Endoscopic management of nonlifting colon polyps

Hot avulsion versus argon plasma coagulation for the management of the non-ensnarable polyp: A multicenter, randomized controlled trial

Background and Aim

Snare resection of nonlifting colonic lesions often requires supplemental techniques. We compared the success rates of neoplasia eradication using hot avulsion and argon plasma coagulation in colonic polyps when complete snare polypectomy had failed.

Methods

Polyps that were not completely resectable by snare polypectomy were randomized to argon plasma coagulation or hot avulsion for completion of resection. Argon plasma coagulation was delivered using a forward shooting catheter, using a nontouch technique (flow 1.2 L, 35 watts). Hot avulsion was performed by grasping the neoplastic tissue with hot biopsy forceps and applying traction away from the bowel wall while using EndoCut I or soft coagulation for avulsion. Surveillance colonoscopies were performed at 6, 12, and 18 months.

Results

From November 2013 to July 2017, 59 patients were randomized to argon plasma coagulation (28) or hot avulsion (31). The median age was 69 (60-75), with 46% being female. The median residual tissue size was 10 mm (6-12). The residual adenoma rate at 6 months (hot avulsion 6% vs argon plasma coagulation 21% P = 0.09) and 18 months was not different between the groups (6.6% vs 3.6% P = 0.25). One patient in the argon plasma coagulation arm was diagnosed with metastatic cancer of likely colorectal origin despite benign histology in the original polypectomy specimen, supporting the importance of tissue acquisition.

Conclusion

Both hot avulsion and argon plasma coagulation are effective and safe modalities to complete resection of non-ensnarable colonic polyps.

Through the Looking Glass: Surveillance Following Colonoscopic Polypectomy of Malignant Polyps

Introduction Colonoscopic polypectomy is a well-established screening and surveillance modality for malignant colorectal polyps. Following the detection of a malignant polyp, patients are either put on endoscopic surveillance or planned for a surgical procedure. We studied the outcome of colonoscopic excision of malignant polyps and their recurrence rates. Methods We performed a retrospective analysis over a period of five years (2015-2019) of patients who underwent colonoscopy and resection of malignant polyps. Size of polyp, follow-up with tumour markers, CT scan, and biopsy were considered individually for pedunculate and sessile polyps. We analysed the percentage of patients who underwent surgical resection, the percentage of patients who were managed conservatively, and the percentage of recurrence post-excision of malignant polyps. Results A total of 44 patients were included in the study. Of the 44 malignant polyps, most were present in the sigmoid colon at 43% (n=19), with the rectum containing 41% (n=18). The ascending colon accounted for 4.5% (n=2), transverse colonic polyps were 7% (n=3), and the descending colon polyps were 4.5% (n=2). Pedunculated polyps made up 55% (n=24). These were Level 1-3 based on Haggits classification; 14 were Haggits Level 1, eight were Haggits Level 2, and two were Haggits Level 3. The rest were sessile polyps making up 45% (n=20). Based on the Kikuchi classification, these were predominantly SM1 (n=12) and SM2 (n=8). Out of 44 cases, 11% (n=5) underwent surgical resection on follow-up in the form of bowel resection. This included three right hemicolectomies, one sigmoid colectomy, and one low anterior resection. Seven per cent (n=3) underwent endoscopic resection as trans-anal endoscopic mucosal resection (TEMS) and 82% (n=36) of the remaining cases were managed with regular follow-up and surveillance. Conclusions Colonoscopic polypectomy offers excellent benefits in detecting colorectal cancer and treating pre-malignant polyps. Colonoscopic polypectomy provides excellent benefits in colorectal cancer (CRC) detection and treatment of malignant polyps. However, it remains to be seen if post-polypectomy surveillance for low-risk polyp cancers would require a change in surveillance.

Factors associated with non-lifting of colorectal mucosal lesions

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is an effective treatment for colorectal tumors. However, lesions that cannot be lifted after submucosal injection are not indication for ESD. This is because the procedure is difficult, and the lesions are often considered as tumor invasion or submucosal fibrosis. The aims of this study are to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ESD for non-lifting lesions and to analyze the causes of non-lifting phenomenon.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 29 patients with non-lifting colon lesions resected by ESD from February 2018 to September 2021. Cases were observed for demographics, endoscopic findings, treatment outcomes, adverse events and endoscopic follow-up. We studied the pathological features of lesions to explore the reasons for non-lifting.

RESULTS

Among 29 cases of non-lifting lesions, 20 lesions (69.0%) were 30 mm in diameter or larger. Most of lesions (96.6%) were non-lifting in center, and only one lesions (3.4%) had non-lifting of one side. The en bloc and curative resection rates of ESD were 100 and 86.2%, respectively. There was one (3.4%) delayed bleeding, no perforations and other complications. No tumor recurrence occurred during the follow-up period. For pathological features, 16 (55.2%) non-lifting lesions had submucosal fibrosis and only 4 cases (13.8%) had deep submucosal invasion. There were 9 cases (31.0%) of non-lifting lesions due to musculo-fibrous of muscularis propria anomaly (MMPA).

CONCLUSION

MMPA is another reason for non-lifting signs besides invasive carcinomas and submucosal fibrosis. ESD should be considered in patients with large non-lifting adenoma instead of surgery.

A step-by-step guide to approaching colon polyps

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is considered one of the most prevalent cancers among Iranian men and women (1). Colorectal polyps, known as precursors of CRCs, are of great importance. Surveillance, locating, and removal of colorectal polyps make them the most modifiable factor apart from other genetic and environmental factors leading to CRCs. Colorectal polyps are defined as outpouchings from superficial and deep layers of mucosa of the colonic wall. They are classified as adenomas, serrated polyps, hyperplastic polyps, and hamartomas based on histological evaluation. Submucosal invasion precludes the possibility of endoscopic resection and should be ruled out via colonoscopic evaluation (2). Knowing this significance, the present study aims to present a brief review on classification, probability of endoscopic resection, complications of endoscopic polypectomy, as well as proper surveillance after polypectomy.

Current Endoscopic Resection Techniques for Gastrointestinal Lesions: Endoscopic Mucosal Resection, Submucosal Dissection, and Full-Thickness Resection

Background

Endoscopic resection of dysplastic lesions in early stages of cancer reduces mortality rates and is recommended by many national guidelines throughout the world. Snare polypectomy and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) are established techniques of polyp removal. The advantages of these methods are their relatively short procedure times and acceptable complication rates. The latter include delayed bleeding in 0.9% and a perforation risk of 0.4-1.3%, depending on the size and location of the resected lesion. EMR is a recent modification of endoscopic resection. A limited number of studies suggest that larger lesions can be removed en bloc with low complication rates and short procedure times. Novel techniques such as endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) are used to enhance en bloc resection rates for larger, flat, or sessile lesions. Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) is employed for non-lifting lesions or those not easily amenable to resection. Procedures such as ESD or EFTR are emerging standards for lesions inaccessible to EMR techniques.

Summary

Endoscopic treatment is now regarded as first-line therapy for benign lesions.

Key Message

Endoscopic resection of dysplastic lesions or early stages of cancer is recommended. A plethora of different techniques can be used dependent on the lesions.

Propensity score-matched analysis of endoscopic resection for recurrent colorectal neoplasms: A pilot study

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Local residual/recurrent colorectal lesions after endoscopic resection (ER) are difficult to treat with conventional ER. Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) are reportedly effective. We investigated the appropriate indications of ESD and UEMR for recurrent colorectal lesions.

METHODS

This single-center, retrospective, observational study was conducted at a tertiary cancer institute. Patients who underwent UEMR or ESD for residual/recurrent colorectal lesions after ER from October 2013 to February 2019 were enrolled. Propensity score matching was performed between the UEMR and ESD groups to compare the clinical characteristics, treatment, and outcomes.

RESULTS

In total, 30 UEMRs and 21 ESDs were performed. Median (range) diameter of the lesions was 8 mm (2-22 mm) in UEMR and 15 mm (2-58 mm) in ESD. Median procedure time in UEMR was significantly shorter than that of ESD (4 min [2-15 min] vs 70 min [17-193 min], P < 0.001). En bloc and complete resection rates of ESD were significantly higher than that of UEMR (73% vs 100%, 41% vs 81%, respectively). No adverse events occurred with UEMR, but there were two cases (10%) of delayed perforation with ESD. Neither group reported recurrence after treatment. Propensity score-matched cases showed significantly shorter procedure time and hospitalization period in UEMR than in ESD.

CONCLUSIONS

The outcomes of UEMR and ESD were comparable. UEMR could be a useful salvage therapy for small local residual/recurrent colorectal lesions after ER with shorter procedure time and hospitalization period.

Another Use for Padlock Clip

The novel over-the-scope Padlock clip was reported to assist in the management of esophageal fistulas, refractory gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding, and GI defects closure. A little is known about the management of non-lifting colon polyps with fibrosis secondary to prior intervention. Resection could be challenging given prior intervention. The tools used to remove such polyps are different between institutions.

In this study, we describe our experience with Padlock clip in removing non-lifting colon polyp.

Devices and techniques for endoscopic treatment of residual and fibrotic colorectal polyps (with videos)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Residual neoplasia after macroscopically complete EMR of large colon polyps has been reported in 10% to 32% of resections. Often, residual polyps at the site of prior polypectomy are fibrotic and nonlifting, making additional resection challenging.

METHODS

This document reviews devices and methods for the endoscopic treatment of fibrotic and/or residual polyps. In addition, techniques reported to reduce the incidence of residual neoplasia after endoscopic resection are discussed.

RESULTS

Descriptions of technologies and available outcomes data are summarized for argon plasma coagulation ablation, snare-tip coagulation, avulsion techniques, grasp-and-snare technique, EndoRotor endoscopic resection system, endoscopic full-thickness resection device, and salvage endoscopic submucosal dissection.

CONCLUSIONS

Several technologies and techniques discussed in this document may aid in the prevention and/or resection of fibrotic and nonlifting polyps.

EMR/ESD: Techniques, Complications, and Evidence

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To discuss endoscopic resection techniques of early gastrointestinal malignancy. The review will focus on the indications and outcomes of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD).

RECENT FINDINGS

EMR is indicated for upper GI lesions less than 20 mm provided they can be easily lifted and have a low risk of submucosal invasion (SMI). ESD should be considered for esophageal and gastric lesions that are bulky, show intramucosal carcinoma, or have a risk of superficial submucosal invasion. With regard to colonic polyps, EMR is acceptable for the removal of large colonic polyps using a piecemeal technique. ESD can be reserved for rectal neuroendocrine tumors, fibrotic polyps, or polyps harboring early malignancy. In selected cases, particularly in lesions less than 2 cm in size, EMR can be safe and effective. For larger lesions or lesions with submucosal invasion, ESD is effective and curative. Choosing the best approach can be tailored for each patient depending on lesion size, pathology, and availability of local expertise.

Dissection-enabled scaffold-assisted resection (DeSCAR): a novel technique for resection of residual or non-lifting gastrointestinal neoplasia of the colon, expanded experience and follow-up

Background and study aims  Colonic lesions may not be amenable to conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) due to previous manipulation, submucosal invasion, or lesion flatness. In 2018, we described Dissection-enabled Scaffold Assisted Resection (DeSCAR) to be safe for the endoscopic resection of non-lifting or residual colonic lesions 1 In this study, we expand our original cohort to describe our expanded experience with patients undergoing DeSCAR and assess the efficacy, safety, and feasibility of DeSCAR for endoscopic resection of non-lifting or residual colonic lesions. Patients and methods  We retrospectively reviewed 57 patients from 2015-2019 who underwent DeSCAR for colonic lesions with incomplete lifting and/or previous manipulation. Cases were reviewed for location, prior manipulation, rates of successful resection, adverse events, and endoscopic follow up to assess for residual lesions. Results  Fifty-seven lesions underwent DeSCAR. Of the patients, 51 % were female, and average patient age was 69 years. Lesions were located in the cecum (n = 16), right colon (n = 27), left colon (n = 10), and rectum (n = 4). Average lesion size was 27.7 mm. Previous manipulation occurred in 54 cases (72 % biopsy, 44 % resection attempt, 18 % intralesional tattoo). The technical success rate for resection of non-lifting lesions was 98 %. There were two delayed bleeding episodes (one required endoscopic intervention) and one small perforation (managed by endoscopic hemoclip closure). Endoscopic follow up was available in 31 patients (54 %) with no residual adenoma in 28 patients (90 % of those surveilled). Conclusions  Our expanded experience with DeSCAR demonstrates high safety, feasibility, and effectiveness for the endoscopic management of non-lifting or residual colonic lesions.

Biodegradable fluorescent nanoparticles for endoscopic detection of colorectal carcinogenesis

Early and comprehensive endoscopic detection of colonic dysplasia - the most clinically significant precursor lesion to colorectal adenocarcinoma - provides an opportunity for timely, minimally-invasive intervention to prevent malignant transformation. Here, the development and evaluation of biodegradable near-infrared fluorescent silica nanoparticles (FSN) is described that have the potential to improve adenoma detection during fluorescence-assisted white-light colonoscopic surveillance in rodent and human-scale models of colorectal carcinogenesis. FSNs are biodegradable (t_1/2 of 2.7 weeks), well-tolerated, and enable detection and delineation of adenomas as small as 0.5 mm² with high tumor-to-background ratios. Furthermore, in the human-scale, APC ^1311/+ porcine model, the clinical feasibility and benefit of using FSN-guided detection of colorectal adenomas using video-rate fluorescence-assisted white-light endoscopy is demonstrated. Since nanoparticles of similar size (e.g., 100-150-nm) or composition (i.e., silica, silica/gold hybrid) have already been successfully translated to the clinic, and, clinical fluorescent/white light endoscopy systems are becoming more readily available, there is a viable path towards clinical translation of the proposed strategy for early colorectal cancer detection and prevention in high-risk patients.

Histologic discrepancy between endoscopic forceps biopsy and endoscopic mucosal resection specimens of colorectal polyp in actual clinical practice

Background/Aims

We aimed to assess the rate of histologic discrepancy (HD) between endoscopic forceps biopsy (EFB) and totally resected specimens in colorectal polyp and analyze the risk factors of discordant group, especially under-diagnosis (UD) cases before complete removal of colorectal polyp.

Methods

From 2010 to 2015, a total of 290 polyps in 210 patients which had baseline pathology report before endoscopic resection (ER) were analyzed. UD cases were defined as those in which the diagnosis changed to a more advanced histologic feature after ER.

Results

A change in the final histology after ER was noted in 137 cases (47.2%), and after excluding 9 insignificant cases, 128 cases were further categorized into over-diagnosed and under-diagnosed group. UD occurred in 86 cases (29.7%) and change from benign to malignancy was noted in 26 cases (8.9%). On univariate analysis, a larger polyp size (>10 mm) was significantly associated with both HD (P<0.001) and UD (P<0.001). Regarding polyp morphology, protruding or flat was not significantly important. On multivariate analysis, polyp size >10 mm was the single most significant predictor of both HD (P<0.001) and UD (P<0.001).

Conclusions

The HD and UD rates were 47.2% and 29.7%, respectively. Polyp size >10 mm was the most important predictor of both HD and UD. We should be careful in making treatment strategy of colorectal polyp based on histologic report of EFB especially when the size of polyp is >10 mm.

Dissection-enabled scaffold-assisted resection (DeSCAR): a novel technique for resection of residual or non-lifting GI neoplasia of the colon (with video)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

As a result of previous manipulation or submucosal invasion, GI lesions referred for EMR frequently have flat areas of visible tissue that cannot be snared. Current methods for treating residual tissue may lead to incomplete eradication or not allow complete tissue sampling for histologic evaluation. Our aim is to describe dissection-enabled scaffold-assisted resection (DeSCAR), a new technique combining circumferential ESD with EMR for removal of superficial non-lifting or residual "islands" with suspected submucosal involvement/fibrosis.

METHODS

From 2015 to 2017, lesions referred for EMR were retrospectively reviewed. Cases were identified where lifting and/or snaring of the lesion was incomplete and the DeSCAR technique was undertaken. Cases were reviewed for location, previous manipulation, rates of successful hybrid resection, and adverse events.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine lesions underwent DeSCAR because of non-lifting or residual "islands" of tissue. Fifty-two percent of the patients were male and 48% were female; average age was 66 years (standard deviation ±9.9 years). Lesions were located in the cecum (n = 10), right side of the colon (n = 12), left side of the colon (n = 4), and rectum (n = 3). Average size was 31 mm (standard deviation ±20.6 mm). Previous manipulation had occurred in 28 of 29 cases (83% biopsy, 34% resection attempt, 52% tattoo). The technical success rate for resection of non-lifting lesions was 100%. There was one episode of delayed bleeding but no other adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

DeSCAR is a feasible and safe alternative to argon plasma coagulation and avulsion for the endoscopic management of non-lifting or residual GI lesions, providing en bloc resection of tissue for histologic review. Further studies are needed to demonstrate long-term eradication and for comparison with other methods.

Endoscopic Resection Techniques

Cancers at an early stage of disease with a low risk of lymph node metastases or distant spread can be managed endoscopically. Different endoscopic techniques can be applied in the gastrointestinal tract. Furthermore, endoscopic and laparoscopic surgery can be combined in specific indications today. Most of all, resection-related complications can also be solved endoscopically.

Update on Difficult Polypectomy Techniques

Endoscopists often encounter colon polyps that are technically difficult to resect. These lesions traditionally were managed surgically, with significant potential morbidity and mortality. Recent advances in endoscopic techniques and instruments have allowed endoscopists to safely and effectively remove colorectal lesions with high technical and clinical success and potentially avoid invasive surgery. Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) has gained acceptance as the first-line therapy for large colorectal lesions. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been reported to be associated with higher rate of en bloc resection and less risk of short-time recurrence, but with an increased risk of adverse events. Therefore, the role of colorectal ESD should be restricted to lesions with high-risk morphologic features of submucosal invasion. In this article, we review the recent literature on the endoscopic management of difficult colorectal neoplasms.

British Society of Gastroenterology/Association of Coloproctologists of Great Britain and Ireland guidelines for the management of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps

These guidelines provide an evidence-based framework for the management of patients with large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs), in addition to identifying key performance indicators (KPIs) that permit the audit of quality outcomes. These are areas not previously covered by British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) Guidelines.A National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) compliant BSG guideline development process was used throughout and the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) tool was used to structure the guideline development process. A systematic review of literature was conducted for English language articles up to May 2014 concerning the assessment and management of LNPCPs. Quality of evaluated studies was assessed using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) Methodology Checklist System. Proposed recommendation statements were evaluated by each member of the Guideline Development Group (GDG) on a scale from 1 (strongly agree) to 5 (strongly disagree) with >80% agreement required for consensus to be reached. Where consensus was not reached a modified Delphi process was used to re-evaluate and modify proposed statements until consensus was reached or the statement discarded. A round table meeting was subsequently held to finalise recommendations and to evaluate the strength of evidence discussed. The GRADE tool was used to assess the strength of evidence and strength of recommendation for finalised statements.KPIs, a training framework and potential research questions for the management of LNPCPs were also developed. It is hoped that these guidelines will improve the assessment and management of LNPCPs.

Endoscopic mucosal resection

EMR has become an established therapeutic option for premalignant and early-stage GI malignancies, particularly in the esophagus and colon. EMR can also aid in the diagnosis and therapy of subepithelial lesions localized to the muscularis mucosa or submucosa. Several dedicated EMR devices are available to facilitate these procedures. Adverse event rates, particularly bleeding and perforation, are higher after EMR relative to other basic endoscopic interventions but lower than adverse event rates for ESD. Endoscopists performing EMR should be knowledgeable and skilled in managing potential adverse events resulting from EMR.

Effect of prior biopsy sampling, tattoo placement, and snare sampling on endoscopic resection of large nonpedunculated colorectal lesions

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic manipulations, including biopsy sampling, tattoo application on the lesion itself, and sampling of the lesion with a polypectomy snare, are frequently performed on large nonpedunculated colorectal lesions ≥ 20 mm (LNCL) before referral for endoscopic resection.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect of prior manipulations on the technical difficulty and recurrence rates of subsequent endoscopic treatment.

DESIGN

Retrospective study.

SETTING

Two referral centers.

PATIENTS

Patients with LNCL referred for endoscopic resection.

INTERVENTIONS

Endoscopic resection.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENT

En-bloc resection rate, rate of successful complete endoscopic resection without the need for ablation of visible residual, recurrence rate on follow-up, independent predictive factors for en-bloc resection, complete resection without ablation of visible residual, and recurrence.

RESULTS

A total of 132 lesions was analyzed: 46 lesions without any prior manipulation, 44 with prior biopsy sampling only, and 42 with prior advanced manipulation including tattoo and/or snare sampling. The en-bloc resection rate was 34.8% for nonmanipulated lesions, 15.9% for lesions with prior biopsy sampling, and 4.8% for lesions with prior advanced manipulation (P = .001). Complete endoscopic resection without the need for ablation of visible residual was performed in 93.5% of nonmanipulated lesions, 68.2% of lesions with prior biopsy sampling, and 50% of lesions with prior advanced manipulation (P < .001). Recurrence rates were 7.7%, 40.7%, and 53.8% in the 3 groups (P = .001). In multivariate analysis, prior biopsy sampling was an independent predictor for inability to perform complete resection without ablation of visible residual (odds ratio .24, P < .05) and for recurrence (odds ratio 11.5, P = .004) compared with nonmanipulated lesions. Prior advanced manipulation was an independent predictor for inability to perform en-bloc resection (odds ratio .024, P = .001), for inability to perform complete resection without ablation of visible residual (odds ratio .081, P < .001), and for recurrence (odds ratio 18.8, P = .001).

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective study.

CONCLUSIONS

Prior biopsy sampling and advanced manipulation have significant deleterious effects on endoscopic treatment of LNCL.

Endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection of epithelial neoplasia of the colon

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) with curative intent has evolved into a safe and effective technique and is currently the gold standard for management of large colonic epithelial neoplasms. Piecemeal EMR is associated with a high risk of local recurrence requiring vigilant surveillance and repeat interventions. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) was introduced in Japan for the management of early gastric cancer, and has recently been described for en bloc resection of colonic lesions greater than 20 mm. En bloc resection allows accurate histological assessment of the depth of invasion, minimizes the risk of local recurrence and helps determine additional therapy. Morphologic classification of lesions prior to resection allows prediction of depth of invasion and risk of nodal metastasis, allowing selection of the appropriate intervention. This review provides an overview of the assessment of epithelial neoplasms of the colon and the application of EMR and ESD techniques in their management.