Combining eastern and western practices for safe and effective endoscopic resection of large complex colorectal lesions

Laparoscopic versus open surgery for colonoscopic perforation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of laparoscopic surgery (LS) for the treatment of colonoscopic perforation is still controversial. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of LS versus open surgery (OS) for colonoscopic perforation.

METHODS

All clinical trials that compared laparoscopic with OS for colonoscopic perforation published in English were identified in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library searches. A modified scale was used to assess the quality of the literature. We analyzed the age, sex ratio, aim of colonoscopy, history of abdominopelvic surgery, type of procedure, size of perforation, operation time, postoperative fasting time, hospital stay, postoperative complication morbidity, and postoperative mortality. Meta-analyses were performed using weighted mean differences for continuous variables, and odds ratios for dichotomous variables.

RESULTS

No eligible randomized trials were identified, but eleven nonrandomized trials were analyzed. In the pooled data of 192 patients who underwent LS and 131 OS, there were no significant differences in age, sex ratio, aim of colonoscopy, history of abdominopelvic surgery, perforation size, and operative time between the groups. LS group had shorter time of hospital stay and postoperative fasting time, less postoperative complication morbidity, but there were no significant difference in postoperative mortality rate between LS group and OS group.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the current meta-analysis, we conclude that LS is a safe and efficacious technique for colonoscopic perforation, with fewer postoperative complications, less hospital mortality, and faster recovery compared with OS.

High burden of polyp mischaracterisation in tertiary centre referrals for endoscopic resection may be alleviated by telestration

OBJECTIVE

Endoscopic resection (ER) often involves referral to tertiary centres with high volume practices. Lesions can be subject to prior manipulation and mischaracterisation of features required for accurate planning, leading to prolonged or cancelled procedures. As potential solutions, repeating diagnostic procedures is burdensome for services and patients, while even enriched written reports and still images provide insufficient information to plan ER. This project sought to determine the frequency and implications of polyp mischaracterisation and whether the use of telestration might prevent it.

DESIGN/METHOD

A retrospective data analysis of ER referrals to four tertiary centres was conducted for the period July-December 2019. Prospective telestration with a novel digital platform was then performed between centres to achieve consensus on polyp features and ER planning.

RESULTS

163 lesions (163 patients; mean age 67.9±12.2 y; F=62) referred from regional hospitals, were included. Lesion site was mismatched in 11 (6.7%). Size was not mentioned in the referral in 27/163 (16.6%) and incorrect in 81/136 (51.5%), more commonly underestimated by the referring centre (<0.0001), by a mean factor of 1.85±0.79. Incurred procedure time (in units of 20 min) was significantly greater than that allocated (p=0.0085). For 10 cases discussed prospectively, rapid consensus on lesion features was achieved, with agreement between experts on time required for ER.

CONCLUSIONS

Polyp mischaracterisation is a frequent feature of ER referrals, but could be corrected by the use of telestration between centres. Our study involved expert-to-expert consensus, so extending to 'real-world' referring centres would offer additional learning for a digital pathway.

Is underwater endoscopic mucosal resection of colon polyps superior to conventional techniques? A network analysis of endoscopic mucosal resection and submucosal dissection

Background and study aims  Evidence from recent trials comparing conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) to underwater EMR (UEMR) have matured. However, studies comparing UEMR to endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) are lacking. Hence, we sought to conduct a comprehensive network meta-analysis to compare the efficacy of UEMR, ESD, and EMR. Methods  Embase and Medline databases were searched from inception to December 2020 for articles comparing UEMR with EMR and ESD. Outcomes of interest included rates of en bloc and complete polyp resection, risk of perforation and bleeding, and local recurrence. A network meta-analysis comparing all three approaches was conducted. In addition, a conventional comparative meta-analysis comparing UEMR to EMR was performed. Analysis was stratified according to polyp sizes (< 10 mm, ≥ 10 mm, and ≥ 20 mm). Results  Twenty-two articles were included in this study. For polyps ≥ 10 mm, UEMR was inferior to ESD in achieving en bloc resection ( P  = 0.02). However, UEMR had shorter operating time for polyps ≥ 10 mm ( P  < 0.001), and ≥20 mm ( P  = 0.019) with reduced perforation risk for polyps ≥ 10 mm ( P  = 0.05) compared to ESD. In addition, en bloc resection rates were similar between UEMR and EMR, although UEMR had reduced recurrence for polyps ≥ 10 mm ( P  = 0.013) and ≥ 20 mm ( P  = 0.014). UEMR also had shorter mean operating than EMR for polyps ≥ 10 mm ( P  < 0.001) and ≥ 20 mm ( P  < 0.001). Risk of bleeding and perforation with UEMR and EMR were similar for polyp of all sizes. Conclusions  UEMR has demonstrated technical and oncological outcomes comparable to ESD and EMR, along with a desirable safety profile. UEMR appears to be a safe and effective alternative to conventional methods for resection of polyps ≥ 10 mm.

Multidisciplinary decision-making strategies may reduce the need for secondary surgery in complex colonic polyps - A systematic review and pooled analysis

AIM

The recognition of complex colonic polyps is increasing. Management varies considerably and the impact of this on clinical outcomes is unclear. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the impact of group decision-making strategies and defined selection criteria on the treatment outcomes of complex colonic polyps.

METHOD

A systematic literature review identified studies reporting complex polyp treatment outcomes and describing their decision-making strategies. Databases searched included PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL and Scopus. Articles were identified by two blinded reviewers using defined inclusion criteria. The review protocol was registered on PROSPERO and performed in line with PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

There were 303 identified articles describing treatment outcomes of complex colonic polyps. Only nine of these fully described the decision-making strategy and met the inclusion criteria. Adverse events ranged from 1.3% to 10% across the studies. Unsuspected malignancy and secondary surgery rates ranged from 2.4% to 15.4% and 3.3% to 43.9%, respectively. Grouping of articles into a hierarchy of decision-making strategies demonstrated a sequential reduction in secondary surgery rates with improving strategies. There were no differences in comparisons of adverse event or unsuspected malignancy rates.

CONCLUSIONS

There is limited description of decision-making strategies and variability in reporting of studies describing complex polyp treatment outcomes. The use of multidisciplinary decision-making and defined selection criteria may reduce the need for secondary surgical intervention in complex colonic polyps, but further evidence is required to draw definite conclusions.

Double-clip traction for colonic endoscopic submucosal dissection: a multicenter study of 599 consecutive cases (with video)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Colonic endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is particularly challenging and limited to a few expert centers. We recently conducted a pilot study on improvement of colonic ESD with systematic use of a countertraction device (double-clip traction with rubber band [DCT-ESD]).

METHODS

A French prospective multicenter study was conducted between March 2017 and September 2019, including all consecutive cases of naive colonic ESD. Since the first case of DCT-ESD in March 2017, all cases of colonic ESD have been performed using the DCT-ESD strategy in the 3 centers involved in the study.

RESULTS

Five hundred ninety-nine lesions with a mean size of 53 mm were included in this study, resected by 5 operators in 3 centers. The en bloc, R0, and curative resection rates were 95.7%, 83.5%, and 81.1%, respectively. The adverse event rates were 4.9% for perforation and 4.2% for postprocedure bleeding. Between 2017 and 2019, the rates of R0 and curative resections increased significantly from 74.7% in 2017 to 88.4% in 2019 (P = .003) and from 72.6% in 2017 to 86.3% in 2019 (P = .004), respectively. Procedure duration and speed of resection were 62.4 minutes and 39.4 mm²/minute, respectively. No differences were noted between operators.

CONCLUSION

DCT-ESD is a safe and reproducible technique, with results comparable with those of the large Japanese teams with speed of resection twice as high as previously reported studies. The DCT strategy is promising, cheap, and seems to be reproducible. Physicians performing colonic ESD should be aware of this promising tool to improve their results in ESD.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection vs endoscopic mucosal resection for colorectal polyps: A meta-analysis and meta-regression with single arm analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has shown to be effective in management of colorectal neoplasm in the Asian countries, while its implementation in Western countries where endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is preferred is still debatable.

AIM

To compare the surgical, histological, and oncological outcomes between ESD and EMR in the treatment of colorectal polyps, with subgroup analysis comparing the efficacy of ESD and EMR between Japan and the rest of the world.

METHODS

Embase and Medline databases were searched from inception to October 2020 in accordance with PRISMA guidelines for studies comparing en bloc, complete resection, margin involvement, resection time, need for additional surgery, complications, and recurrence rate of ESD with EMR.

RESULTS

Of 281344 colorectal polyps from 21 studies were included. When compared to EMR, the pooled analysis revealed ESD was associated with higher en bloc and complete resection rate, and lower lateral margin involvement and recurrence. ESD led to increased procedural time, need for additional surgery, and perforation risk. No significant difference in bleeding risk was found between the two groups. Meta-regression analysis suggested only right colonic polyps correlated with an increased perforation risk in ESD. Confounders including polyp size and invasion depth did not significantly influence the en bloc and complete resection rate, bleeding risk and recurrence. In subgroup analysis, Japan performed better than the rest of the world in both ESD and EMR with perforation risk of 4% and 0.0002%, respectively, as compared to perforation risk of 8% and 1%, respectively, in reports coming from rest of the world.

CONCLUSION

ESD resulted in better resection outcomes and lower recurrence compared to EMR. With appropriate training, ESD is preferred over EMR as the first-line therapy for resection of colorectal polyps, without restricting to lesions greater than 20 mm and those with high suspicion of submucosal invasion.

Histopathological features for coexistent invasive cancer in large colorectal adenomatous polyps

Background

Histopathological features associated with coexistent invasive adenocarcinoma in large colorectal adenomas have not been described. This study aimed to determine the association of histopathological features in areas of low-grade dysplasia with coexistent invasive adenocarcinoma.

Methods

High-grade lesions (containing high-grade dysplasia or adenocarcinoma) from a cohort of large (at least 20 mm) colorectal adenomas removed by endoscopic resection were subjected to detailed histopathological analysis. The histopathological features in low-grade areas with coexistent adenocarcinoma were reviewed and their diagnostic performance was evaluated.

Results

Seventy-four high-grade lesions from 401 endoscopic resections of large adenomas were included. In the low-grade dysplastic areas, a coexistent invasive adenocarcinoma was associated significantly with a cribriform or trabecular growth pattern (P < 0.001), high nuclear grade (P < 0.001), multifocal intraluminal necrosis (P < 0.001), atypical mitotic figures (P = 0.006), infiltrative lesion edges (P < 0.001), a broad fibrous band (P = 0.001), ulceration (P < 0.001), expansile nodules (P < 0.001) and an extensive tumour-infiltrating lymphocyte pattern (P = 0.04). Lesions with coexistent invasive adenocarcinoma harboured at least one of these features. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) for coexistent invasive adenocarcinoma, using frequencies of adverse histopathological factors in low-grade areas, was 0.92. The presence of two or more of these adverse histopathological features in low-grade areas had a sensitivity of 86 per cent and a specificity of 84 per cent for coexistent invasive adenocarcinoma.

Conclusion

Several histopathological features in low-grade dysplastic areas of adenomas could be predictive of coexistent adenocarcinoma.

Multimodal Endoscopic Assessment Guides Treatment Decisions for Rectal Early Neoplastic Tumors

BACKGROUND

There is a trend toward organ conservation in the management of rectal tumors. However, there is no consensus on standardized investigations to guide treatment.

OBJECTIVE

We report the value of multimodal endoscopic assessment (white light, magnification chromoendoscopy and narrow band imaging, selected colonoscopic ultrasound) for rectal early neoplastic tumors to inform treatment decisions.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective study.

SETTING

The study was conducted in a tertiary referral unit for interventional endoscopy and early colorectal cancer.

PATIENTS

A total of 296 patients referred with rectal early neoplastic tumors were assessed using standardized multimodal endoscopic assessment and classified according to risk of harboring invasive cancer.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of multimodal endoscopic assessment, and previous biopsy to predict invasive cancer were calculated and treatment outcomes reported.

RESULTS

After multimodal endoscopic assessment, lesions were classified as invasive cancer, at least deep submucosal invasion (n = 65); invasive cancer, superficial submucosal invasion or high risk of covert cancer (n = 119); or low risk of covert cancer (n = 112). Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive values, and negative predictive values of multimodal endoscopic assessment for diagnosing invasive cancer, deep submucosal invasion, were 77%, 98%, 93%, and 93%. The combined classification of all lesions with invasive cancer or high risk of covert cancer had a negative predictive value of 96% for invasive cancer on final histopathology. Sensitivity of previous biopsy was 37%. A total of 47 patients underwent radical surgery and 33 transanal endoscopic microsurgery. No patients without invasive cancer were subjected to radical surgery; 222 patients initially underwent endoscopic resection. Of the 203 without deep submucosal invasion, 95% avoided surgery and were free from recurrence at last follow-up.

LIMITATIONS

This was a retrospective study from a tertiary referral unit.

CONCLUSIONS

Standardized multimodal endoscopic assessment guides rational treatment decisions for rectal tumors resulting in organ-conserving treatment for all patients without deep submucosal invasive cancer. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B133. LA EVALUACIÓN ENDOSCÓPICA MULTIMODAL COMO GUÍA DE DECISIONES EN EL TRATAMIENTO DE TUMORES RECTALES NEOPLÁSICOS PRECOCES: La tendencia actual es la preservación del órgano en el manejo de los tumores de rectao. Sin embargo, no hay consenso sobre las investigaciones estandar para guiar dicho tratamiento.Presentamos los valores de la evaluación endoscópica multimodal (luz blanca, cromoendoscopia de aumento, imagen de banda estrecha y ecografía colonoscópica seleccionada) para tumores rectales neoplásicos tempranos y así notificar las decisiones sobre el tratamiento.Estudio retrospectivo.El estudio se realizó en una unidad de referencia terciaria para endoscopia intervencionista y cáncer colorrectal temprano.Se evaluaron 296 pacientes referidos con tumores neoplásicos precoces de recto mediante una evaluación endoscópica multimodal estandarizada y se clasificaron de acuerdo al riesgo de albergar un cáncer invasivo.Se calcularon la sensibilidad, la especificidad, los valores predictivos positivos y negativos de la evaluación endoscópica multimodal y la biopsia previa para predecir el cáncer invasivo y se notificaron los resultados para el tratamiento.Después de la evaluación endoscópica multimodal, las lesiones se clasificaron como: cáncer invasive (al menos invasión submucosa profunda n = 65); cáncer invasive (invasión submucosa superficial o alto riesgo de cáncer encubierto n = 119) y finalmente aquellos de bajo riesgo de cáncer encubierto (n = 112). La sensibilidad, la especificidad, los valores predictivos positivos y negativos de la evaluación endoscópica multimodal para el diagnóstico de cáncer invasivo, la invasión submucosa profunda fueron 77%, 98%, 93% y 93% respectivamente. La clasificación combinada de todas las lesiones con cáncer invasivo o de alto riesgo de cáncer encubierto tuvo un VPN del 96% para el cáncer invasivo en la histopatología final. La sensibilidad fué de 37% en todas las biopsias previas. 47 pacientes fueron sometidos a cirugía radical, 33 por microcirugía endoscópica transanal. Ningún paciente sin cáncer invasivo fue sometido a cirugía radical. Inicialmente, 222 pacientes fueron sometidos a resección endoscópica. De los 203 sin invasión submucosa profunda, el 95% evitó la cirugía y no tuvieron recurrencia en el último seguimiento.Estudio retrospectivo de una unidad de referencia terciaria.La evaluación endoscópica multimodal estandarizada guía las decisiones racionales de tratamiento para los tumores rectales que resultan en un tratamiento conservador de órganos para todos los pacientes sin cáncer invasivo submucoso profundo. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B133.

Risk factors for early and late adenoma recurrence after advanced colorectal endoscopic resection at an expert Western center

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Few large Western series examine risk factors for recurrence after endoscopic resection (ER) of large (≥20 mm) colorectal laterally spreading tumors. Recurrence beyond initial surveillance is seldom reported, and differences between residual/recurrent adenoma and late recurrence are not scrutinized. We report the incidence of recurrence at successive surveillance intervals, identify risk factors for recurrent/residual adenoma and late recurrence, and describe the outcomes of ER of recurrent adenomas.

METHODS

Recurrence was calculated for successive surveillance periods after colorectal ER. Multiple logistic regression was used to identify independent risk factors for recurrent/residual adenoma and late recurrence (≥12 months).

RESULTS

Six hundred twenty colorectal ERs were performed, and 456 eligible patients (98%) had completed 3- to 6-month surveillance. Residual/recurrent adenoma (3-6 months) was detected in 8.3%, at 12 months in 6.1%, between 24 and 36 months in 6.4%, and after 36 months in 13.5%. Independent risk factors for residual/recurrent adenoma were piecemeal resection (odds ratio [OR], 13.0; P = .01), adjunctive argon plasma coagulation (OR, 2.4; P = .01), and lesion occupying ≥75% of the luminal circumference (OR, 5.6; P < .001) and for late recurrence were lesion size >60 mm (OR, 6.3; P < .001) and piecemeal resection (OR, 4.4; P = .04). Of 66 patients with recurrence, 5 required surgery, 8 left the treatment pathway, 20 are still receiving ER or surveillance, and 33 had ER with normal subsequent surveillance.

CONCLUSIONS

Recurrence occurs at successive periods of surveillance after ER even beyond 3 years. Aside from piecemeal resection, risk factors for residual/recurrent adenoma and late recurrence are different. Recurrence can be challenging to treat, but surgery is rarely required.

Outcomes of endoscopic resection of large colorectal lesions subjected to prior failed resection or substantial manipulation

PURPOSE

Injudicious attempts at resection and extensive sampling of large colorectal adenomas prior to referral for endoscopic resection (ER) are common. This has deleterious effects, but little is known about the outcomes following ER. We retrospectively analysed the outcomes of ER of large adenomas previously subjected to substantial manipulation.

METHOD

ER of large (≥ 2 cm) colorectal adenomas were grouped according to level of manipulation: prior attempted resection, heavy manipulation (≥ six biopsies or tattoo under lesion) or minimal manipulation (< six biopsies). Outcomes were compared between groups. Independent predictors of outcomes were identified using multiple logistic regression.

RESULTS

Five hundred forty-two lesions (mean size 53.7 mm) were included. Two hundred sixty-five (49%) had been subjected to prior attempted resection or heavy manipulation, 151 (28%) to minimal manipulation, and 126 (23%) were not previously manipulated. ESD techniques were used more frequently than EMR after substantial manipulation. There were no differences in initial success of ER (99%, 98%, 98%, p = 0.71). Prior attempted resection was independently associated with recurrence (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.1-4.5, p = 0.03) and negatively associated with en bloc resection (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.1-0.7, p = 0.004). Regardless of level of prior manipulation, there were no differences in sustained endoscopic cure with > 95% of patients overall free from recurrence and avoiding surgery at last follow-up.

CONCLUSION

There is a substantial burden of injudicious lesion manipulation before referral, which makes recurrence more likely and en bloc resection less likely. However, with appropriate expertise, sustained successful endoscopic treatment is achievable for the vast majority of patients treated in a specialist unit.

Endoscopic resection of colorectal circumferential and near-circumferential laterally spreading lesions: outcomes and risk of stenosis

PURPOSE

Almost any colorectal superficial neoplastic lesion can be treated by endoscopic resection (ER) but very little is known about outcomes of ER leaving circumferential or near-circumferential mucosal defects. We report the outcomes of ER leaving ≥ 75% circumferential mucosal defects performed in a western expert centre.

METHODS

Five hundred eighty-seven ERs of large colorectal lesions ≥ 20 mm were grouped according to the extent of the mucosal defect and comparisons made between those with < 75% and ≥ 75% defects. Independent predictors of stenosis were identified.

RESULTS

Forty-seven patients had ER leaving ≥ 75% circumference defect, most located at or distal to the rectosigmoid, with ≥ 90% defects in 5 and 100% in 11. There were no significant colonic muscle injuries in patients with ≥ 75% defect and no differences in post-procedure bleeding (OR 1.6, 95% CI 0.2-13.7, p = 0.64) between patients with ≥ 75% and < 75% defects. Stenosis developed in 9 patients. ≥ 90% circumference defect was the only independent risk factor for stenosis (OR 286, p < 0.001). Three of 4 patients with asymptomatic stenosis had successful expectant management. The remainder were treated with dilatation. Recurrence was more likely in those with ≥ 75% defect (OR 7.9, 95% CI 3.8-16.4, p < 0.001) but was managed with further ER in all but 2 cases.

CONCLUSION

ER of colorectal lesions resulting in defects ≥ 75% of the luminal circumference is challenging but safe and effective when performed in an expert centre. The only independent predictor of stenosis is ≥ 90% circumference defect but some patients improve with expectant management; therefore, pre-emptive intervention may not be warranted.