Endoscopic excision of synchronous large bowel polyps in the presence of colorectal carcinoma: is the fear of malignant cell implantation justified? A systematic review of the literature

Risk of metachronous colorectal cancer associated with polypectomy during endoscopic diagnosis of colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND AND AIM

There are conflicting reports regarding the risk of metachronous colorectal cancer (CRC) subsequent to colonoscopy with polypectomy or biopsy performed concurrently with diagnostic biopsies for CRC. We aimed to establish the 5-year risk of CRC in patients who had synchronous polypectomy or biopsies during the colonoscopy at which CRC was diagnosed.

METHODS

This is a single-centre retrospective case-control study of adults who underwent surgical resection for CRC over a 2-year period (January 2016 to December 2017). Colonoscopy details of interest were the location of the CRC, polypectomy and non-CRC biopsy sites. In patients with CRC at index colonoscopy, we sought associations between the occurrence of metachronous CRC and the sites from which endoscopic specimens had been obtained.

RESULTS

Our study population comprised 225 patients with a median (IQR) age of 71 (60-77) years. Polypectomy or biopsy at a non-CRC site had been performed during the index colonoscopy in 108 patients (48%), including 83 (37%) polypectomies outside the surgical resection field. There were 8 (3.6%) metachronous CRCs: 1 (0.4%) at the site of endoscopic mucosal resection for a 15-mm sessile serrated lesion, 3 (1.3%) anastomotic site CRCs and 4 (1.8%) at other sites within the colon. There was no significant difference in the prevalence of metachronous CRC in patients who underwent polypectomy/biopsy at the index colonoscopy compared with those who did not (1.9% vs. 5.1%, p = 0.283).

CONCLUSION

There was no significant increased risk of metachronous CRC subsequent to synchronous polypectomy or biopsy during the colonoscopy at which CRC was diagnosed.

Biopsy of Non-tumor Sites After Biopsy of a Colorectal Cancer is not Associated With Metachronous Cancers: A Case-control Study

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Recent research has demonstrated biologic plausibility for iatrogenic tumor seeding via colonoscopy as a cause of metachronous colorectal cancers (CRC). This study evaluated the association between biopsy of non-tumor sites after CRC biopsy and risk of metachronous CRC in a large community-based health care organization.

METHODS

This was a retrospective case-control study of adults with an initial CRC diagnosed by colonoscopy between January 2006 and June 2018 who underwent curative resection. Cases developed a second primary (metachronous) CRC diagnosed 6 months to 4 years after the initial CRC, and were matched by age, sex, diagnosis of inflammatory bowel disease, race, and ethnicity with up to 5 controls without a second CRC diagnosis. The exposure was biopsy in the colonic segment of the metachronous CRC (or corresponding segment in controls) after tumor biopsy, ascertained with blinding to case status. Associations were evaluated using conditional logistic regression and adjusted for potential cofounders.

RESULTS

Among 14,119 patients diagnosed with an initial CRC during colonoscopy, 107 received a second CRC diagnosis. After exclusions for recurrent or synchronous CRC, 45 cases and 212 controls were included. There was no significant association between biopsy of non-tumor sites after initial CRC biopsy and risk of metachronous CRC in the segment of the additional biopsy site (adjusted odds ratio, 2.29; 95% confidence interval, 0.77-6.81).

CONCLUSIONS

Metachronous cancers are not significantly associated with biopsy of non-tumor sites after biopsy of the primary cancer. Although the sample size does not allow definite exclusion of any association, these findings do not support iatrogenic tumor seeding as a common risk factor for metachronous CRC.

Implantation metastasis from sigmoid colon cancer to rectal anastomosis proved by whole exome sequencing and lineage inference for cancer heterogeneity and evolution analysis: Case report and literature review

It was estimated that 70% of patients with colorectal cancer were found to have viable exfoliated malignant cells in adjacent intestinal lumen. Exfoliated malignant cells had been reported to implant on raw surfaces, such as polypectomy site, anal fissure, anal fistula, hemorrhoidectomy wound, and anastomotic suture line. Tumors at anastomosis could be classified into four groups: local recurrence, local manifestation of widespread metastasis, metachronous carcinogenesis, and implantation metastasis. However, all of the previous studies only reported the phenomena of implantation metastasis at anastomosis. No study had proved the origin of anastomotic metastasis by genomic analysis. In this study, a 43-year-old woman presented with persistent hematochezia was diagnosed as having severe mixed hemorrhoids. She was treated by procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids (PPH), without receiving preoperative colonoscopy. Two months later, she was found to have sigmoid colon cancer by colonoscopy due to continuous hematochezia and received radical sigmoidectomy. Postoperative histological examination confirmed the lesion to be a moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma (pT3N1M0). Six months later, she presented with hematochezia again and colonoscopy revealed two tumors at the rectal anastomosis of PPH. Both tumors were confirmed to be moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma without lymph node and distant metastasis and were finally removed by transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM). Pathological examination, whole exome sequencing (WES), and Lineage Inference for Cancer Heterogeneity and Evolution (LICHeE) analysis demonstrated that the two tumors at the rectal anastomosis were probably implantation metastases arising from the previous sigmoid colon cancer. This is the first study to prove implantation metastasis from colon cancer to a distal anastomosis by WES and LICHeE analysis. Therefore, it is recommended to rule out colorectal cancer in proximal large bowel before performing surgery with a rectal anastomosis, such as PPH and anterior resection. For patients with a suspected implanted tumor, WES and LICHeE could be used to differentiate implantation metastasis from metachronous carcinogenesis.

Detection methods of synchronous colorectal lesions in proximal colon for patients with obstructive colorectal cancer: a literature review

INTRODUCTION

Colorectal cancer holds a high morbidity and mortality rate. As a common method for colorectal cancer detection, colonoscopy has difficulty in passing through the malignant stenosis in patients with obstructive colorectal cancer, which results in incomplete detection and missed diagnosis. The missed synchronous lesions increase the risk of metachronous cancer. Therefore, detecting proximal synchronous lesions in patients with obstructive colorectal cancer should be appreciated before operation.

AREA COVERED

This review evaluates related literature, aiming at providing clinicians with more ideas and attention for detecting proximal synchronous lesions in patients with obstructive colorectal cancer.

EXPERT OPINION

In patients with obstructive colorectal cancer, missed diagnosis of lesions proximal to the obstruction may lead to metachronous colorectal cancer. Except for preoperative colonoscopy which is difficult to pass through malignant stenosis, other methods that can evaluate proximal colon segment are critical. This article introduced several preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative measures for synchronous lesions detection. The choice of methods should base on patients' conditions, aiming at a high diagnostic yield and low risk. Early detection and resection of synchronous lesions in the proximal section of malignant obstruction are expected to minimize the risk of metachronous colorectal cancer and even effect follow-up treatment strategy, which deserves the attention of clinicians.

Filiform polyposis with sigmoid colon adenocarcinoma: a case report

Background

Filiform polyposis is a rare form of inflammatory polyposis, which is occasionally formed in the colon of patients with history of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). It is characterized by presence of several to hundreds of slender, worm-like polyps in the colon lined by histologically normal colonic mucosa and often coalesce, resulting in a tumor-like mass. Filiform polyposis is most frequently associated with a post-inflammatory reparative process in patients with IBD history, and only cases of filiform polyposis occurring in patients without IBD history have been reported. Filiform polyposis has been considered as a benign inflammatory polyposis without any risk of dysplasia, while the possibility of carcinogenesis of inflammatory polyps is not fully excluded. To date, only three cases of filiform polyposis coexisting with dysplasia have been reported.

Case presentation

A 59-year-old male patient with no past medical history of IBD underwent laparoscopic sigmoidectomy for obstructive filiform polyposis, which was associated with sigmoid colon adenocarcinoma. Based on the histological findings of the resected specimen, invasive sigmoid colon adenocarcinoma was surrounded by filiform polyposis, and adenocarcinoma also scattered uniformly on the surface of filiform polyposis. In immunohistochemistry, abnormal p53 expression was observed in adenocarcinoma, while it was not shown in mucosa on filiform polyposis.

Conclusions

This is the fourth case of filiform polyposis that is closely associated with colon dysplasia or adenocarcinoma based on histological findings. However, immunohistochemical findings did not support the theory that inflammation initiates adenocarcinoma in filiform polyposis like IBD. Hence, further immunohistochemical and genetic analyses are needed to clarify the association between filiform polyposis and carcinogenesis.

Tumor Seeding During Colonoscopy as a Possible Cause for Metachronous Colorectal Cancer

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

In patients who have undergone surgery for colorectal cancer (CRC), 3% have recurrence of (metachronous) CRC. We investigated whether tumor seeding during colonoscopy (iatrogenic implantation of tumor cells in damaged mucosa) increases risk for metachronous CRC.

METHODS

In a proof of principle study, we collected data from the Dutch National Pathology Registry for patients with a diagnosis of CRC from 2013 through 2015, with a second diagnosis of CRC within 6 months to 3.5 years after surgery. We reviewed pathology reports to identify likely metachronous CRC (histologically proven adenocarcinoma located elsewhere in the colon or rectum from the surgical anastomosis). For 22 patients fulfilling the inclusion criteria, we ascribed the most likely etiology to tumor seeding when endoscopic manipulations, such as biopsies or polypectomy, occurred at the location where the metachronous tumor was subsequently detected, after endoscopic manipulation of the primary tumor. We collected clinical data from patients and compared molecular profiles of the primary and metachronous colorectal tumors using next-generation sequencing. We then examined the source of seeded tumor. We tested whether tumor cells stay behind in the working channel of the endoscope after biopsies of colorectal tumors, and whether these cells maintain viability in organoid cultures.

RESULTS

In total, tumor seeding was suspected as the most likely etiology of metachronous CRC in 5 patients. Tumor tissues were available from 3 patients. An identical molecular signature was observed in the primary and metachronous colorectal tumors from all 3 patients. In 5 control cases with a different etiology of metachronous CRC, the molecular signature of the primary and metachronous tumor were completely different. Based on review of 2147 patient records, we estimated the risk of tumor seeding during colonoscopy to be 0.3%-0.6%. We demonstrated that the working channel of the colonoscope becomes contaminated with viable tumor cells during biopsy collection. Subsequent instruments introduced through this working channel also became contaminated. These cells were shown to maintain their proliferative potential.

CONCLUSIONS

In an analysis of primary and secondary tumors from patients with metachronous CRC, we found that primary tumor cells might be seeded in a new location after biopsy of the primary tumor. Although our study does not eliminate other possibilities of transmission, our findings and experiments support the hypothesis that tumor seeding can occur during colonoscopy via the working channel of the endoscope. The possibility of iatrogenic seeding seems low. However, our findings compel awareness on this potentially preventable cause of metachronous CRC.

Synchronous polypectomy during endoscopic diagnosis of colorectal cancer - is the risk of tumour implantation at the polypectomy site significant?

Background

Synchronous polypectomy in colonic malignancies is contentious due to the perceived risks of tumour implantation at polypectomy sites (PS). We assess the risks of tumour implantation after synchronous polypectomy.

Methods

An analysis of all endoscopies for cancer that were accompanied by synchronous polypectomies from 2005 to 2009 was performed. The incidence of metachronous colorectal cancers located at the same segment of a previous PS was the surrogate for tumour implantation. Data on patient demographics, tumour and polyp location(s) and follow-up outcomes were extracted. The rate of metachronous lesions at the same segment of a previous PS between patients who had all synchronous PS resected (Group A) and patients with PS left in-situ (Group B) were compared.

Results

Two hundred and eighty-four patients had synchronous polypectomy performed during their initial endoscopy for cancer. Three patients were lost to follow-up and, in the remaining 281 patients, 87 (31.0%) were in Group A while 194 (69%) were in Group B. Median age, gender, tumour location, tumour stage, and pathological characteristics were similar between both groups. 2 (0.7%) patients developed local recurrences. Six (2.1%) patients developed metachronous lesions, four of which were located at the same segment where synchronous polypectomy was previously performed. The rates of metachronous lesions at the PS in groups A and B were similar at 1.1% (1/87) and 1.5% (3/194), respectively (p = 0.795).

Conclusion

Malignant implantation after synchronous polypectomy in the setting of a newly diagnosed cancer remains unproven. Even if tumor implantation did occur, the incidence is likely low.