Endoscopic Approach for Superficial Colorectal Neoplasms

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.

Communication in decision aids for stage I-III colorectal cancer patients: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To assess the communicative quality of colorectal cancer patient decision aids (DAs) about treatment options, the current systematic review was conducted.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

DAs (published between 2006 and 2019) were identified through academic literature (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and PsycINFO) and online sources.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

DAs were only included if they supported the decision-making process of patients with colon, rectal or colorectal cancer in stages I-III.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

After the search strategy was adapted from similar systematic reviews and checked by a colorectal cancer surgeon, two independent reviewers screened and selected the articles. After initial screening, disagreements were resolved with a third reviewer. The review was conducted in concordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. DAs were assessed using the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) and Communicative Aspects (CA) checklist.

RESULTS

In total, 18 DAs were selected. Both the IPDAS and CA checklist revealed that there was a lot of variation in the (communicative) quality of DAs. The findings highlight that (1) personalisation of treatment information in DAs is lacking, (2) outcome probability information is mostly communicated verbally and (3) information in DAs is generally biased towards a specific treatment. Additionally, (4) DAs about colorectal cancer are lengthy and (5) many DAs are not written in plain language.

CONCLUSIONS

Both instruments (IPDAS and CA) revealed great variation in the (communicative) quality of colorectal cancer DAs. Developers of patient DAs should focus on personalisation techniques and could use both the IPDAS and CA checklist in the developmental process to ensure personalised health communication and facilitate shared decision making in clinical practice.

Endoscopic full-thickness resection of early colorectal neoplasms using an endoscopic submucosal dissection knife: a retrospective multicenter study

Background and study aims  Endoscopic full-thickness resection allows resection of early gastrointestinal neoplasms not amenable to conventional endoscopic resection techniques, due to their location, presence of submucosal fibrosis, or suspected deep mural invasion. It is typically achieved using a dedicated over-the-scope device (full-thickness resection device or FTRD). The aim of our study was to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and clinical outcomes of endoscopic full-thickness resection using an endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) knife. Patients and methods  Consecutive patients who underwent full-thickness endoscopic resection at six tertiary care centers from August 2010 to June 2017 were retrospectively included. We conducted a comparative analysis of patient characteristics, technical success, adverse events, and time to discharge between patients treated by a full-thickness resection using an ESD knife. Results  Twenty-one procedures were performed using an ESD knife. En-bloc resection and R0 resection rates were 95.2 % and 65 %, respectively. Clinical symptoms of perforation occurred in 66.7 %. There was no need for surgery or additional endoscopic procedures. Conclusion  Endoscopic full-thickness resection of early colorectal neoplasms using an ESD knife might be feasible and safe. It allows complete resection of lesions with no limitation in size. The technique may be preferable to an other-the-scope resection device in lesions larger than 20 mm, and to surgery in selected cases of low-risk T1 colorectal carcinomas, non-lifting adenomas, submucosal tumors, or technically challenging lesion locations.

Risk factors associated with clinical outcomes of endoscopic mucosal resection for colorectal laterally spreading tumors: A Honam Association for the Study of Intestinal Diseases (HASID) multicenter study

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Colorectal laterally spreading tumors (LSTs) are large and superficial neoplasms. Most are adenomatous lesions. Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is a standard technique of removing precursor colorectal lesions. The aim of the present study was to assess the factors associated with the clinical outcomes of EMR for LSTs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 275 patients with LSTs who underwent EMR were enrolled in the study. The clinical outcomes of the patients were analyzed by retrospectively reviewing their medical records.

RESULTS

The en bloc resection and R0 resection rates were 86.9% and 80.4%, respectively. The bleeding and perforation rates were 7.6% and 0.4%, respectively. The frequency of high-grade dysplasia and adenocarcinoma histology was significantly higher, and the procedure time was significantly longer in LSTs >20 mm than in those ≤20 mm. The R0 resection rate was significantly higher in LSTs ≤20 mm than in those >20 mm. The frequency of piecemeal resection was significantly higher in LSTs with an adenomatous and cancerous pit pattern than in those with a non-neoplastic pit pattern. The frequency of piecemeal resection was significantly higher in LSTs with adenocarcinoma than in those with low-grade dysplasia. Multivariate analysis revealed that adenomatous pit pattern, high-grade dysplasia, or adenocarcinoma was a significant independent risk factor of LSTs for piecemeal resection after EMR.

CONCLUSION

EMR is useful for treating ≤20 mm LSTs with regard to curative resection and procedure time. LSTs with an adenomatous pit pattern, high-grade dysplasia, or adenocarcinoma are significant independent risk factors for piecemeal resection after EMR.

Effect of Preceding Biopsy on the Results of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Colorectal Laterally Spreading Tumor

BACKGROUND

Forceps biopsies are usually performed before endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for colonic laterally spreading tumors (LSTs). However, preceding biopsy is commonly believed to possibly inhibit complete tumor resection by causing blurring of tumor borders and tissue fibrosis.

AIMS

The aims were to investigate whether the preceding biopsy of colorectal LST affects the complete endoscopic tumor resection and increases the risk of complications.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients with colorectal LSTs who underwent ESD at our center during an 8-year period. Patients were divided into two groups according to whether they underwent biopsy of the tumor before ESD. In addition, the characteristics of patients and tumors, including the completeness of tumor resection, were investigated.

RESULTS

Of 288 patients (174 men) enrolled in this study, 194 (67.4%, preceding biopsy group) underwent biopsies before ESD, whereas 94 (32.6%, no biopsy group) did not. There were no significant differences in age, sex, comorbidity, medication history, tumor location, and final pathologic result between both groups. Tumor size was larger (p = 0.002) and LST-G tumor was more common (p = 0.003) in the preceding biopsy group than in the no biopsy group. No significant difference was seen in ESD outcomes, including procedure time, hospitalization period, incidence of complications, en bloc resection rate, resection margin status, and incidence of surgical operation, between both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Biopsy of LST is commonly performed before endoscopic resection. Contrary to popular belief, it does not increase the incomplete tumor resection rate and incidence of complications.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

KCT0002321.

Clinicopathological feature and treatment outcome of patients with colorectal laterally spreading tumors treated by endoscopic submucosal dissection

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is an advanced technique that can be used to treat precancerous and early colorectal neoplasms by facilitating en bloc resection regardless of tumor size. In our study, we investigated the clinicopathological feature and the treatment outcome of patients with colorectal laterally spreading tumors (LSTs) that were treated by ESD.

METHODS

The study enrolled all of 210 patients with colorectal LSTs who underwent ESD. Clinical outcomes were analyzed by retrospectively reviewing medical records.

RESULTS

A cancerous pit pattern (Vi/Vn) was more common in pseudo-depressed (PD) subtype than in flat elevated (FE) subtype. The incidence of adenocarcinoma in the PD subtype and nodular mixed (NM) subtypes was significantly higher than in the homogenous (HG) subtype and FE subtype. The en bloc and R0 resection rates were 89.0% and 85.7%, respectively. The bleeding and perforation rates were 5.2% and 1.9%, respectively. The mean procedure time was much longer in the PD subtype than in the FE subtype. The en bloc resection rate was significantly higher in the NM subtype than in the HG subtype. However, there were no statistically significant differences in mean procedure time, en bloc resection rate, R0 resection rate, bleeding rate, or perforation rate between LST-granular and LST-nongranular types.

CONCLUSIONS

These results indicate that ESD is acceptable for treating colorectal LSTs concerning en bloc resection, curative resection, and risk of complications. Careful consideration is required for complete resection of the PD subtype and NM subtype because of their higher malignant potential.

Comparison of endoscopic ultrasonography and magnifying endoscopy for assessment of the invasion depth of shallow gastrointestinal neoplasms: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To conduct a meta-analysis to provide accurate evidence regarding the preferred diagnostic method, magnifying endoscopy (ME) or endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), for assessment of the depth of invasion of the gastrointestinal neoplasms.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, Ovid Medline, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched for studies published between January 1946 and October 2016, regarding the use of EUS and ME to assess the invasion depth of gastrointestinal cancers. The quality of diagnostic studies was evaluated using the QUADAS2 instrument. The Meta-DiSc software (version 1.4) was used for meta-analysis of the pooled data regarding the diagnostic accuracy of EUS and ME of the invasion depth of gastrointestinal neoplasms.

RESULTS

Our meta-analysis included the data of 754 patients with gastrointestinal cancers contributed by seven prospective studies. All studies were of high quality (QUADAS2). The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) planes were not observed in shoulder and arm forms for either EUS or ME, with Spearman's correlation coefficients of -0.821 and 0.234 for EUS and ME, respectively. The p values of the diagnostic odds ratio for EUS and ME were 0.0038 and 0.0131, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of EUS for the diagnosis of the depth of invasion of gastrointestinal cancers were 0.75 (95% CI 0.69-0.81) and 0.84 (95% CI 0.79-0.88), respectively. In comparison, the sensitivity and specificity for ME were 0.74 (95% CI 0.67-0.69) and 0.85 (95% CI 0.80-0.89), respectively. The values of area under the summary ROC (SROC) curves for EUS and ME were 0.8499 and 0.8757, respectively, with a non-significant Z value between EUS and MR (0.296 < 1.96).

CONCLUSIONS

Both EUS and ME provide a comparable performance for judging the depth of invasion of gastrointestinal neoplasms. However, there is heterogeneity between studies contributed by non-threshold effects.

Use of confocal laser endomicroscopy with a fluorescently labeled fatty acid to diagnose colorectal neoplasms

Endoscopic treatment for early colorectal cancer closely correlates with patient prognosis. However, endoscopic differentiation between carcinomas and non-neoplastic lesions remains difficult. Here, we topically stained colorectal neoplasms with a fatty acid analogue (BODIPY-FA) and quantified the fluorescent signals using confocal laser endomicroscopy (CLE) and fluorescence microscopy. We also analyzed protein expression in colorectal cancer tissues. We found that expression of fatty acid synthase was elevated, while the expression of fatty acid transporters was reduced in colorectal cancer. In colorectal cancer mouse models and patients, the BODIPY-FA signals were higher in normal epithelia than in carcinomas or colonic intraepithelial neoplasias. BODIPY-FA staining revealed both the arrangement of intestinal glands and the intracellular structures under CLE screening. In a double-blind trial, CLE images stained with BODIPY-FA exhibited greater consistency (κ = 0.68) and overall validity (74.65%) than those stained using intravenous fluorescein sodium (κ = 0.43, 55.88%) when the results were compared with histological diagnoses. These findings suggest that topical use of BODIPY-FA with CLE is a promising imaging approach for early colorectal neoplasm screening.