Safety of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of large non-pedunculated colorectal adenomas in the elderly

Cold EMR vs. Hot EMR for the removal of sessile serrated polyps larger than 10 mm: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) appears to be a promising technique for the removal of sessile serrated polyps (SSPs) ≥ 10 mm. To assess the effectiveness and safety of EMR for removing SSPs ≥ 10 mm, we conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

We conducted a thorough search of Embase, PubMed, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases for relevant studies reporting on EMR of SSPs ≥ 10 mm, up until December 2023. Our primary endpoints of interest were rates of technical success, residual SSPs, and adverse events (AE).

RESULTS

Our search identified 426 articles, of which 14 studies with 2262 SSPs were included for analysis. The rates of technical success, AEs, and residual SSPs were 100%, 2.0%, and 3.1%, respectively. Subgroup analysis showed that the technical success rates were the same for polyps 10-19 and 20 mm, and en-bloc and piecemeal resection. Residual SSPs rates were similar in en-bloc and piecemeal resection, but much lower in cold EMR (1.0% vs. 4.2%, P = 0.034). AEs rates were reduced in cold EMR compared to hot EMR (0% vs. 2.9%, P = 0.168), in polyps 10-19 mm compared to 20 mm (0% vs. 4.1%, P = 0.255), and in piecemeal resection compared to en-bloc (0% vs. 0.7%, P = 0.169).

CONCLUSIONS

EMR is an effective and safe technique for removing SSPs ≥ 10 mm. The therapeutic effect of cold EMR is superior to that of hot EMR, with a lower incidence of adverse effects.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42023388959.

Cold Versus Hot Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for Sessile Serrated Colorectal Polyps ≥10 mm: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis studying the efficacy and safety of cold versus hot endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for resection of sessile serrated polyps (SSPs) ≥10 mm.

METHODS

Multiple databases were searched until January 2023 for studies reporting outcomes of cold versus hot EMR for SSPs ≥10 mm. The primary outcome was the residual SSP rate. Secondary outcomes included technical success rate, R0 resection rate, and adverse events. We used standard meta-analysis methods using the random-effects model, and I2% was used to assess heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies were included in the final analysis. In all, 1896 SSPs were included with a mean polyp size of 23.7 mm (range, 15.9 to 33). A total of 1452 SSPs were followed up for a median follow-up duration of 15.3 months (range, 6 to 37). The pooled residual SSP rate for cold EMR was 4.5% (95% CI: 1.0-17.4), and 5.1% (95% CI: 2.4-10.4) for hot EMR (P=0.9). The pooled rates of technical success, R0 resection, immediate bleeding, and perforation were comparable. Hot EMR was significantly associated with lower piecemeal resection (59.2% vs. 99.3%, P<0.001), higher en-bloc resection (41.4% vs. 1.4%, P<0.001), and delayed bleeding rate (4% vs. 0.7%, P=0.05) compared to cold EMR.

CONCLUSIONS

Cold EMR has similar efficacy compared to hot EMR for resection of SSP ≥ 10 mm, despite limitations in piecemeal R0 resection rate reporting. Although hot EMR was associated with a higher rate of en-bloc resection, it also showed an increased risk of delayed bleeding compared to cold EMR.

Decreasing rates of colectomy for benign neoplasms: A nationwide analysis

BACKGROUND

Despite advances in endoscopic techniques for management of benign colonic neoplasms, a rise in rates of surgical treatment has been reported. We used a nationally representative cohort to characterize temporal trends, patient characteristics, and outcomes associated with colectomy for colonic neoplasms.

METHODS

All patients undergoing elective partial colectomy for benign or malignant colonic neoplasms were identified using the 2012-2019 National Inpatient Sample. Those presenting with inflammatory bowel disease, or experiencing intestinal perforation were excluded. Patients with benign neoplasms were classified as the Benign cohort (others: Malignant). Trends, characteristics, and outcomes were assessed between groups.

RESULTS

Of 569,280 colectomy procedures included for analysis, 153,435 (27.0%) were performed for benign lesions. The proportion of Benign operations decreased from 28.6% in 2012 to 23.7% in 2019 (P for trend<0.001). While overall national incidence of colectomy for benign neoplasms decreased from 2012 to 2019 (IRD -1.19, 95%CI -1.20- -1.19), Black patients demonstrated an incremental increase (IRD +0.04, 95%CI +0.02-0.06). On average, Benign was younger (66 [57-72] vs 68 years [58-77], P<0.001), and demonstrated a lower Elixhauser comorbidity index (2 [1-3] vs 3 [2-4], P<0.001), relative to Malignancy. Following adjustment, Benign demonstrated lower odds of in-hospital mortality (AOR 0.61, 95%CI 0.50-0.74; P<0.001), stoma creation (AOR 0.46, 95%CI 0.43-0.50; P<0.001), and infectious complications (AOR 0.68, 95%CI 0.63-0.73; P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The present national study identifies a decrease in colectomy for benign polyps from 2012-2019. Future investigations should identify patients who would most benefit from surgical resection and address persistent inequities in access to screening and treatment for colonic neoplasms.

Onset Time and Characteristics of Postprocedural Bleeding after Endoscopic Resection of Colorectal Lesions: A Multicenter Retrospective Study

INTRODUCTION

Postprocedural bleeding is a major adverse event after endoscopic resection of colorectal lesions, but the optimal surveillance time after endoscopy is unclear. In this study, we determined onset time and characteristics of postprocedural bleeding events.

METHODS

We retrospectively screened patients who underwent endoscopic resection of colorectal lesions at three German hospitals between 2010 and 2019 for postprocedural bleeding events using billing codes. Only patients who required re-endoscopy were included for analysis. For identified patients, we collected demographic data, clinical courses, characteristics of colorectal lesions, and procedure-related variables. Factors associated with late-onset bleeding were determined by univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

From a total of 6,820 patients with eligible billing codes, we identified 113 cases with postprocedural bleeding after endoscopic mucosal (61.9%) or snare resection (38.1%) that required re-endoscopy. The median size of the culprit lesion was 20 mm (interquartile range 14-30 mm). The median onset time of postprocedural bleeding was day 3 (interquartile range: 1-6.5 days), with 48.7% of events occurring within 48 h. Multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrates that a continued intake of antiplatelet drugs (OR: 3.98, 95% CI: 0.89-10.12, p = 0.025) and a flat morphology of the colorectal lesion (OR: 2.98, 95% CI: 1.08-8.01, p = 0.031) were associated with an increased risk for late postprocedural bleeding (>48 h), whereas intraprocedural bleeding was associated with a decreased risk (OR: 0.12, 95% CI: 0.04-0.50, p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Significant postprocedural bleeding can occur up to 18 days after endoscopic resection of colorectal lesions, but was predominantly observed within 48 h. Continued intake of antiplatelet drugs and a flat polyp morphology are associated with risk for late postprocedural bleeding.

Dilemmas in the Clinical Management of pT1 Colorectal Cancer

Implementation of population-based colorectal cancer screening programs has led to increases in the incidence of pT1 colorectal cancer. These incipient invasive cancers have a very good prognosis and can be treated locally, but more than half of these cases are treated with surgery due to the presence of histological high-risk criteria. These high-risk criteria are suboptimal, with no consensus among clinical guidelines, heterogeneity in definitions and assessment, and poor concordance in evaluation, and recent evidence suggests that some of these criteria considered high risk might not necessarily affect individual prognosis. Current criteria classify most patients as high risk with an indication for additional surgery, but only 2-10.5% have lymph node metastasis, and the residual tumor is present in less than 20%, leading to overtreatment. Patients with pT1 colorectal cancer have excellent disease-free survival, and recent evidence indicates that the type of treatment, whether endoscopic or surgical, does not significantly impact prognosis. As a result, the protective role of surgery is questionable. Moreover, surgery is a more aggressive treatment option, with the potential for higher morbidity and mortality rates. This article presents a comprehensive review of recent evidence on the clinical management of pT1 colorectal cancer. The review analyzes the limitations of histological evaluation, the prognostic implications of histological risk status and the treatment performed, the adverse effects associated with both endoscopic and surgical treatments, and new advances in endoscopic treatment.

Efficacy and safety of cold snare polypectomy for sessile serrated polyps ≥ 10 mm: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Cold snare polypectomy (CSP) is a promising technique for the removal of sessile serrated polyps (SSPs) ≥ 10 mm. However, the efficacy and safety of this technique remain undetermined.

AIMS

We aimed to comprehensively evaluate the efficacy and safety of CSP for SSPs ≥ 10 mm.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane Library were searched up to January 2021.

RESULTS

A total of 10 studies consisting of 1727 SSPs (range, 10-40 mm) from 1021 patients were included. The overall rates of technical success, adverse events (AEs) and residual SSPs were 100%, 0.7% and 2.9%, respectively. Subgroup analysis showed that the rates of technical success and AEs were comparable between CSP and cold endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) (99.9% vs. 100% and 1.3% vs. 0.5%, respectively), between the proximal and distal colon (100% vs. 99.9% and 0.3% vs. 0, respectively), and between polyps of 10-19 mm and ≥20 mm (99.8% vs. 100% and 0.9% vs. 0, respectively). However, subgroup analysis showed that the rate of residual SSPs was slightly lower in CSP compared with cold EMR (1.3% vs. 3.9%), as well as in polyps of 10-19 mm compared with those ≥20 mm (3.1% vs. 4.7%).

CONCLUSION

CSP was an effective and safe technique for removing SSPs ≥ 10 mm.

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.

Risk Stratification of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection in Colon Tumors

Background: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a technique proven effective in the treatment of early neoplastic lesions in the gastrointestinal tract. However, in the case of colon lesions, many doubts remain. The purpose of our study is to stratify the success rates of the ESD procedure in the colon. Materials and Methods: A retrospective analysis of 601 patients who underwent ESD procedure for colorectal neoplasm from 2016 to 2019 in Center of Bowel Treatment, Brzeziny, Poland. Excluding 335 rectal neoplasms, we selected 266 patients with lesions located in the colon. Results: Lesions located in the left colon were characterized by the statistically higher en bloc resection and success rate, compared with the right colon—87.76% vs. 73.95% (p = 0.004) and 83.67% vs. 69.75% (p = 0.007), respectively. The success rate was significantly lower in lesions with submucosal cancer, compared to low- and high-grade dysplasia (p < 0.001). Polyps located in the right colon were characterized by a slightly higher complication rate compared to the left colon, without statistical significance—13.45% vs. 9.52% (p = 0.315). Conclusions: Our results show that colonic ESD has a high success rate, especially in the left colon, with a low risk of complications, slightly higher than in the right colon.

Current endoscopic closure techniques for the management of gastrointestinal perforations

Acute gastrointestinal perforations occur either from spontaneous or iatrogenic causes. However, particular attention should be made in acute iatrogenic perforations as timely diagnosis and endoscopic closure prevent morbidity and mortality. With the increasing use of diagnostic endoscopy and advances in therapeutic endoscopy worldwide, the endoscopist must be able to recognize and manage perforations. Depending on the size and location of the defect, a variety of endoscopic clips, stents, and suturing devices are available. This review aims to prepare and guide the endoscopist to use the right tools and techniques for optimal patient outcomes.

Endoscopic Management of Complex Colorectal Polyps: Current Insights and Future Trends

Most colorectal cancers arise from adenomatous polyps and sessile serrated lesions. Screening colonoscopy and therapeutic polypectomy can potentially reduce colorectal cancer burden by early detection and removal of these polyps, thus decreasing colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. Most endoscopists are skilled in detecting and removing the vast majority of polyps endoscopically during a routine colonoscopy. Polyps can be considered “complex” based on size, location, morphology, underlying scar tissue, which are not amenable to removal by conventional endoscopic polypectomy techniques. They are technically more challenging to resect and carry an increased risk of complications. Most of these polyps were used to be managed by surgical intervention in the past. Rapid advancement in endoscopic resection techniques has led to a decreasing role of surgery in managing these complex polyps. These endoscopic resection techniques do require an expert in the field and advanced equipment to perform the procedure. In this review, we discuss various advanced endoscopic techniques for the management of complex polyps.

Endoscopic Mucosal Resection in Children

OBJECTIVES

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for removal of large polyps is well established in adults. EMR technique in the pediatric population is less utilized due to lower incidence of large intestinal polyps in pediatric patients and limited EMR training for pediatric gastroenterologists. The aim of this study is to retrospectively review safety and efficacy of pediatric EMR cases at two large, tertiary referral centers with adult and pediatric EMR expertise.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was conducted at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center and Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center from January 2012 to May 2021. Demographic, clinical, technical and follow up data were collected for patients <18 years of age who underwent EMR during the study period.

RESULTS

Fifteen pediatric EMR procedures were identified in 11 patients (five male, six female) during the study period. Indication was most frequently rectal bleeding. Polyp size removed ranged from 9 to 60 mm and pathology was consistent with juvenile inflammatory polyps in six patients. Technical success was achieved in 14 of 15 (93%) of EMRs with clinical success (desired clinical outcome) in all 13 procedures with clinical follow-up. There were no adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

This study identifies a case series of pediatric patients who underwent EMR at two tertiary care centers. This series demonstrates successful EMR in children and shows a high technical and clinical success rate with a low complication rate. More investigation into EMR in pediatric patients is necessary, and its use should be isolated to centers with endoscopists with specific experience in EMR techniques.

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.

Efficacy of cyanoacrylate in the prevention of delayed bleeding after endoscopic mucosal resection of large colorectal polyps: a pilot study

BACKGROUND

Postoperative bleeding is a common complication after endoscopic polypectomy, particularly after endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of large non-pedunculated polyps, despite prophylactic clipping can reduce its occurrence. Cyanoacrylate glue has recently been proposed as a useful tool in reducing bleeding in surgery because of its adhesive and haemostatic properties. The aim of this study is to evaluate the usefulness of endoscopic application of a modified cyanoacrylate glue in the prevention of early or delayed post EMR bleeding.

METHODS

This is a pilot study. Inclusion criteria were patients between 18 and 75 years old affected by sessile or flat colonic polyps larger than 2 cm. Patients enrolled in the study were randomized in two groups: group A (EMR) and group B (EMR with the application of 0.3 ml of N-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate + methacryloxysulfolane-Glubran 2®).

RESULTS

Fifteen patients in both group A and B were enrolled. There were no intraoperative complications but haemostatic clipping was necessary in 3 patients in each group because of active bleeding. Delayed (after 24 h) bleeding occurred in two patients (13.3%) in group A requiring hospital readmission and re-do endoscopy with apposition of haemostatic clips. No case of bleeding was recorded in group B (p = 0.48).

CONCLUSION

The results of this pilot study suggest a potential role of local spray application of Glubran®2 in reducing post-procedural bleeding.

Effects of antithrombotic agents on post-operative bleeding after endoscopic resection of gastrointestinal neoplasms and polyps: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There are some studies investigating the relationship between antithrombotic medication and postoperative bleeding after endoscopic resection (ER) with controversial results. 

AIM

To perform a meta-analysis evaluating the effects of antithrombotic therapy on postoperative bleeding after ER.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted on PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to evaluate the quality of studies. Stata 12.0 was used for statistical analysis. The odds ratio (OR) and 95%CI were calculated and heterogeneity was quantified using Cochran’s Q test and I².

RESULTS

Total 66 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Pooled data suggested that antithrombotic therapy was significantly associated with postoperative bleeding (OR = 2.302, 95%CI: 2.057-2.577, P = 0.000) after ER. The risk of postoperative bleeding after endoscopic submucosal dissection, endoscopic mucosal resection and polypectomy in the antithrombotic group was higher than the non-antithrombotic group (OR = 2.439, 95%CI: 1.916-3.105; OR = 2.688, 95%CI: 1.098-6.582; OR = 2.112, 95%CI: 1.434-3.112). 

CONCLUSION

The risk of postoperative bleeding after ER correlated with the types and management of antithrombotic agents by our meta-analysis.

Efficacy and Safety of Endoscopic Resection of Sessile Serrated Polyps 10 mm or Larger: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The best method for endoscopic resection of sessile serrated polyps (SSP) 10 mm or larger is unclear; studies report variable outcomes in comparison to conventional adenomas. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of resection of SSPs 10 mm or larger in size.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed/MEDLINE, Google Scholar, Embase, and Cochrane databases for studies reporting data on endoscopic resection of SSPs 10 mm or larger, through May 31st, 2019. The primary outcome was rate of residual SSP, which was the rate of residual SSP found at the polypectomy site during the first follow-up colonoscopy. Secondary outcomes were: technical success (rate of complete macroscopic resection), R0 resection rate (complete histological resection with absence of any polyp tissue at the lateral and deep margins after en-bloc resection), and adverse events (immediate or delayed bleeding and perforation). We performed IQR,group analyses for outcomes based on polyp size and resection techniques. Pooled proportion rates (%) or odds ratio with 95% CIs with heterogeneity (I²) and P < .05.

RESULTS

A total of 14 studies met the inclusion criteria: 911 patients (50.2% male; mean age, 62.8 ± 4.9 years) who underwent resection of 1137 SSPs (574 SSPs ≥ 20 mm) with a median polyp size of 19.4 mm (interquartile range, 15.9-29.6 mm). Follow-up information was available for 832 SSPs with a median follow-up duration of 12 months (interquartile range, 6-22.5 months). Piecemeal resection was performed in 58.5% SSPs. The pooled residual SSP rate was 4.3% (95% CI, 2%-6.5%). There was a higher residual SSP rate for polyps ≥ 20 mm compared to 10-19 mm (5.9% vs 1.2%; odds ratio, 3.02; 95% CI, 1-9.2; P = .049). Cold endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) had significantly lower rates of delayed bleeding (0 vs 2.3%; P = .03) and residual polyp rate (0.9% vs 5%; P=.01) compared to hot EMR, based on univariate analysis. In multi-variate analysis there was no difference in residual polyp rate. There was no significant difference in other outcomes based on the size or method of resection.

CONCLUSIONS

In a systematic review and meta-analysis, we found that SSPs ≥ 10 mm can be safely resected with low residual polyp rates. Polyp size ≥ 20 mm is a significant factor for residual polyp. Compared to hot EMR, cold EMR is associated with a lower rate of delayed bleeding. Randomized controlled trials comparing hot and cold resection are needed to standardize techniques and optimize outcomes.

Underwater versus conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for small size non-pedunculated colorectal polyps: a randomized controlled trial : (UEMR vs. CEMR for small size non-pedunculated colorectal polyps)

BACKGROUND

Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) is a recently developed technique and can be performed during water-aided or ordinary colonoscopy for the treatment of colorectal polyps. The objective of this clinical trial was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of UEMR in comparison with conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (CEMR) of small non-pedunculated colorectal polyps.

METHODS

Patients with small size, non-pedunculated colorectal polyps (4-9 mm in size) who underwent colonoscopic polypectomy were enrolled in this multicenter randomized controlled clinical trial. The patients were randomly allocated to two groups, an UEMR group and a CEMR group. Efficacy and safety were compared between groups.

RESULTS

In the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis, the complete resection rate was 83.1% (59/71) in the UEMR group and 87.3% (62/71) in the CEMR group. The en-bloc resection rate was 94.4% (67/71) in the UEMR group and 91.5% (65/71) in the CEMR group (difference 2.9%; 90% CI - 4.2 to 9.9%), showed noninferiority (noninferiority margin - 5.7% < - 4.2%). No significant difference in procedure time (81 s vs. 72 s, P = 0.183) was observed. Early bleeding was observed in 1.4% of patients in the CEMR group (1/71) and 1.4% of patients in the UEMR group (1/71). None of the patients in the UEMR group complained of postprocedural bloody stool, whereas two patients in the CEMR group (2/64) reported this adverse event.

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that UEMR is safer and just as effective as CEMR in En-bloc resection for the treatment of small colorectal polyps as such, UEMR is recommended as an alternative approach to excising small and non-pedunculated colorectal adenomatous polyps.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trials.gov, NCT03833492 . Retrospectively registered on February 7, 2019.

Colon mucosal neoplasia referred for endoscopic mucosal resection: Recurrence of adenomas and prediction of submucosal invasion

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is an effective and minimally invasive alternative to surgery for large polyps and laterally spreading lesions. Gross morphology and surface characteristics may help predict submucosal invasion of the lesion (SMIL) during endoscopic evaluation. This is one of the largest single-center studies reporting endoscopic mucosal resection for larger (≥ 20 mm) colorectal lesions in the United States.

AIM

To determine the recurrence rate of adenomas and endoscopic features that may predict submucosal invasion of colonic mucosal neoplasia.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study of all the patients referred for endoscopic mucosal resection for lesions ≥ 20 mm, spanning a period from January 2013 to February 2017. The main outcome measure was identifying features that may predict submucosal invasion of mucosal lesions and predict recurrence of adenomas on follow-up surveillance colonoscopy performed at 4-6 mo.

RESULTS

A total of 480 patients with 500 lesions were included in the study. The median age was 68 (Inter quantile range: 14) with 52% males. The most common lesion location was ascending colon (161; 32%). Paris classification 0-IIa (Flat elevation of mucosa - 316; 63.2%); Kudo Pit Pattern IIIs (192; 38%) and Granular surface morphology (260; 52%) were most prevalent. Submucosal invasion was present in 23 (4.6%) out of 500 lesions. The independent risk factors for SMIL were Kudo Pit Pattern IIIL + IV and V (Odds ratio: 4.5; P value < 0.004) and Paris classification 0-IIc (Odds ratio: 18.2; P value < 0.01). Out of 500, 354 post-endoscopic mucosal resection scars were examined at surveillance colonoscopy. Recurrence was noted in 21.8% (77 cases).

CONCLUSION

There was overall low prevalence of SMIL in our study. Kudo pit pattern (IIIL + IV and V) and Paris classification 0-IIc were the only factors identified as an independent risk factor for submucosal invasion. The independent risk factor for recurrence was adenoma size (> 40 mm). Almost all recurrences (98.8%) were treated endoscopically.

Outcomes and adverse factors for endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of colorectal polyps in elderly patients

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is an invaluable technique, however it is associated with significant risks. In the elderly in particular, the long-term survival benefits of polyp resection with EMR are unknown. The aim of this study was to determine the long-term outcomes in elderly patients who had undergone EMR and to identify any adverse factors.

METHOD

A retrospective observational study on patients of 75 years of age or greater, who underwent EMR of colorectal polyps, in a single tertiary centre, from 2005 to 2014. Demographics of the patients, including Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), endoscopic and histological data, were reviewed to identify potential factors predicting outcomes.

RESULTS

The patients' median age was 80 years. In total 239 procedures were performed in 206 unique patients. The complication rate was 1.6%. Mean overall survival was 6.7 years with only one patient dying from metastatic colorectal cancer (0.5%) and 49 dying from non-colorectal cancer conditions (24%). Age more than 79 years and CCI more than 2 were independent predictors of significantly shorter survival (p=<0.01). Gender, size of the removed polyps and total number of polyps were not statistically significantly affecting survival. Patients who had more than two colonoscopies were found to have a survival benefit (p=0.02).

CONCLUSION

EMR of colonic polyps is safe even for elderly patients. However, the decision to proceed to complex endoscopic therapy should be individualised considering the patients' age and comorbidities. CCI can help to objectively assess the comorbid state of a patient prior to such decisions.

Periprocedural adverse events after endoscopic resection of T1 colorectal carcinomas

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

In contrast to the adverse event (AE) risk of endoscopic resection (ER) of adenomas, the intra- and postprocedural AE risks of ER of T1 colorectal cancer (CRC) are scarcely reported in the literature. It is unclear whether ER of early CRCs, which grow into the submucosal layer and sometimes show incomplete lifting, is associated with an increased AE risk. We aimed to identify the AE rate after ER of T1 CRCs and to identify the risk factors associated with these AEs.

METHODS

Medical records of patients with T1 CRCs diagnosed between 2000 and 2014 in 15 hospitals in the Netherlands were reviewed. Patients who underwent primary ER were selected. The primary outcome was the occurrence of endoscopy-related AEs. The secondary outcome was the identification of risk factors. Multivariate logistic regression was performed.

RESULTS

Endoscopic AEs occurred in 59 of 1069 (5.5%) patients, among which 37.3% were classified as mild, 59.3% as moderate, and 3.4% as severe. AEs were postprocedural bleeding (n = 40, 3.7%), perforation (n = 13, 1.2%), and postpolypectomy electrocoagulation syndrome (n = 6, 0.6%). No fatal AEs were observed. Independent predictors for AEs were age >70 years (odds ratio, 2.11; 95% confidence interval, 1.12-3.96) and tumor size >20 mm (odds ratio, 2.22; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-4.69).

CONCLUSIONS

In this large multicenter retrospective cohort study, AE rates of ER of T1 CRC (5.5%) are comparable with reported AE rates for adenomas. Larger tumor size and age >70 years are independent predictors for AEs. This study suggests that endoscopic treatment of T1 CRCs is not associated with an increased periprocedural AE risk.

Endoscopic mucosal resection with anchoring of the snare tip: multicenter retrospective evaluation of effectiveness and safety

Background  Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) with snare is the recommended technique to resect non-invasive colorectal neoplastic lesions between 10 and 30 mm in diameter. The objective of EMR is to resect completely the neoplastic tissue en bloc and preferably with free margins (R0), avoiding recurrences. Anchoring the tip of the snare in the submucosa is a technical trick that allows snare sliding to be reduced and larger pieces to be caught. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of anchoring-EMR (A-EMR). Methods  This was a retrospective analysis of A-EMR procedures for lesions of diameter between 10 and 30 mm (endoscopic evaluation) performed consecutively in four French centers between May 2017 and January 2018. A-EMR was routinely performed for all EMR using Olympus conventional snares (10 or 25 mm). The primary outcome was evaluation of the proportion of R0 resections. Results  A total of 141 A-EMR procedures were performed by 10 operators. Mean lesion size was 19.8 mm. Anchoring was feasible in 96.5 % of cases. There were 81.6 % en bloc resections and 70.2 % R0 resections, with the percentage of procedures decreasing with increasing lesion size (82.8 % < 20 mm, 55.3 % 21 - 30 mm, and 50.0 % > 30 mm, P  = 0.002). Complete perforations closed endoscopically occurred in 3/141 cases (2.1 %); none occurred in lesions < 20 mm in size (0 /87). Conclusion  The A-EMR technique appears to be promising with a high proportion of R0 for lesions of 10 - 20 mm in size without any perforations. It could also offer an alternative to endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), or to hybrid techniques to reach R0 for lesions between 20 and 30 mm in size.

Cold snare endoscopic resection of nonpedunculated colorectal polyps larger than 10 mm: a systematic review and pooled-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Hot snare polypectomy and EMR are the standard of care in resecting colorectal polyps ≥10 mm. To avoid the risk of electrocautery-induced damage, there is recent evidence about using cold snare polypectomy and cold EMR for such lesions. The aim of this pooled analysis is to report outcomes of cold snare resection for polyps ≥10 mm.

METHODS

PubMed/Medline, Embase, Google Scholar, and Cochrane databases were searched up to July 2018 to identify studies that performed cold snare resection for colorectal polyps ≥10 mm. Primary outcomes were adverse events (bleeding, perforation, and postpolypectomy abdominal pain), and secondary outcomes were the rates of complete resection, overall residual polyp rates, and rates for adenomas versus sessile serrated polyps (SSPs). Subgroup analysis was performed focusing on lesion size, location, and resection technique.

RESULTS

Eight studies were included in the final analysis that included 522 colorectal polyps with a mean polyp size of 17.5 mm (range, 10-60). The overall adverse event rate was 1.1% (95% confidence interval, CI, 0.2%-2.0%; I² = 0%). Intra- and postprocedural bleeding rates were .7% (95% CI, 0%-1.4%) and .5% (95% CI, .1%-1.2%), respectively, with abdominal pain rate being .6% (95% CI, .1%-1.3%). Polyps ≥20 mm had a higher intraprocedural bleeding rate of 1.3% (95% CI, .7%-3.3%) and abdominal pain rate of 1.2% (95% CI, .7%-3.0%) but no delayed bleedings. No perforations were reported. The complete resection rate was 99.3% (95% CI, 98.6%-100%). Overall pooled residual rates of polyps of any histology, adenomas, and SSPs were 4.1% (95% CI, .2%-8.4%), 11.1% (95% CI, 4.1%-18.1%), and 1.0% (95% CI, .4%-2.4%), respectively, during a follow-up period ranging from 154 to 258 days.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this systematic review and pooled analysis were excellent with cold snare resection of colorectal polyps >10 mm in terms of postpolypectomy bleeding, complete resection, and residual polyp rates. Randomized controlled trials comparing cold snare resection with hot snare resections of polyps ≥10 mm are required for further investigation.

Quality of life and fear of cancer recurrence in T1 colorectal cancer patients treated with endoscopic or surgical tumor resection

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

To optimize therapeutic decision-making in early invasive colorectal cancer (T1 CRC) patients, it is important to elicit the patient's perspective next to considering medical outcome. Because empirical data on patient-reported impact of different treatment options are lacking, we evaluated patients' quality of life, perceived time to recovery, and fear of cancer recurrence after endoscopic or surgical treatment for T1 CRC.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, we selected patients with histologically confirmed T1 CRC who participated in the Dutch Bowel Cancer Screening Programme and received endoscopic or surgical treatment between January 2014 and July 2017. Quality of life was measured using the European Organization for Research and Treatment 30-item Core Quality of Life Questionnaire and the 5-level EuroQoL 5-dimension questionnaire. We used the Cancer Worry Scale (CWS) to evaluate patients' fear of cancer recurrence. A question on perceived time to recovery after treatment was also included in the set of questionnaires sent to patients.

RESULTS

Of all 119 eligible patients, 92.4% responded to the questionnaire (endoscopy group, 55/62; surgery group, 55/57). Compared with the surgery group, perceived time to recovery was on average 3 months shorter in endoscopically treated patients after adjustment for confounders (19.9 days vs 111.3 days; P = .001). The 2 treatment groups were comparable with regard to global quality of life, functioning domains, and symptom severity scores. Moreover, patients in the endoscopy group did not report more fear of cancer recurrence than those in the surgery group (CWS score, 0-40; endoscopy 7.6 vs surgery 9.7; P = .140).

CONCLUSIONS

From the patient's perspective, endoscopic treatment provides a quicker recovery than surgery, without provoking more fear of cancer recurrence or any deterioration in quality of life. These results contribute to the shared therapeutic decision-making process of clinicians and T1 CRC patients.