Endoscopic resection of large sporadic non-ampullary duodenal polyps: efficacy and long-term recurrence

Endoscopic diagnosis and treatment of superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors: A review

The surface of the small bowel mucosa is covered more than any other section of the digestive canal; however, the overall prevalence of small bowel tumors of the whole gastrointestinal tract is evidently low. Owing to the improvement in endoscopic techniques, the prevalence of small bowel tumors has increased across multiple countries, which is mainly due to an increase in duodenal tumors. Superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors (SNADETs) are defined as tumors originating from the non-ampullary region in the duodenum that share similarities and discrepancies with their gastric and colorectal counterparts in the pathogenesis and clinicopathologic characteristics. To date, white light endoscopy (WLE) remains the cornerstone of endoscopic diagnosis for SNADETs. Besides, narrow-band imaging (NBI) techniques and magnifying endoscopy (ME) have been widely used in the clinic and endorsed by multiple guidelines and consensuses for SNADETs' evaluation. Confocal laser endomicroscopy (CLE), endocytoscopy (ECS), and artificial intelligence (AI) are also up-and-coming methods, showing an exceptional value in the diagnosis of SNADETs. Similar to the endoscopic treatment for colorectal polyps, the choices for SNADETs mainly include cold snare polypectomy (CSP), endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), and laparoscopic endoscopic cooperative surgery (LECS). However, owing to the narrow lumen, rich vascularity, weak muscle layer, abundant Brunner's gland, and the hardship of endoscope control, the duodenum ranks as one of the most dangerous operating areas in the digestive tract. Therefore, endoscopists must anticipate the difficulties in endoscopic maneuverability, remain aware of the increased risk of complications, and then select the appropriate treatment according to the advantages and disadvantages of each method.

Long-term outcomes of endoscopic resection for non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors: A single-center experience

BACKGROUND/AIMS

The malignant potential of non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors (NADETs) is lower compared to that of other gastrointestinal epithelial tumors, but it should not be overlooked. Recently, endoscopic resection (ER) has been proposed as an alternative treatment option for NADETs. Therefore, we aimed to analyze the clinical outcomes of ER of NADETs and determine the factors associated with an incomplete resection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective observational study of 54 patients (56 lesions) with NADETs, who underwent ER in the period between October 2006 and March 2016, and analyzed the therapeutic outcomes and procedure-related adverse events.

RESULTS

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) was performed on 41 lesions, and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) was performed on 15 lesions. The en bloc and complete resection rates were 82% (46/56) and 54% (30/56), respectively. Multivariate logistic regression analyses determined that the resection method (EMR: odds ratio 4.356, 95% confidence interval 1.021-18.585, p=0.047) was independently associated with incomplete resection. The procedure-related bleeding and perforation rates were 4% and 5%, respectively. Recurrence of tumor occurred in one of 44 patients during the median follow-up period of 25 months (range: 6-89 months).

CONCLUSION

ER is an effective, safe, and feasible treatment option for NADETs. However, the incomplete resection rate increases when EMR is performed. Nevertheless, given the longer procedure time and the technical difficulty associated with ESD, and the excellent long-term outcomes associated with EMR, EMR of NADETs is appropriate, especially in patients with dysplastic lesions.

Case series of non-ampullary duodenal adenomas

Duodenal adenomas are benign tumours of the duodenum which carry a malignant potential. They are found either sporadically or associated with familial syndromes. Majority of these cases are treated endoscopically but surgical resection is a better alternate to endoscopy in select cases. Endoscopic treatment is associated with higher chances of local recurrence and require frequent check endoscopies in the follow up period, while surgery offers a one-time treatment option. Identification of the ampulla and a duodenal resection sparing ampullary area becomes difficult in larger lesions of the 2nd part of the duodenum. Passage of a catheter from cystic duct through common bile duct to duodenum aids in identification of the ampullary area and is helpful in performing a local/wedge resection of the duodenum containing adenoma without injuring ampullary orifice.

•

Duodenal adenomas carry malignant potential.

•

Found sporadically or with familial syndromes.

•

Surgery offers one time treatment options for larger lesions.

•

Isolating the ampullary orifice through catheterization of the cystic duct is useful.

Current status of endoscopic diagnosis and treatment for superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors

Though superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors (SNADETs) have been traditionally considered rare, there is a growing detection under the development and widespread of endoscopic techniques in recent times. Many case studies have revealed early manifestations of lesions through advanced endoscopic technology, however, because of the low incidence of duodenal tumors and challenges in diagnosing, the preoperative diagnosis criteria have not been established so far. In spite of this, recently the increasing detection rate of early duodenal epithelial lesions enhances the demand for minimally invasive treatment as well. The most suitable therapeutic endoscopic modality to remove duodenal lesions should be selected according to the size, location and histological invasive depth of duodenal lesions. Nevertheless, due to the special anatomical structure of the duodenum, the incidence of complications is much higher than in any other part of the digestive tract. To prevent these adverse events prophylactically, a few novel strategies have been applied effectively after resection. This review describes the current status of preoperative endoscopic diagnosis and endoscopic resection approaches, as well as countermeasures for avoiding procedure-related complications.

Endoscopic management of superficial nonampullary duodenal tumors: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline

1: ESGE recommends that all duodenal adenomas should be considered for endoscopic resection as progression to invasive carcinoma is highly likely.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 2: ESGE recommends performance of a colonoscopy, if that has not yet been done, in cases of duodenal adenoma.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends the use of the cap-assisted method when the location of the minor and/or major papilla and their relationship to a duodenal adenoma is not clearly established during forward-viewing endoscopy.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 4: ESGE recommends the routine use of a side-viewing endoscope when a laterally spreading adenoma with extension to the minor and/or major papilla is suspected.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 5: ESGE suggests cold snare polypectomy for small (< 6 mm in size) nonmalignant duodenal adenomas.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 6: ESGE recommends endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) as the first-line endoscopic resection technique for nonmalignant large nonampullary duodenal adenomas.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 7: ESGE recommends that endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for duodenal adenomas is an effective resection technique only in expert hands.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 8: ESGE recommends using techniques that minimize adverse events such as immediate or delayed bleeding or perforation. These may include piecemeal resection, defect closure techniques, noncontact hemostasis, and other emerging techniques, and these should be considered on a case-by-case basis.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 9: ESGE recommends endoscopic surveillance 3 months after the index treatment. In cases of no recurrence, a further follow-up endoscopy should be done 1 year later. Thereafter, surveillance intervals should be adapted to the lesion site, en bloc resection status, and initial histological result. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.

Parenchymal Sparing Resection: Options in Duodenal and Pancreatic Surgery

Parenchymal sparing duodenal and pancreatic resection are safe procedures in selected patients with the aim to reduce endocrine and exocrine long-term dysfunction. When the tumor is benign or borderline malignant, this appears to be a good option for the surgeon, associated with low rates of severe surgery-related early postoperative complications and low in-hospital mortality. This mini review offers comments, tips and tricks, and a review of literature concerning those different options with specific illustrations in order to clarify their indication.

Endoscopic management of ampullary tumors: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline

1: ESGE recommends against diagnostic/therapeutic papillectomy when adenoma is not proven.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 2: ESGE recommends endoscopic ultrasound and abdominal magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) for staging of ampullary tumors.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends endoscopic papillectomy in patients with ampullary adenoma without intraductal extension, because of good results regarding outcome (technical and clinical success, morbidity, and recurrence).Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 4: ESGE recommends en bloc resection of ampullary adenomas up to 20-30 mm in diameter to achieve R0 resection, for optimizing the complete resection rate, providing optimal histopathology, and reduction of the recurrence rate after endoscopic papillectomy.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 5: ESGE suggests considering surgical treatment of ampullary adenomas when endoscopic resection is not feasible for technical reasons (e. g. diverticulum, size > 4 cm), and in the case of intraductal involvement (of > 20 mm). Surveillance thereafter is still mandatory.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 6: ESGE recommends direct snare resection without submucosal injection for endoscopic papillectomy.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 7: ESGE recommends prophylactic pancreatic duct stenting to reduce the risk of pancreatitis after endoscopic papillectomy.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 8: ESGE recommends long-term monitoring of patients after endoscopic papillectomy or surgical ampullectomy, based on duodenoscopy with biopsies of the scar and of any abnormal area, within the first 3 months, at 6 and 12 months, and thereafter yearly for at least 5 years.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.

Clinical characteristics of non-ampullary duodenal polyps in the elderly and the outcomes of endoscopic mucosal resection

At present, there are no reports on non-ampullary polyps of the duodenum (NAPDs) in the elderly. The aim of this study was to analyze the clinicopathological features of NAPDs in elderly and non-elderly patients to explore the efficacy and safety of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of NAPDs in the elderly.A total of 110 patients underwent EMR of NAPDs between April 2016 and December 2019. The shape, location, size, postoperative complications, and histopathological types of NAPDs were compared between the elderly group (n = 44) and the non-elderly group (n = 66).Sessile type was the most common form of NAPD in both groups. In the elderly group, the average size of NAPDs was 12.6 ± 3.9 mm. In the non-elderly group, NAPDs had an average size of 10.1 ± 5.8 mm. Complete EMR was performed in both groups. The postoperative complications of EMR did not significantly differ between the 2 groups. Postoperative pathological examination showed that tubular villous adenomas were more common in the elderly group than in the non-elderly group (P = .005), while tubular adenomas were more common in the non-elderly group than in the elderly group (P = .007). Of the 110 patients, 99 completed postoperative follow-up (median follow-up duration, 20.93 months). There were no residual or recurrent lesions.EMR is safe and effective for the treatment of NAPDs in elderly patients.

Endoscopic diagnosis and treatment of superficial non-ampullary duodenal tumors

The diagnostic and treatment guidelines of superficial non-ampullary duodenal tumors have not been standardized due to their low prevalence. Previous reports suggested that a superficial adenocarcinoma (SAC) should be treated via local resection because of its low risk of lymph node metastasis, whereas a high-grade adenoma (HGA) should be resected because of its high risk of progression to adenocarcinoma. Therefore, pretreatment diagnosis of SAC or HGA is important to determine the appropriate treatment strategy. There are certain endoscopic features known to be associated with SAC or HGA, and current practice prioritizes the endoscopic and biopsy diagnosis of these conditions. Surgical treatment of these duodenal lesions is often related to high risk of morbidity, and therefore endoscopic resection has become increasingly common in recent years. Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) are the commonly performed endoscopic resection methods. EMR is preferred due to its lower risk of adverse events; however, it has a higher risk of recurrence than ESD. Recently, a new and safer endoscopic procedure that reduces adverse events from EMR or ESD has been reported.

Nonampullary Duodenal Adenomas Rarely Recur after Complete Endoscopic Resection: A Swiss Experience Including a Literature Review

INTRODUCTION

Duodenal polyps and especially duodenal adenomas are a rare and mostly coincidental finding in patients undergoing upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Due to their malignant potential, duodenal adenomas should be removed upon diagnosis. So far, the limited available data on the performance of endoscopic polypectomy show conflicting results with regard to adverse events and the adenoma recurrence rate.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

After summarizing the currently available data, we retrospectively analyzed all patients undergoing endoscopic resection of nonampullary duodenal adenomas (NAD) at our institution between 2006 and 2016.

RESULTS

A total of 78 patients underwent endoscopic polypectomy for NAD adenoma. End-of-treatment success with complete resection requiring a mean of 1.2 interventions was achieved in 91% (n = 71). Procedural hemorrhage occurred in 12.8% (n = 10), whereas delayed bleeding was noted in 9% (n = 7). Duodenal perforation was registered and successfully treated in 2 cases (2.6%). No adenoma recurrence was noted following primary complete adenoma resection after a mean follow-up time of 33 months. Acute post-polypectomy bleeding was statistically significantly associated with large polyp size (p = 0.003) and lack of endoscopic prophylaxis (p = 0.0008). Delayed post-polypectomy bleeding showed a trend in the occurrence of large polyps (p = 0.064), and was statistically significantly associated with familial cancer syndrome (p = 0.019) and advanced histopathology (p = 0.013).

CONCLUSION

Our data suggest that endoscopic polypectomy of NAD is well feasible with high success rates. Procedural and delayed hemorrhage seems to be the primary issue rather than adenoma recurrence. We therefore advocate referral of patients with large NAD to experienced centers for endoscopic resection.

Clinical outcome of EMR of sporadic, nonampullary, duodenal adenomas: a 10-year retrospective

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Sporadic non-ampullary duodenal adenomas (SNADAs), although uncommon, pose clinical challenges. Because SNADAs have malignant potential, endoscopic or surgical resection is generally recommended. EMR is increasingly used for resection of SNADAs, but large-scale data on natural history after EMR are scarce. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the clinical outcome of EMR for SNADAs and the natural history after EMR from a large, single-operator experience with dedicated follow-up.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of patients with SNADAs who were referred for endoscopic therapy from May 2007 to May 2016. Patient demographics, lesion characteristics, and procedural technical data were collected. The outcomes studied were complete endoscopic resection, major adverse events, and recurrence.

RESULTS

A total of 162 patients were referred for endoscopic therapy, and 142 (88%) (median age 67 years, interquartile range [IQR] 57-73 years, 42% male) underwent a total of 166 EMRs with the use of a submucosal injection and thermal snare resection technique. In per-patient analysis, the median size of SNADAs was 20 mm (IQR 15-30) in diameter. Complete mucosal resection was achieved in 130 of 142 patients (92%). Local or residual recurrences were observed in 23% of patients (median time until recurrence 277 days [IQR 196-591]) and were treated endoscopically. No metachronous recurrences were found within a median follow-up of 363 days. In per-procedure analysis, en bloc resection was achieved in 88 (53%). EMR-related bleeding occurred in 18 (11%) EMRs, and all cases were successfully managed with supportive and/or endoscopic measures. No perforations occurred. Increasing size of adenomas was associated with recurrence (P < .001). No association with recurrence was noted with endoscopic or histologic features. Increasing size of resected specimens (P < .001) was associated with an increased risk of bleeding.

CONCLUSION

EMR of most SNADAs can be performed safely and effectively. Increasing size of adenomas was associated with recurrence and bleeding after EMR. No association with recurrence was noted with endoscopic or histologic features. Focal recurrence can be managed with additional endoscopic therapy. Metachronous lesions do not occur. The findings inform directed management and surveillance.

Endoscopic and surgical management of nonampullary duodenal neoplasms

BACKGROUND

Sporadic nonampullary duodenal neoplasms (SNADN) can have malignant potential for which endoscopic and surgical resections are offered. We report combined gastroenterologic and surgical experience for treatment of SNADN, including endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and pancreas-preserving partial duodenectomy (PPPD).

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 121 consecutive patients, who underwent 30 PPPDs and 91 EMRs for mucosal and submucosal SNADN. Decision to undergo EMR or surgical resection was based on expert endoscopist and surgeon discretion including multidisciplinary tumor board review. Main outcomes were recurrence rate of neoplasia and adverse events requiring hospital admission or prolonged care. EMRs were performed with submucosal lifting followed by snare resection. PPPD included total duodenectomy, supra-ampullary PPPD for neoplasms proximal to the ampulla, and infra-ampullary PPPD for lesions distal to the ampulla. Follow-up data were available for 65% of EMR and 73% of surgical patients.

RESULTS

Surgically resected neoplasia was larger with more advanced neoplasia and submucosal lesions. En bloc resection was achieved in all surgical resections and in 53% of EMRs. Post-EMR, mucosal and submucosal neoplasia recurred in 32 and 0%, respectively, including five neoplasms (26%) after an initial negative esophagogastroduodenoscopy. All recurrences were treated endoscopically. Complications occurred in 14 endoscopically and eight surgically treated patients, none requiring surgical intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Post-EMR patients had higher recurrence of mucosal neoplasia, whereas submucosal neoplasms, mainly carcinoid, did not recur. Polyp size and positive resection margin were not associated with neoplasia recurrence. Patients with SNADN could benefit from a multidisciplinary approach to stratify the optimal treatment based on local expertise.

Endoscopic assessment and management of sporadic duodenal adenomas: The results of single centre multidisciplinary management

AIM

To review the role of multidisciplinary management in treating sporadic duodenal adenomas (SDA).

METHODS

SDA managed at North Shore Hospital between 2009-2014 were entered into a prospective database. Pathology, endoscopic and surgical management as well as follow up were reviewed.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight patients (14 male: Median age 68 years) presented with SDA [18 were classified as non ampullary location (NA), 10 as ampullary location (A)]. All SDA were diagnosed on upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and were imaged with a contrast enhanced CT scan of the chest, abdomen and pelvis. Of the NA adenomas 14 were located in the second part, 2 in the first part and 2 in the third part of the duodenum. Two patients declined treatment, 3 patients underwent surgical resection (2 transduodenal resections and 1 pancreaticoduodenectomy), and 23 patients were treated with endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). The only complication with endoscopic resection was mild pancreatitis post procedure. Patients were followed with gastroduodenoscopy for a median of 22 mo (range: 2-69 mo). There were 8 recurrences treated with EMR with one patient proceeding to pancreaticodeuodenectomy because of high grade dysplasia in the resected specimen and 2 NA recurrences were managed with surgical resection (distal gastrectomy for a lesion in the first part of the duodenum and a transduodenal resection of a lesion in the third part of the duodenum).

CONCLUSION

SDA can be treated endoscopically with minimal morbidity and piecemeal resection results in eradication in nearly three quarters of patients. Recurrent SDA can be treated with endoscopic reresection with surgical resection indicated when the lesions are large (> 4 cm in diameter) or demonstrate severe dysplasia or invasive cancer.

Safety and efficacy of EMR for sporadic, nonampullary duodenal adenomas: a single U.S. center experience (with video)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EMR is increasingly used for resection of sporadic, nonampullary duodenal adenomas (SNDAs), but there are no guidelines for the management of these lesions. The aims of this study were to evaluate the safety and efficacy of EMR exclusively for SNDAs and to determine the factors predictive of outcomes.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of patients with SNDAs referred for endoscopic therapy from 2006 to 2013. The outcomes studied were successful endoscopic resection, major adverse events, early and late recurrences, and clinical remission.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight patients with SNDAs were included and 51 (75%) underwent EMR. The mean adenoma size was 22.0 ± 8.9 mm. Successful resection was achieved in 49 of 51 patients (96.1%), and major adverse events were noted in 8 of 51 patients (15.7%). Early and late recurrences were noted in 25.6% and 5.2% of patients, respectively, and were treated endoscopically. Clinical remission was achieved in 89.7% of patients after a median follow-up of 15 months. Presence of villous histology was associated with increased recurrence (P = .019), but no association of recurrence was noted with other endoscopic features or resection technique. Large adenoma size (P = .0057) and need for intraprocedural hemostasis (P = .006) were associated with increased adverse events, but no association of adverse events was noted with location or resection technique.

CONCLUSIONS

Large duodenal adenomas can be effectively managed with EMR at a referral center with experienced endoscopists. However, EMR has a significant recurrence rate, especially early recurrence, and the risk of adverse events is not negligible. Endoscopic therapy is successful in managing recurrent adenomas.

Extra-ampullary Peutz-Jeghers polyp causing duodenal intussusception leading to biliary obstruction: a case report

Background

Duodenal Peutz–Jeghers polyp is a rare cause of duodenal or biliary obstruction. However, a sporadic Peutz–Jeghers polyp leading to simultaneous biliary and duodenal obstruction has not been reported.

Case presentation

We report a case of a 25-year-old Sri Lankan woman presenting with features of recurrent upper small intestinal obstruction and biliary obstruction. She had clinical as well as biochemical evidence of intermittent biliary obstruction. Evidence of duodenal intussusception was found in a computed tomography enterogram and a duodenal polyp was noted as the lead point. Marked elongation and distortion of her lower common bile duct with intrahepatic duct dilatation was also noted and the ampulla was found to be on the left side of the midline pulled toward the intussusceptum. Open polypectomy and reduction of intussusception were done and she became fully asymptomatic following surgery. Histology of the resected specimen was reported as a typical “Peutz–Jeghers polyp”. As there was not enough evidence to diagnose Peutz–Jeghers syndrome this was considered to be a sporadic Peutz–Jeghers polyp.

Conclusion

Rare benign causes such as a duodenal polyp should be considered and looked for in initial imaging, when the cause for concurrent biliary and intestinal obstruction is uncertain, particularly in young individuals.

Efficacy and safety of endoscopic mucosal resection of non-ampullary duodenal polyps: a systematic review

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Data on the safety and efficacy of endoscopic resection of non-ampullary duodenal polyps are limited. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of sporadic non-ampullary duodenal polyps.

METHODS

Relevant studies for the meta-analysis were identified through search of PUBMED and EMBASE databases. Studies employing EMR for the management of sporadic duodenal polyps in the non-ampullary region were included. The primary outcome was the surgical intervention rates due to non-curative endoscopic resection (incomplete removal/recurrence necessitating surgery) and/or management of procedural adverse events.

RESULTS

A total of 440 patients (485 duodenal polyps) from 14 studies were included. The mean size of the polyps was 13 mm to 35 mm. Surgical intervention due to non-curative EMR and adverse events was required in 2 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 0 - 4 %). EMR was successfully accomplished in 93 % (95 %CI 89 - 97 %). The overall bleeding rate after EMR was 16 % (95 %CI 10 - 23 %), and the pooled delayed bleeding rate was 5 % (95 %CI 2 - 7 %). The overall incidence of perforation was 1 % (95 %CI 1 - 3 %). Over a median follow-up period of 6 - 72 months, the recurrence rate after EMR was 15 % (95 %CI 7 - 23 %). Six studies (pooled recurrence 20 %, 95 %CI 14 - 27 %) reported on the outcomes of managing recurrent polyps, for which endoscopic removal was successful in 62 % (95 %CI 37 - 87 %). There was no procedure related mortality.

CONCLUSION

EMR appears to be a safe and effective therapeutic option for management of sporadic non-ampullary duodenal polyps. Long-term endoscopic surveillance is required to manage and treat recurrent disease.

[Endoscopic Resection of Sporadic Non-ampullary Duodenal Neoplasms: A Single Center Study]

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Sporadic non-ampullary duodenal neoplasms are rare and optimal treatment for these lesions remains undefined. Endoscopic resection of duodenal neoplasms is widely used recently and it is an alternative treatment strategy to surgical excision. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of endoscopic resection of duodenal neoplasms and to determine its outcomes.

METHODS

Patients who underwent endoscopic resection for non-ampullary duodenal neoplasms between January 2005 and December 2014 were analyzed retrospectively. Data including size, morphology, histology, location and endoscopic procedural technique were reviewed. The main outcome measurements were success rate, complication, recurrence and follow-up assessments.

RESULTS

The study included 33 patients with duodenal neoplasms. The mean size of resected lesion was 8.58 mm. The results of histologic examination were as follows: 23 (69.7%) adenomas, 2 (6.1%) adenocarcinoma, 3 (9.1%) Brunner's gland tumor and 3 (9.1%) neuroendocrine tumor. Tubular adenoma was the most common type (63.6%) of non-ampullary duodenal neoplasms. Eighteen (54.5%) lesions were found in the second portion of the duodenum, and 10 (30.3%) lesions on bulb and 3 (9.1%) lesions on superior duodenal angle. Of the 33 cases, 32 (97.0%) were managed by endoscopic mucosal resection technique during a single session and one case was managed by endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). One episode of perforation occurred after ESD. During a median follow-up period of 5.76 months, recurrence was observed in only one case of in a patient with tubular adenoma.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic resection of duodenal neoplasm is a safe and effective treatment modality that can replace surgical resection in many cases. Careful endoscopic follow-up is essential to manage recurrence or residual lesions.

Approach to the endoscopic resection of duodenal lesions

Duodenal polyps or lesions are uncommonly found on upper endoscopy. Duodenal lesions can be categorized as subepithelial or mucosally-based, and the type of lesion often dictates the work-up and possible therapeutic options. Subepithelial lesions that can arise in the duodenum include lipomas, gastrointestinal stromal tumors, and carcinoids. Endoscopic ultrasonography with fine needle aspiration is useful in the characterization and diagnosis of subepithelial lesions. Duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumors and large or multifocal carcinoids are best managed by surgical resection. Brunner's gland tumors, solitary Peutz-Jeghers polyps, and non-ampullary and ampullary adenomas are mucosally-based duodenal lesions, which can require removal and are typically amenable to endoscopic resection. Several anatomic characteristics of the duodenum make endoscopic resection of duodenal lesions challenging. However, advanced endoscopic techniques exist that enable the resection of large mucosally-based duodenal lesions. Endoscopic papillectomy is not without risk, but this procedure can effectively resect ampullary adenomas and allows patients to avoid surgery, which typically involves pancreaticoduodenectomy. Endoscopic mucosal resection and its variations (such as cap-assisted, cap-band-assisted, and underwater techniques) enable the safe and effective resection of most duodenal adenomas. Endoscopic submucosal dissection is possible but very difficult to safely perform in the duodenum.

Nonampullary duodenal adenoma: Current understanding of its diagnosis, pathogenesis, and clinical management

Nonampullary duodenal adenomas are relatively common in familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), but nonampullary sporadic duodenal adenomas (SDAs) are rare. Emerging evidence shows that duodenal adenomas, regardless of their anatomic location and whether they are sporadic or FAP-related, share morphologic and molecular features with colorectal adenomas. The available data suggest that duodenal adenomas develop to duodenal adenocarcinomas via similar mechanisms. The optimal approach for management of duodenal adenomas remains to be determined. The techniques for endoscopic resection of duodenal adenoma include snare polypectomy, endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), and argon plasma coagulation ablation. EMR may facilitate removal of large duodenal polyps. Although several studies have reported cases of successful ESD for duodenal adenomas, the procedure is technically difficult to perform safely because of the anatomical properties of the duodenum. Although current clinical practice recommends endoscopic resection of all large duodenal adenomas in patients with FAP, endoscopic treatment is usually insufficient to guarantee a polyp-free duodenum. Surgery is indicated for FAP patients with severe polyposis or nonampullary SDAs or FAP-related polyps not amenable to endoscopic resection. Further studies are needed to develop newer endoscopic techniques to guide diagnostic and therapeutic decisions for future management of nonampullary duodenal adenomas.