were reviewed prospectively.

Results

Forty-two patients with a mean age of 64.9 ±8.4 underwent laparoscopic polypectomy. Laparoscopic mobilization of the colonic segment and colotomy with removal of the polyp was performed for 12 (28.6%) polyps. Laparoscopic segmental bowel resection was performed in 30 (71.4%) cases: anterior rectal resection with partial total mesorectal excision in 12 (28.6%), left hemicolectomy in 7 (16.6%), sigmoid resection in 6 (14.3%), ileocecal resection in 2 (4.76%), resection of transverse colon in 2 (4.76%) and sigmoid resection with transanal retrieval of specimen in 1 (2.38%). Mean postoperative hospital stay was 5.9 ±2.6 days. There were 4 complications (9.5%). All patients recovered after conservative treatment. Mean polyp size was 3.6 ±2.2 cm. Final pathology revealed polyps (n = 2), tubular adenoma (n = 6), tubulovillous adenoma (n = 20), carcinoma in situ (n = 10) and invasive cancer (n = 4). Two of these patients underwent laparoscopic left hemicolectomies 14 and 10 days after laparoscopic colotomy and polypectomy.

Conclusions

For the management of endoscopically unresectable polyps, laparoscopic polypectomy is currently the technique of choice.

Endolaparoscopic removal of colonic polyps

AIM

A proportion of colonic polyps is not amenable to exclusively colonoscopic removal due to their location, size or tortuosity of the colon. A combined laparoscopic/colonoscopic polypectomy or endolaparoscopic polypectomy (ELP) is an alternative to formal segmental resection. We present our experience of ELP.

METHOD

This is a retrospective review of a consecutive series of patients who underwent ELP for preoperatively diagnosed benign polyps between 2010 and 2013. Data are presented as median (interquartile range, IQR).

RESULTS

Thirty patients commenced ELP. Eighteen were male and the median (IQR) age was 65.4 (61.6-73.5) years. Of 30 attempted cases, 22 (73%) underwent successful ELP surgery. Patients in whom combined ELP surgery was unsuccessful were converted to laparoscopic colectomy (one) or colonic mobilization and colotomy (seven). The median operation time for successful ELP was 105 (75-125) min. The complication rate was 13.3% and the median length of stay was 2.0 (1.0-3.0) days for successful ELP compared with 5.5 (3.5-6.8) days for converted patients (P = 0.014). The median polyp size was 14 (10-22) mm; eight (26.7%) had high-grade dysplasia with two cases of invasive cancer identified.

CONCLUSION

A combined endoscopic-laparoscopic approach provides an alternative to segmental resection for treating challenging colonic polyps. This approach appears to be safe and effective and should be offered to selected patients with benign colonic polyps.

Laparoscopic-Facilitated Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection, Mucosal Resection, and Partial Circumferential (“Wedge”) Colon Wall Resection for Benign Colorectal Neoplasms That Come to Surgery

Background. Large polyps that come to surgery are removed via colectomy (CR). Alternatives are MIS-facilitated endoscopic submucosal dissection/endoscopic mucosal resection (ESD/EMR) or wedge resection (WR). This study presents the results of 26 polyp patients who had minimally invasive surgery (MIS)-monitored ESD/EMR, WR, or if necessary, standard CR. Methods. The authors used a retrospective review of 1 surgeon’s experience. ESD/EMR was the first choice, WR was the second, and CR was the last resort. Results. Polyp locations were as follows: right/transverse, 16 (62%); rectum, 7 (27%); and left/sigmoid, 3 (12%). ESD/EMR was successful in 13 patients and WR in 4; 9 patients required CR. Median flatus times were as follows: ESD/EMR, 1 day; WR, 2 days; and CR, 3 days (ESD/EMR vs CR, P = .01). Median length of stay was as follows: ESD/EMR, 3 days; WR, 5 days; and CR, 5 days (ESD/EMR vs CR, P = .0037). There were no leaks or abscesses. Carcinoma was found in 3 patients. Postoperatively, 2 ESD/EMR patients had residual polyp fully removed via a scope. Conclusions. ESD/EMR and WR appear to be safe but techniques are evolving. Larger studies are needed.

Oncologic colorectal resection, not advanced endoscopic polypectomy, is the best treatment for large dysplastic adenomas

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), and partial circumference resection are used for large benign polyps to avoid an "Oncologic" Colorectal Resection (OCR); polyps with invasive cancer require OCR. This review of polyp patients who had OCR was done to stratify polyps into risk groups to guide treatment.

METHODS

Colonoscopy, operative, and pathology reports of patients with adenoma (+/- dysplasia) who had OCR were reviewed. Polyp size, location, and pathology were assessed.

RESULTS

Three hundred eighty-six polyp patients who had OCR were studied. Polyp locations were: right, 263 (68.1%); transverse, 33 (8.6%); sigmoid, 38 (9.8%); rectum, 23 (6.0%); and multiple sites, 13 (3.4%). The preoperative diagnosis was adenoma for 288 (74.6%) and dysplastic adenoma for 98 patients (25.4%). Final pathology revealed 62 invasive cancers (16.1%); 35% (34 out of 98) with dysplasia preoperatively had cancer versus 9.7% (28 out of 288) with adenoma alone (p < 0.0001). The mean lymph node count was 16.0 ± 10.2. Cancer stage breakdown was: stage 1, 74%; stage 2, 8.1%; stage 3, 16%; and stage 4, 1.6%. The mean benign polyp size was 3.0 ± 1.9 versus 3.9 ± 2.4 cm for malignant polyps (p = 0.0008).

CONCLUSION

Over one out of three of dysplastic polyps and 10% of adenomas were invasive cancers. OCR is advised for dysplastic polyps; ESD, EMR, and wedge resection are appropriate for non-dysplastic adenomas.