Endoscopic treatment of early colorectal cancer - just a competition with surgery?

Case report: Successful treatment of advanced colon cancer in an eighty-year-old man with long-term and multi-stage endoscopic minimally invasive therapy

Background

No previous studies have reported on the use of minimally invasive endoscopic therapy for colon cancer in older patients.

Case presentation

An 80-year-old man was admitted to our hospital with haematochezia and diagnosed with advanced colon cancer in 2018. Traditional surgical care was rejected by his family. We successfully treated the patient with multiple minimally invasive endoscopic therapies, such as argon plasma coagulation, from 2018 to 2021.

Conclusion

Invasive endoscopic therapy is a feasible way to treat colon cancer in older patients.

Weighing the benefits of lymphadenectomy in early-stage colorectal cancer

Recent advancements in endoscopic procedures have resulted in a growing diagnosis of early colorectal cancer (CRC) cases, where classical en bloc lymph node (LN) dissection is not performed and treatment is terminated with the removal of the main cancer lesion by endoscopy without pathologic LN staging. Although many studies report noninferior outcomes of endoscopic resection in comparison to surgical resection, a cautious approach to completing treatment with endoscopic resection alone is recommended because LN metastases may be present even in early-stage CRC. In most countries, including the United States, Europe, and South Korea, the guidelines for additional surgery after endoscopic resection are very similar. If LN metastasis is suspected, even in T1 stage or lower lesions, further surgery is an essential treatment modality, but confirmation of the presence of LN metastasis is perhaps the most difficult part of this process. Another paradoxical recent trend is the expansion of more extensive and complete surgical lymphadenectomy for CRC. The success rate of surgery has improved dramatically over the past decade with the introduction of surgical devices and minimally invasive surgery, and the associated risks have been significantly reduced. While the burden of surgery on patients is understandable, the indications for surgery in early colon cancer need to be carefully reviewed to improve cure rates. In this process, we believe that an integrated decision-making process with surgeons, radiologists, and pathologists, in addition to the opinions of endoscopists, will be an important process to improve the cure rate.

Volume of surgical interventions for benign colorectal tumors – an analysis of 3510 surgical and endoscopic resections in the single colorectal center in Poland

Introduction: Colorectal cancer is the most frequent neoplasm of the whole gastrointestinal track. Due to screening colonoscopy program, colorectal lesions are often diagnosed at early stage. The vast majority of them are possible to remove endoscopically. However, a substantial percentage of benign lesion in Western centers are still operated. The aim of this article was to determine the percentage of surgical resections due to benign adenomas in the reference center of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and colorectal surgery in Poland. Materials and Methods: Retrospective analysis of 3 510 patients operated from 2015 to 2019 in Center of Bowel Treatment in Brzeziny. Results: We have analyzed 3 510 endoscopic and surgical procedures performed in the colon: 601 ESDs; 1 002 endoscopic mucosal resections (EMRs); and 1,907 surgical resections. Out of 601 ESDs, 57 invaded the submucosa, of which 29 (4.8%) were non-therapeutic ESDs. In 5 patients, due to occurrence of post-ESD perforation, an additional surgical intervention was necessary. Out of the 1,002 EMRs, 22 cases (2.2%) were diagnosed with deeply infiltrating cancers, which required a surgery. The overall percentage of the need for surgery in the endoscopically treated patients (ESD + mucosectomy) was 3.5% (56/1 603). Among resection surgeries, 15 of them (0.8%) ended with the diagnosis of a benign lesion in the postoperative histopathological examination. Conclusions: Inclusion advanced endoscopic techniques such as ESD to routine clinical practice in colorectal centers gives clear benefits for the patients. Well defined and standardized process of qualifying for appropriate treatment allows to significantly reduce the percentage of abdominal approach surgery due to benign colorectal lesions.  

Surgical resection after endoscopic resection in patients with T1 colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Additional surgical resection (ASR) after endoscopic resection (ER) in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) allows a complete staging and may decrease the recurrence rate, but no meta-analysis is available. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of ER vs. ER + ASR as a treatment for patients with T1 (stage 1) CRC.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search from databases (PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library) for cohort studies published up to November 2019. The outcomes were overall survival (OS), local recurrence, recurrence, disease-specific survival, recurrence-free survival, and metastasis.

RESULTS

Seven studies were included. There were 1205 patients in the ASR group and 993 patients in the ER group. Compared with ER, ASR was associated with better OS (OR = 0.31, 95% CI: 0.18-0.53, P < 0.001) and a borderline significant difference in lower local recurrence rates (OR = 0.29, 95% CI: 0.08-1.01, P = 0.052), but no differences were observed in recurrences, disease-specific survival, recurrence-free survival, and distant metastasis. A sensitivity analysis was performed; excluding each study sequentially from the pooled analysis did not affect the overall conclusion of the study.

CONCLUSION

Compared with ER, ASR after ER could improve the overall survival for patients with T1 CRC.