Meta-analysis and systematic review of colorectal endoscopic mucosal resection

Efficacy and Safety of Cold Versus Hot Snare Endoscopic Mucosal Resection in Colorectal Polyp Removal: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Cold snare endoscopic mucosal resection (C-EMR) is hypothesized to offer a safety advantage over hot snare endoscopic mucosal resection (H-EMR). The primary objective of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of C-EMR versus H-EMR for the management of colorectal lesions.

METHODS

A meta-analysis was performed to determine pooled odds ratios (ORs) for comparing outcomes between the C-EMR and H-EMR groups.

RESULTS

The pooled OR for complete resection rates were estimated at 0.70 (95% CI: 0.36-1.36, P =0.29) and en bloc rates were 0.24 (95% CI: 0.05-1.08, P =0.06) between C-EMR group and H-EMR group. The overall complete resection rate for C-EMR was 84%, and the en bloc resection rate was 57. Notably, C-EMR was associated with a significantly lower incidence of delayed bleeding. The recurrence rate of polyps was very low (2%) when treating sessile serrated polyp (SSP) lesions, but higher (23%) for non-SSP lesions. Subgroup analysis revealed minimal recurrence of polyps after using C-EMR for lesions between 10 to 20 mm and ≥20 mm.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis suggests that C-EMR could be a safer and equally effective alternative to H-EMR for resecting colorectal lesions. We recommend C-EMR as the preferred method for excising large colorectal lesions.

Rhabdomyolysis following colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: A case report

The occurrences of rhabdomyolysis after endoscopic submucosal dissection surgery were rarely reported. This is a case involving rhabdomyolysis affecting the muscles of the left buttocks and left hip following a prolonged endoscopic submucosal surgery.

Endoscopic resection of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps: current standards of treatment

Colorectal cancer is a significant public health concern, and large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps pose a substantial risk for malignancy and incomplete resection, which may lead to interval cancer. The choice of resection technique is influenced by various factors, including polyp size, morphology, location, submucosal invasion depth and endoscopist expertise. For non-cancerous superficial large non-pedunculated polyps, conventional hot or cold snare polypectomy, endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection are common techniques for non-surgical therapeutic endoscopic resection of these polyps. This manuscript provides a comprehensive review of literature on current endoscopic resection techniques for large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps, emphasising indications, advantages, limitations and outcomes.

DECIDE: Delphi Expert Consensus Statement on Inflammatory Bowel Disease Dysplasia Shared Management Decision-Making

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Inflammatory bowel disease colitis-associated dysplasia is managed with either enhanced surveillance and endoscopic resection or prophylactic surgery. The rate of progression to cancer after a dysplasia diagnosis remains uncertain in many cases and patients have high thresholds for accepting proctocolectomy. Individualised discussion of management options is encouraged to take place between patients and their multidisciplinary teams for best outcomes. We aimed to develop a toolkit to support a structured, multidisciplinary and shared decision-making approach to discussions about dysplasia management options between clinicians and their patients.

METHODS

Evidence from systematic literature reviews, mixed-methods studies conducted with key stakeholders, and decision-making expert recommendations were consolidated to draft consensus statements by the DECIDE steering group. These were then subjected to an international, multidisciplinary modified electronic Delphi process until an a priori threshold of 80% agreement was achieved to establish consensus for each statement.

RESULTS

In all, 31 members [15 gastroenterologists, 14 colorectal surgeons and two nurse specialists] from nine countries formed the Delphi panel. We present the 18 consensus statements generated after two iterative rounds of anonymous voting.

CONCLUSIONS

By consolidating evidence for best practice using literature review and key stakeholder and decision-making expert consultation, we have developed international consensus recommendations to support health care professionals counselling patients on the management of high cancer risk colitis-associated dysplasia. The final toolkit includes clinician and patient decision aids to facilitate shared decision-making.

Colonoscopic-assisted laparoscopic wedge resection versus segmental colon resection for benign colonic polyps: a comparative cost analysis

AIM

The colonoscopic-assisted laparoscopic wedge resection (CAL-WR) is proven to be an effective and safe alternative to a segmental colon resection (SCR) for large or complex benign colonic polyps that are not eligible for endoscopic removal. This analysis aimed to evaluate the costs of CAL-WR and compare them to the costs of an SCR.

METHOD

A single-centre 90-day 'in-hospital' comparative cost analysis was performed on patients undergoing CAL-WR or SCR for complex benign polyps between 2016 and 2020. The CAL-WR group consisted of 44 patients who participated in a prospective multicentre study (LIMERIC study). Inclusion criteria were (1) endoscopically unresectable benign polyps; (2) residual or recurrence after previous polypectomy; or (3) irradically resected low risk pT1 colon carcinoma. The comparison group, which was retrospectively identified, included 32 patients who underwent an elective SCR in the same period.

RESULTS

Colonoscopic-assisted laparoscopic wedge resection was associated with significantly fewer complications (7% in the CAL-WR group vs. 45% in the SCR group, P < 0.001), shorter operation time (50 min in the CAL-WR group vs. 119 min in the SCR group, P < 0.001), shorter length of hospital stay (median length of stay 2 days in the CAL-WR group vs. 4 days in the SCR group, P < 0.001) and less use of surgical resources (reduction in costs of 32% per patient), resulting in a cost savings of €2372 (£2099 GBP) per patient (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Given the clinical and financial benefits, CAL-WR should be recommended for complex benign polyps that are not eligible for endoscopic resection before major surgery is considered.

Endocuff Vision-Assisted Resection for Difficult Colonic Lesions-Preliminary Results of a Multicenter, Prospective Randomized Pilot Study

Background-Screening programs for colorectal cancer are implemented due to their ability to reduce mortality. The Endocuff Vision is a new endoscopic device that significantly improves the adenoma detection rate. The primary outcome was to assess the efficacy of ECV in improving stability and reducing operation time during difficult colon polypectomies in a multicenter randomized prospective study. Methods-In a randomized multicenter pilot study, two groups of patients who underwent difficult polypectomies with and without the assistance of Endocuff Vision were compared. Demographics and clinical characteristics of patients were obtained, and polyps' size, morphology, site, and access (SMSA); polypectomy time; and endoscope stability were evaluated. Results-From October 2016 to April 2020, 32 patients were enrolled. In total, 12 patients underwent Endocuff Vision polypectomy, and 20 patients underwent standard polypectomy by using a computer-generated random number table. No statistical differences were found in clinical characteristics, SMSA, and polypectomy time. The most interesting findings were the positive correlations between shaking and SMSA (r = 0.55, p = 0.005) and shaking and polypectomy time (r = 0.745, p < 0.0001). Conclusion-Endocuff Vision seems to be adequately stable during difficult endoscopic resection procedures. The new parameter proposed that shaking is strongly correlated to the stability of the endoscope, the difficulty of the resection (SMSA), and the polypectomy time.

Endoscopic mucosal resection with double band ligation versus endoscopic submucosal dissection for small rectal neuroendocrine tumors

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic resection remains an effective method for the treatment of small rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) (≤ 10 mm). Moreover, endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) with double band ligation (EMR-dB), a simplified modification of EMR with band ligation, is an alternative strategy to remove small rectal NETs.

AIM

To evaluate the feasibility and safety of EMR-dB for the treatment of small rectal NETs (≤ 10 mm).

METHODS

A total of 50 patients with small rectal NETs, without regional lymph node enlargement or distant metastasis confirmed by endoscopic ultrasound, computerized tomography scan, or magnetic resonance imaging, were enrolled in the study from March 2021 to June 2022. These patients were randomly assigned into the EMR-dB (n = 25) group or endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) group (n = 25). The characteristics of the patients and tumors, procedure time, devices cost, complete resection rate, complications, and recurrence outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

There were 25 patients (13 males, 12 females; age range 28-68 years old) in the EMR-dB group, and the ESD group contained 25 patients (15 males, 10 females; age range 25-70 years old). Both groups had similar lesion sizes (EMR-dB 4.53 ± 1.02 mm, ESD 5.140 ± 1.74 mm; P = 0.141) and resected lesion sizes(1.32 ± 0.52 cm vs 1.58 ± 0.84 cm; P = 0.269). Furthermore, the histological complete resection and en bloc resection rates were achieved in all patients (100% for each). In addition, there was no significant difference in the complication rate between the two groups. However, the procedure time was significantly shorter and the devices cost was significantly lower in the EMR-dB group. Besides, there was no recurrence in both groups during the follow-up period.

CONCLUSION

The procedure time of EMR-dB was shorter compared with ESD, and both approaches showed a similar curative effect. Taken together, EMR-dB was a feasible and safe option for the treatment of small rectal NETs.

Large bowel obstruction caused by a colonic polyp

A large bowel obstruction (LBO) is an emergency condition that requires early diagnosis and prompt treatment, and it is also crucial to identify the cause of the obstruction. Here, we describe a 76-year-old woman who presented to the hospital with a 1-day history of abdominal pain and vomiting and was diagnosed with LBO. Endoscopic findings showed that the cause of the LBO was initially determined to be a Bormann Type I tumour in the sigmoid colon. However, the surgery was performed later; the pathological findings led to the diagnosis of colonic obstruction caused by a colonic polyp in the sigmoid colon narrowed by chronic diverticulitis. Colonic polyps rarely cause LBO. Poor observation due to colonic stenosis can mask the morphology of the lesion. In cases of LBO, colonic polyps should be differentially diagnosed in addition to colon cancer.

Colonoscopic-Assisted Laparoscopic Wedge Resection for Colonic Lesions: A Prospective Multicentre Cohort Study (LIMERIC-Study)

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a modified colonoscopic-assisted laparoscopic wedge resection.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

The use of segmental colectomy in patients with endoscopically unresectable colonic lesions results in significant morbidity and mortality. CAL-WR is an alternative procedure that may reduce morbidity.

METHODS

This prospective multicentre study was performed in 13 Dutch hospitals between January 2017 and December 2019. Inclusion criteria were (1) colonic lesions inaccessible using current endoscopic resection techniques (judged by an expert panel), (2) non-lifting residual/recurrent adenomatous tissue after previous polypectomy or (3) an undetermined resection margin after endoscopic removal of a low-risk pT1 colon carcinoma. Thirty-day morbidity, technical success rate and radicality were evaluated.

RESULTS

Of the 118 patients included (56% male, mean age 66 years, SD ± 8 years), 66 (56%) had complex lesions unsuitable for endoscopic removal, 34 (29%) had non-lifting residual/recurrent adenoma after previous polypectomy and 18 (15%) had uncertain resection margins after polypectomy of a pT1 colon carcinoma. CAL-WR was technically successful in 93% and R0 resection was achieved in 91% of patients. Minor complications (Clavien-Dindo I-II) were noted in 7 patients (6%) and an additional oncologic segmental resection was performed in 12 cases (11%). Residual tissue at the scar was observed in 5% of patients during endoscopic follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

CAL-WR is an effective, organ-preserving approach that results in minor complications and circumvents the need for major surgery. CAL-WR therefore deserves consideration when endoscopic excision of circumscribed lesions is impossible or incomplete.

Artificial intelligence-enhanced white-light colonoscopy with attention guidance predicts colorectal cancer invasion depth

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and EMR are applied in treating superficial colorectal neoplasms but are contraindicated by deeply invasive colorectal cancer (CRC). The invasion depth of neoplasms can be examined by an automated artificial intelligence (AI) system to determine the applicability of ESD and EMR.

METHODS

A deep convolutional neural network with a tumor localization branch to guide invasion depth classification was constructed on the GoogLeNet architecture. The model was trained using 7734 nonmagnified white-light colonoscopy (WLC) images supplemented by image augmentation from 657 lesions labeled with histopathologic analysis of invasion depth. An independent testing dataset consisting of 1634 WLC images from 156 lesions was used to validate the model.

RESULTS

For predicting noninvasive and superficially invasive neoplasms, the model achieved an overall accuracy of 91.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 89.6%-92.4%), with 91.2% sensitivity (95% CI, 88.8%-93.3%) and 91.0% specificity (95% CI, 89.0%-92.7%) at an optimal cutoff of .41 and the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve of .970 (95% CI, .962-.978). Inclusion of the advanced CRC data significantly increased the sensitivity in differentiating superficial neoplasms from deeply invasive early CRC to 65.3% (95% CI, 61.9%-68.8%) with an AUROC curve of .729 (95% CI, .699-.759), similar to experienced endoscopists (.691; 95% CI, .624-.758).

CONCLUSIONS

We have developed an AI-enhanced attention-guided WLC system that differentiates noninvasive or superficially submucosal invasive neoplasms from deeply invasive CRC with high accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity.

Indications and outcomes of endoscopic resection for non-pedunculated colorectal lesions: A narrative review

In the last years, endoscopic techniques gained a crucial role in the treatment of colorectal flat lesions. At the same time, the importance of a reliable assessment of such lesions to predict the malignancy and the depth of invasion of the colonic wall emerged. The current unsolved dilemma about the endoscopic excision techniques concerns the necessity of a reliable submucosal invasive cancer assessment system that can stratify the risk of the post-procedural need for surgery. Accordingly, this narrative literature review aims to compare the available diagnostic strategies in predicting malignancy and to give a guide about the best techniques to employ. We performed a literature search using electronic databases (MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library). We collected all articles about endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) registering the outcomes. Moreover, we analyzed all meta-analyses comparing EMR vs ESD outcomes for colorectal sessile or non-polypoid lesions of any size, preoperatively estimated as non-invasive. Seven meta-analysis studies, mainly Eastern, were included in the analysis comparing 124 studies and overall 22954 patients who underwent EMR and ESD procedures. Of these, eighty-two were retrospective, twenty-four perspective, nine case-control, and six cohorts, while three were randomized clinical trials. A total of 18118 EMR and 10379 ESD were completed for a whole of 28497 colorectal sessile or non-polypoid lesions > 5-10 mm in size. In conclusion, it is crucial to enhance the preoperative diagnostic workup, especially in deciding the most suitable endoscopic method for radical resection of flat colorectal lesions at risk of underlying malignancy. Additionally, the ESD necessitates further improvement because of the excessively time-consuming as well as the intraprocedural technical hindrances and related complications. We found a higher rate of en bloc resections and R0 for ESD than EMR for non-pedunculated colorectal lesions. Nevertheless, despite the lower local recurrence rates, ESD had greater perforation rates and needed lengthier procedural times. The prevailing risk for additional surgery in ESD rather than EMR for complications or oncologic reasons is still uncertain.

Outcomes of a hybrid technique using EMR and endoscopic full-thickness resection for polyps not amenable to standard techniques (with video)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The full-thickness resection device (FTRD) offers a safe and effective approach for resection of complex colorectal lesions but is limited to lesions <2 cm in size. A hybrid approach-combining EMR with the FTRD-significantly expands the pool of lesions amenable to this technique; however, its safety and efficacy has not been well established.

METHODS

We report a single-center retrospective study of consecutive patients who underwent full-thickness resection (FTR) of colorectal lesions, either with a standalone FTRD or a hybrid (EMR + FTRD) approach. Outcomes of technical success, clinical success (macroscopically complete resection), R0 resection, and adverse events (AEs) were evaluated.

RESULTS

Sixty-nine FTR procedures (38 standalone FTR and 31 hybrid EMR + FTR) were performed on 65 patients. The most common indications were nonlifting polyp (43%) or suspected high-grade dysplasia or carcinoma (38%). Hybrid EMR + FTR permitted resection of significantly larger lesions (mean, 39 mm; range, 15-70 mm) compared with standalone FTR (mean, 17 mm; range, 7-25 mm; P < .01). Clinical success (91%), technical success (83%), and R0 resection (81%) rates did not differ between standalone and hybrid groups. Most patients (96%) were discharged home on the day of the procedure. Three AEs occurred, including 2 patients who developed acute appendicitis.

CONCLUSIONS

A hybrid approach combining EMR and FTRD maintains safety and efficacy while permitting resection of significantly larger lesions than FTRD alone.

Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for management of colorectal polyps

BACKGROUND

The Japanese Society of Gastroenterology (JSGE) published ''Daicho Polyp Shinryo Guideline 2014'' in Japanese and a part of this guideline was published in English as "Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for management of colorectal polyps" in the Journal of Gastroenterology in 2015. A revised version of the Japanese-language guideline was published in 2020, and here we introduce a part of the contents of revised version.

METHODS

The guideline committee discussed and drew up a series of clinical questions (CQs). Recommendation statements for the CQs were limited to items with multiple therapeutic options. Items with established conclusions that had 100% agreement with previous guidelines (background questions) and items with no (or old) evidence that are topics for future research (future research questions: FRQs) were given descriptions only. To address the CQs and FRQs, PubMed, ICHUSHI, and other sources were searched for relevant articles published in English from 1983 to October 2018 and articles published in Japanese from 1983 to November 2018. The Japan Medical Library Association was also commissioned to search for relevant materials. Manual searches were performed for questions with insufficient online references.

RESULTS

The professional committee created 18 CQs and statements concerning the current concept and diagnosis/treatment of various colorectal polyps, including their epidemiology, screening, pathophysiology, definition and classification, diagnosis, management, practical treatment, complications, and surveillance after treatment, and other colorectal lesions (submucosal tumors, nonneoplastic polyps, polyposis, hereditary tumors, ulcerative colitis-associated tumors/carcinomas).

CONCLUSIONS

After evaluation by the moderators, evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for management of colorectal polyps were proposed for 2020. This report addresses the therapeutic related CQs introduced when formulating these guidelines.

Recurrence with malignancy after endoscopic resection of large colon polyps with high-grade dysplasia: incidence and risk factors

BACKGROUND

In the West, piecemeal endoscopic resection remains the primary treatment for large colon polyps (LCP), as most recurrences are believed to be benign and resectable with follow-up endoscopy. However, invasive malignancy at the site of prior piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection has been reported in the Asian literature. This study aims to identify the incidence of and the risk factors for local recurrence with malignancy after endoscopic resection of LCP with high-grade dysplasia (HGD).

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, we identified patients undergoing complete endoscopic resection of LCPs (≥ 20 mm) with HGD at the Cleveland Clinic between January 2000 and December 2016. Demographic, endoscopic, and pathologic data were collected. All subsequent endoscopic and pathology reports were reviewed to identify recurrence. The cumulative incidence of malignancy at the polypectomy site was determined and univariate analysis was performed to assess risk factors.

RESULTS

A total of 254 LCPs with HGD were resected in 229 patients. Mean polyp size was 29.2 mm. There were 138 lesions resected in piecemeal fashion and 116 en-bloc. After a median follow-up of 28.7 months for the entire cohort, local recurrence with malignancy was diagnosed in six cases. Median time to malignancy diagnosis was 28.5 months. All malignant cases occurred after piecemeal resection and none after en-bloc resection (HR 11.4; 95% CI 0.48-273).

CONCLUSION

Malignancy after endoscopic resection of LCPs with HGD is uncommon and may be associated with piecemeal resection. When possible, en-bloc resection should be the goal for the management of LCPs.

Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society guidelines for colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection/endoscopic mucosal resection

Suitable lesions for endoscopic treatment include not only early colorectal carcinomas but also several types of precarcinomatous adenomas. It is important to establish practical guidelines wherein preoperative diagnosis of colorectal neoplasia and selection of endoscopic treatment procedures are appropriately outlined and to ensure that actual endoscopic treatment is useful and safe in general hospitals when carried out in accordance with guidelines. In cooperation with the Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum, the Japanese Society of Coloproctology, and the Japanese Society of Gastroenterology, the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society compiled colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection/endoscopic mucosal resection guidelines by using evidence-based methods in 2014. The first edition of these guidelines was published 5 years ago. Accordingly, we have published the second edition of these guidelines based on recent new knowledge and evidence.

Multicenter Study of the Hemorrhage Risk after Endoscopic Mucosal Resection Associated with Direct Oral Anticoagulants

Backgrounds and Aims

Recently, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have become widely used for preventing thromboembolism. However, postoperative hemorrhage (POH) is a major complication associated with endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for colorectal lesions. In this multicenter study, we analyzed the incidence of POH after EMR associated with DOACs and explored the associated risk factors.

Materials and Methods

This study was a multicenter retrospective cohort study conducted at 8 Japanese institutions. A total of 2062 cases that underwent EMR for colorectal lesions at these 8 institutions from October 2016 to September 2017 were analyzed. The cases were divided into 4 groups: the DOAC group (63 cases), warfarin group (34 cases), antiplatelet group (185 cases), and no antithrombotics group (1780 cases). In all lesions of the DOAC and warfarin groups, endoscopic clipping was performed after EMR. The rate of POH in the DOAC group, patients' clinical characteristics, the risk factors of POH, and the rate of thromboembolism due to stopping DOACs were compared with other groups.

Results

The rates of POH were 7.9%^∗ (5/63), 2.9% (1/34), 3.2% (6/185), and 0.6%^∗∗ (11/1780) in the DOAC, warfarin, antiplatelet, and no antithrombotics groups, respectively (^∗ vs. ^∗∗, p < 0.001). Regarding risk factors, the tumor size with POH (mm) was significantly bigger than that without POH (16.2 ± 8.3 vs. 7.2 ± 4.9, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in the rates of POH based on the type of DOAC. In addition, no thromboembolisms occurred due to stopping of DOAC treatment.

Conclusions

Patients receiving DOACs had significantly higher rates of POH after EMR than those without antithrombotics.

Polypectomy versus surgery in early colon cancer: size and location of colon cancer affect long-term survival

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The colon cancer survival rate is significantly affected by location, stage, and size of the cancer. Polypectomy was shown be as equally effective as surgery in early-stage colon cancer, but there have been no established clinical guidelines in the management of colon cancer based on the size of the polyp or the tumor location. The aim of our study was to assess the early-stage colon cancer-specific survival rate in patients who underwent endoscopic polypectomy versus surgery, based on size and location of tumor in early-stage colon cancer.

METHODS

This is a population-based nationwide study in the USA.

RESULTS

Of 13,157 patients, 15.5% underwent endoscopic treatment and 84.5% underwent surgical therapy. For early cancer tumors located in the left colon, polypectomy yielded comparable 5-year survivals to surgery irrespective of size of the tumors. Five-year early cancer-specific survivals were similar for tumors located in the right colon that were < 20 mm in size (94.5 vs 94.3%, p value = 0.94). However, tumors > 20 mm in size that were located in the right colon had better survivals when treated surgically compared to those treated with polypectomy (20-39 mm: 91.8 vs 74.2%; ≥ 40 mm: 92.4 vs 60%, both p values < 0.01). Similar results were obtained on propensity score analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Polypectomy was as effective as surgical therapy for small tumors. For larger tumors, surgical therapy is better than polypectomy for right-sided tumors, but both are equally effective for left-sided tumors.

Perforation and Postoperative Bleeding Associated with Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection in Colorectal Tumors: An Analysis of 398 Lesions Treated in Saga, Japan

Objective The aim of this study was to clarify the safety of colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) during the era of health insurance coverage starting from April 2012 in Japan. Methods Between April 2012 and May 2016, ESD was applied to 398 lesions in 373 patients. Risk factors for serious complications of colorectal ESD, perforation and post-ESD bleeding, were evaluated focusing on the resected specimen size, location, growth pattern, invasion depth, histopathology, postoperative clipping, and procedure time. In addition, the relationship between serious complications and patients' background characteristics was analyzed. Results Among 373 patients, perforation occurred in 12 patients and post-ESD bleeding in 19 patients. A univariate analysis showed that the risk factors for perforation were the lesion size, the resected specimen size, and a long operation time. A multivariate analysis showed that a long operation time was a risk factor for perforation during colorectal ESD. A univariate analysis indicated that significant risk factors for postoperative bleeding were a long operation time, rectal lesion, and cancer. All patients with serious complications were treated by an endoscopic procedure without blood transfusion or the need to convert to open surgery. Conclusion The present study suggests that colorectal ESD may be accepted with relative safety in Japan as a common therapeutic approach for early colorectal cancer.

Challenges associated with the pathological diagnosis of colorectal tumors less than 10 mm in size

Various techniques including cold snare polypectomy and endoscopic mucosal resection are used for the removal of small colorectal polyps. Specimens of resected polyps are prepared in pathology laboratories and analyzed to make a pathological diagnosis. However, reports on how different resection methods influence the pathological diagnosis are limited. This article discusses the problems associated with the failure of polyp retrieval and fragmentation of small specimens during collection and the effects of certain parameters on the pathological diagnosis, particularly with regard to surgical margins. In the future, although pathologists are expected to encounter problems as a result of minor findings that are not clinically problematic, relatively rare cases such as submucosal invasion by a small carcinoma should not be overlooked.

Management of complex polyps of the colon and rectum

PUPRPOSE

Benign polyps that are technically challenging and unsafe to remove via polypectomy are known as complex polyps. Concerns regarding safety and completeness of resection dictate they undergo advanced endoscopic techniques, such as endoscopic mucosal resection or surgery. We provide a comprehensive overview of complex polyps and current treatment options.

METHODS

A review of the English literature was conducted to identifyarticles describing the management of complex polyps of the colon and rectum.

RESULTS

Endoscopic mucosal resection is the standard of care for the majority of complex polyps. Only polyps that fail endoscopic mucosal resection or are highly suspicious of invasive cancer but which cannot be removed endoscopically warrant surgery.

CONCLUSION

Several factors influence the treatment of a complex polyp; therefore, there cannot be a "one-size-fitsall" approach. Treatment should be tailored to the lesion's characteristics, the risk of adverse events, and the resources available to the treating physician.

Endoscopic non-ablative fractional laser therapy in an orthotopic colon tumour model

Colorectal cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer-related deaths. Although several therapeutic management strategies are available at the early colon cancer stages, such as endoscopic mucosal or submucosal dissection, associated complications often include bleeding or bowel perforations. As an alternative approach, we investigated endoscopic non-ablative fractional laser (eNAFL) irradiation as a minimally invasive therapeutic modality for the treatment of early-stage colorectal cancer. By implanting SL4-DsRed colon cancer cells into the colons of the C57BL/6 mice, we developed an orthotopic colon tumour mouse model and demonstrated the early-stage tumour growth delay following the eNAFL irradiation. Additionally, we evaluated the temperature changes in the eNAFL-irradiated area using numerical simulations, and induced inflammation using histological analysis. Our results indicate a minimal thermal damage confined to the irradiated spot, sparing the adjacent tissue and alteration in the tumour microenvironment. eNAFL irradiation may be clinically useful as a minimally invasive therapeutic intervention at the early stage of tumourigenesis. In future, an optimal eNAFL therapeutic dose should be determined, in order to increase the efficacy of this approach.

Endoscopic management of mucosal lesions in the gastrointestinal tract

With the increasing role of endoscopy in patient evaluation, more mucosal lesions, including gastric, duodenal and colonic polyps, are encountered during routine examinations. It is imperative for gastroenterologists to become familiar with the endoscopic management of these various gastrointestinal lesions. In this article, various resection techniques will be discussed, including hot/cold forceps polypectomy, hot/cold snare polypectomy, endoscopic mucosal resection, and endoscopic submucosal dissection. The article will also discuss the evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of these techniques and the future direction of endoscopic management of mucosal lesions in the gastrointestinal tract.

Should antibiotics be administered after endoscopic mucosalresection in patients with colon polyps?

BACKGROUND/AIM

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is widely used for treating gastrointestinal polypoid lesions. However, it is currently unclear whether antibiotic administration is necessary after EMR of colon polyps to prevent infection. We aimed to assess whether antibiotic administration is essential in such conditions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In total, 115 patients with colon polyps were randomly assigned to 3 groups based on the treatment given after EMR: Group A, no antibiotics treatment after EMR (n = 38); Group B, administration of levofloxacin after EMR (n = 38); and Group C, administration of ceftazidime after EMR (n = 39).

RESULTS

The colon polyps were completely removed by EMR in all cases without any serious complications. Although infection developed in 2 cases in Group A, it was resolved via levofloxacin injection over 3 days; infection did not develop in any cases in Group B and C. The postoperative infection rate was not significantly different among Groups A, B, and C. After 6 months, we noted that the wound surface had properly healed and there was no relapse of colon polyps in any patients.

CONCLUSION

The use of antibiotics after EMR of colon polyps to prevent infection did not affect the prognosis of patients.

Endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal lesions: A systematic review

AIM

To assess the efficacy and safety of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for the treatment of colorectal lesions.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted from January 2000 to May 2015. The main outcomes were: recurrence after "en bloc" and "piecemeal" resection; procedure related adverse events; the EMR endoscopic success rate and the completely eradicated resection rate (R0) after ESD.

RESULTS

A total of 66 studies were included in the analysis. The total number of lesions was 17950 (EMR: 11.873; ESD: 6077). Recurrence rate was higher in the EMR than ESD group (765/7303l vs. 50/3910 OR 8.19, 95% CI 6.2-10.9 p<0.0001). EMR-en bloc resection was achieved in 6793/10803 lesions (62.8%) while ESD-en bloc resection was obtained in 5500/6077 lesions (90.5%) (OR 0.18, p<0.0001, 95% CI 0.16-0.2). Perforation occurred more frequently in ESD than in EMR group (p<0.0001, OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.15-0.24).

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic resection of large colorectal lesions is safe and effective. Compared with EMR, ESD results in higher "en bloc" resection rate and lower local recurrence rate, however ESD has high procedure-related complication rates.

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) versus endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for resection of large distal non-pedunculated colorectal adenomas (MATILDA-trial): rationale and design of a multicenter randomized clinical trial

Background

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is currently the most used technique for resection of large distal colorectal polyps. However, in large lesions EMR can often only be performed in a piecemeal fashion resulting in relatively low radical (R0)-resection rates and high recurrence rates. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a newer procedure that is more difficult resulting in a longer procedural time, but is promising due to the high en-bloc resection rates and the very low recurrence rates. We aim to evaluate the (cost-)effectiveness of ESD against EMR on both short (i.e. 6 months) and long-term (i.e. 36 months). We hypothesize that in the short-run ESD is more time consuming resulting in higher healthcare costs, but is (cost-) effective on the long-term due to lower patients burden, a higher number of R0-resections and lower recurrence rates with less need for repeated procedures.

Methods

This is a multicenter randomized clinical trial in patients with a non-pedunculated polyp larger than 20 mm in the rectum, sigmoid, or descending colon suspected to be an adenoma by means of endoscopic assessment. Primary endpoint is recurrence rate at follow-up colonoscopy at 6 months. Secondary endpoints are R0-resection rate, perceived burden and quality of life, healthcare resources utilization and costs, surgical referral rate, complication rate and recurrence rate at 36 months. Quality-adjusted-life-year (QALY) will be estimated taking an area under the curve approach and using EQ-5D-indexes. Healthcare costs will be calculated by multiplying used healthcare services with unit prices. The cost-effectiveness of ESD against EMR will be expressed as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) showing additional costs per recurrence free patient and as ICER showing additional costs per QALY.

Discussion

If this trial confirms ESD to be favorable on the long-term, the burden of extra colonoscopies and repeated procedures can be prevented for future patients.

Trial registration

NCT02657044 (Clinicaltrials.gov), registered January 8, 2016.

Dynamic Article: Full-Thickness Excision for Benign Colon Polyps Using Combined Endoscopic Laparoscopic Surgery

BACKGROUND

Benign colon polyps are commonly encountered but may not always be amenable to endoscopic excision because of their size, shape, location, or scarring from previous attempts. The addition of laparoscopy allows a greater degree of bowel manipulation, but the current technique is still limited when encountering a polyp with inadequate lifting attributed to polyp morphology or scarring. We describe an extension to the existing combined endoscopic laparoscopic surgery technique using a full-thickness approach to increase polyp maneuverability and local excision of difficult but benign polyps.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to report the technical details and preliminary results of a new approach for full-thickness excision of difficult colon polyps, combined endoscopic laparoscopic surgery full-thickness excision.

DESIGN

This study is a retrospective review of our experience from December 2013 to May 2015.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted at a single academic institution.

PATIENTS

All of the patients had previous incomplete colonoscopic polypectomy performed at other institutions. Patients were selected for our technique if the polyp had a benign appearance but was unable to be resected by traditional endoscopic or combined endoscopic laparoscopic surgery methods because of polyp morphology or scarring from previous biopsies.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The safety and feasibility of this procedure were measured.

RESULTS

Three patients underwent combined endoscopic laparoscopic surgery-full-thickness excision for difficult colon polyps. There were no intraoperative or postoperative complications. The length of stay was 1 day for all of the patients. All 3 of the patients had benign final pathology.

LIMITATIONS

This study was limited by the small number of patients in a single institution.

CONCLUSIONS

Full-thickness excision for benign colon polyps using combined endoscopic laparoscopic surgery is safe and feasible. Using this technique, difficult polyps not amenable to traditional endoscopic approaches can be removed and colectomy may be avoided.

Practice parameters for early colon cancer management: Italian Society of Colorectal Surgery (Società Italiana di Chirurgia Colo-Rettale; SICCR) guidelines

Early colon cancer (ECC) has been defined as a carcinoma with invasion limited to the submucosa regardless of lymph node status and according to the Royal College of Pathologists as TNM stage T1 NX M0. As the potential risk of lymph node metastasis ranges from 6 to 17% and the preoperative assessment of lymph node metastasis is not reliable, the management of ECC is still controversial, varying from endoscopic to radical resection. A meeting on recent advances on the management of colorectal polyps endorsed by the Italian Society of Colorectal Surgery (SICCR) took place in April 2014, in Genoa (Italy). Based on this material the SICCR decided to issue guidelines updating the evidence and to write a position statement paper in order to define the diagnostic and therapeutic strategy for ECC treatment in context of the Italian healthcare system.

Advantage of endoscopic mucosal resection with a cap for rectal neuroendocrine tumors

AIM: To compare the outcomes of endoscopic mucosal resection with a cap (EMR-C) with those of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for the resection of rectal neuroendocrine tumors.

METHODS: One hundred and sixteen lesions in 114 patients with rectal neuroendocrine tumor (NET) resected with EMR-C or ESD were included in the study. This study was performed at Pusan National University Yangsan Hospital between July 2009 and August 2014. We analyzed endoscopic complete resection rate, pathologic complete resection rate, procedure time, and adverse events in the EMR-C (n = 65) and ESD (n = 51) groups. We also performed a subgroup analysis by tumor size.

RESULTS: Mean tumor size was 4.62 ± 1.66 mm in the EMR-C group and 7.73 ± 3.14 mm in the ESD group (P < 0.001). Endoscopic complete resection rate was 100% in both groups. Histologic complete resection rate was significantly greater in the EMR-C group (92.3%) than in the ESD group (78.4%) (P = 0.042). Mean procedure time was significantly longer in the ESD group (14.43 ± 7.26 min) than in the EMR-C group (3.83 ± 1.17 min) (P < 0.001). Rates of histologic complete resection without complication were similar for tumor diameter ≤ 5 mm (EMR-C, 96%; ESD, 100%, P = 0.472) as well as in cases of 5 mm < tumor diameter ≤ 10 mm (EMR-C, 80%; ESD, 71.0%, P = 0.524).

CONCLUSION: EMR-C may be simple, faster, and more effective than ESD in removing rectal NETs and may be preferable for resection of small rectal NETs.

Acute appendicitis following endoscopic mucosal resection of cecal adenoma

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) allows the removal of flat or sessile lesions, laterally spreading tumors, and carcinoma of the colon or the rectum limited to the mucosa or the superficial submucosa. Acute appendicitis is the most common abdominal emergency requiring emergency surgery, and it is also a rare complication of diagnostic colonoscopy and therapeutic endoscopy, including EMR. In the case presented here, a 53-year-old female underwent colonoscopy due to a positive fecal occult blood test and was diagnosed with cecal adenoma. She was referred to our hospital and admitted for treatment. The patient had no other symptoms. EMR was performed, and 7 h after the surgery, the patient experienced right -lower abdominal pain. Laboratory tests performed the following day revealed a WBC count of 16000/mm³, a neutrophil count of 14144/mm³, and a C-reactive protein level of 2.20 mg/dL, indicating an inflammatory response. Computed tomography also revealed appendiceal wall thickening and swelling, so acute appendicitis following EMR was diagnosed. Antibiotics were initiated leading to total resolution of the symptoms, and the patient was discharged on the sixth post-operative day. Pathological analysis revealed a high-grade cecal tubular adenoma. Such acute appendicitis following EMR is extremely rare, and EMR of the cecum may be a rare cause of acute appendicitis.

Endoscopic Treatment of Early Cancer of the Colon

Colorectal cancer is the fourth most common cancer diagnosis worldwide and the second leading cause of cancer death. In the United States, it is estimated that in 2015 there will be 132,700 new cases of colorectal cancer (representing 8.43% of all new cancer cases) and 49,700 deaths. Colonoscopy plays a fundamental role in the prevention and management of colorectal cancer patients and is used for both the diagnosis and treatment of early colorectal cancer and its precursors. Improvements in colonoscopy preparation, new techniques of adenoma detection, and recent progress in endoscopic imaging methods are providing higher-quality results and reducing the incidence and mortality of the disease. Traditionally, colonoscopy has been used to remove precursor lesions. Invasive cancer was treated by surgical resection with or without chemoradiotherapy. During the past decade, endoscopic resection techniques have advanced, and cancers confined to the mucosal and superficial submucosal layers can now be resected via flexible endoscopes. Therefore, it is important to understand the indications and limitations of endoscopic resection, determine whether the cancer can be curatively resected, and assess the risk of lymph node metastasis, which precludes endoscopic treatment.

JGES guidelines for colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection/endoscopic mucosal resection

Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has become common in recent years. Suitable lesions for endoscopic treatment include not only early colorectal carcinomas but also many types of precarcinomatous adenomas. It is important to establish practical guidelines in which the preoperative diagnosis of colorectal neoplasia and the selection of endoscopic treatment procedures are properly outlined, and to ensure that the actual endoscopic treatment is useful and safe in general hospitals when carried out in accordance with the guidelines. In cooperation with the Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum, the Japanese Society of Coloproctology, and the Japanese Society of Gastroenterology, the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society has recently compiled a set of colorectal ESD/endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) guidelines using evidence-based methods. The guidelines focus on the diagnostic and therapeutic strategies and caveat before, during, and after ESD/EMR and, in this regard, exclude the specific procedures, types and proper use of instruments, devices, and drugs. Although eight areas, ranging from indication to pathology, were originally planned for inclusion in these guidelines, evidence was scarce in each area. Therefore, grades of recommendation were determined largely through expert consensus in these areas.

A new technique of totally laparoscopic resection with natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) for large rectal adenoma

There is no consensus about the best technique to use for the surgical treatment for large rectal adenomas. The advent of laparoscopic surgery has led to the development of several new methods for the treatment of gastrointestinal tumors. This study was designed to introduce an innovative technique of totally laparoscopic resection with natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) for large rectal adenomas and to assess the feasibility and safety of the technique. Between February 2011 and January 2014, we performed totally laparoscopic resection with NOSE on 18 patients with a large rectal adenoma. This new technique was successful in all 18 patients. The average size of the adenoma was 4.2 cm. Mean operation time was 108.4 min, and mean intraoperative blood loss was 36.6 ml. The mean time to passing of the first flatus was 2.3 days, and the mean postoperative hospital stay was 7.2 days. Only one patient needed analgesics after the operation. All patients were able to walk within the first 2 days. There were no cases of morbidity and recurrence. Totally laparoscopic resection with NOSE appears to be suitable for selected patients with a large adenoma located in mid- or low rectum.

National survey to determine current practices, training and attitudes towards advanced polypectomy in the UK

OBJECTIVE

Developments in advanced polypectomy technique provide an alternative to surgery in the management of large and complex colorectal polyps. These endoscopic techniques require expertise and can potentially incur high complication rates. This survey evaluates current UK practice, attitudes and training in advanced polypectomy.

DESIGN

Anonymous online questionnaire.

SETTING

Colonoscopists within the UK were asked about their approach to large polyps (>2 cm).

RESULTS

Among the 268 respondents (64% of whom were BCSP accredited), 86% were confident in removing lesions >2 cm by endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). Of these, 27% were classed as low volume operators (<10 lesions resected/annum) and 14% as high volume operators (>50/annum). By comparison, only 3% currently performed endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). Referring one or more benign polyps for surgery a year was common among responders of all levels (11-68%). Training deficiencies were common: only 21% of responders had received a period of training dedicated to advanced polypectomy; 58% of responders would welcome a national training scheme and a majority supported the implementation of advanced polypectomy accreditation with national guidelines. However, while 41% wanted nominated regional EMR experts, only 18% would welcome an integrated national referral network for large/complex polyps.

CONCLUSIONS

EMR is practised widely while ESD service provision is very limited. Most experienced colonoscopists are confident to perform piecemeal EMR, even if their training is suboptimal and annual numbers low. Practices and attitudes were variable, even among self-defined level 4 operators. Improving training and implementation of accreditation were welcomed, but there was little appetite for mandated referral to subspecialist 'experts' and national networks.

Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for management of colorectal polyps

BACKGROUND

Recently in Japan, the morbidity of colorectal polyp has been increasing. As a result, a large number of cases of colorectal polyps that are diagnosed and treated using colonoscopy has now increased, and clinical guidelines are needed for endoscopic management and surveillance after treatment.

METHODS

Three committees [the professional committee for making clinical questions (CQs) and statements by Japanese specialists, the expert panelist committee for rating statements by the modified Delphi method, and the evaluating committee by moderators] were organized. Ten specialists for colorectal polyp management extracted the specific clinical statements from articles published between 1983 and September 2011 obtained from PubMed and a secondary database, and developed the CQs and statements. Basically, statements were made according to the GRADE system. The expert panel individually rated the clinical statements using a modified Delphi approach, in which a clinical statement receiving a median score greater than seven on a nine-point scale from the panel was regarded as valid.

RESULTS

The professional committee created 91CQs and statements for the current concept and diagnosis/treatment of various colorectal polyps including epidemiology, screening, pathophysiology, definition and classification, diagnosis, treatment/management, practical treatment, complications and surveillance after treatment, and other colorectal lesions (submucosal tumors, nonneoplastic polyps, polyposis, hereditary tumors, ulcerative colitis-associated tumor/carcinoma).

CONCLUSIONS

After evaluation by the moderators, evidence-based clinical guidelines for management of colorectal polyps have been proposed for 2014.

Endoscopic and surgical treatment of malignant colorectal polyps: a population-based comparative study

BACKGROUND

Long-term population-based data comparing endoscopic therapy (ET) and surgery for management of malignant colorectal polyps (MCPs) are limited.

OBJECTIVE

To compare colorectal cancer (CRC)-specific survival with ET and surgery.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Population-based study.

PATIENTS

Patients with stage 0 and stage 1 MCPs were identified from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database (1998-2009). Demographic characteristics, tumor size, location, treatment modality, and survival were compared. Propensity-score matching and Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to evaluate the association between treatment and CRC-specific survival.

INTERVENTIONS

ET and surgery.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Mid-term (2.5 years) and long-term (5 years) CRC-free survival rates and independent predictors of CRC-specific mortality.

RESULTS

Of 10,403 patients with MCPs, 2688 (26%) underwent ET and 7715 (74%) underwent surgery. Patients undergoing ET were more likely to be older white men with stage 0 disease. Surgical patients had more right-sided lesions, larger MCPs, and stage 1 disease. There was no difference in the 2.5-year and 5-year CRC-free survival rates between the 2 groups in stage 0 disease. Surgical resection led to higher 2.5-year (97.8% vs 93.2%; P < .001) and 5-year (96.6% vs 89.8%; P < .001) CRC-free survival in stage 1 disease. These results were confirmed by propensity-score matching. ET was a significant predictor for CRC-specific mortality in stage 1 disease (hazard ratio 2.40; 95% confidence interval, 1.75-3.29; P < .001).

LIMITATIONS

Comorbidity index not available, selection bias.

CONCLUSIONS

ET and surgery had comparable mid- and long-term CRC-free survival rates in stage 0 disease. Surgical resection is the recommended treatment modality for MCPs with submucosal invasion.

Endoscopic mucosal resection with circumferential incision for the treatment of large sessile polyps and laterally spreading tumors of the colorectum

Background/Aims

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is the standard treatment for colorectal polyps such as adenomas and early cancers with no risk of lymph node metastasis. However, endoscopic resection of large colorectal polyps (≥20 mm diameter) is difficult to perform. We evaluated the clinical outcomes of EMR with circumferential incision (EMR-CI) for the resection of large sessile polyps (Is) and laterally spreading tumors (LSTs) in the colorectum.

Methods

Between February 2009 and March 2011, we resected 80 large colorectal polyps by EMR-CI. We retrospectively investigated the en bloc resection rate, histologic complete resection rate, recurrence rate, and complications.

Results

The median polyp size was approximately 25 mm (range, 20 to 50), and the morphologic types included Is (13 cases), LST-granular (37 cases), and LST-nongranular (30 cases). The en bloc and complete histologic resection rates were 66.3% and 45.0%, respectively. The recurrence rate was 0% (median follow-up duration, 23 months), and perforation occurred in five cases (6.3%).

Conclusions

EMR-CI is an effective treatment modality for 20 to 30 mm-sized colorectal polyps, and may be considered as a second line therapeutic option if ESD is difficult.

Serrated polyposis syndrome

SUMMARY 

Serrated polyposis syndrome, also called hyperplastic polyposis, is a condition characterized by numerous neoplastic polyps throughout the colon and rectum. The polyps possess a distinct serrated morphology. The term serrated refers to the ‘saw-tooth’ pattern formed by epithelial cells in the colonic crypts on standard histologic preparations. Historically, serrated lesions have been lumped together under the term ‘hyperplastic polyps’, and were assumed to carry no malignant potential. Over the past decade, however, an increasing body of evidence suggests that serrated lesions exist along a spectrum and represent an alternative molecular pathway to the development of colorectal cancer in contrast to the traditional adenocarcinoma sequence. Although a hallmark genetic signature for serrated polyposis syndrome remains unidentified, this is an area of active investigation.

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.

Is There an Indication for Surgical Resection in Colorectal Adenoma?

BACKGROUND

Due to the adenoma-carcinoma sequence, complete removal of colorectal polyps is essential.

METHOD

This article analyzes the role of surgery in the removal of colorectal adenoma.

RESULTS

Nowadays, most adenomas are removed properly by endoscopic methods. Also in the resection of giant polyps and recurrent adenoma endoscopic data is convincing. Therefore, surgical resection of colorectal adenomas is required in the case of endoscopic inaccessibility. Reasons for this may be the location of the polyp, incomplete endoscopic resection, or suspected malignancy. Endoscopic or limited surgical resection of malignant adenomas is acceptable only if 'low-risk' criteria are fulfilled. Otherwise oncologic radical resection is recommended. In general, radical resection is also necessary in the case of polyps that are not suitable for endoscopic removal, because here the rate of colorectal carcinoma is high.

CONCLUSION

If a surgical approach is necessary, minimally invasive surgery in the hands of an experienced laparoscopic surgeon is a suitable option. Adenomas in the lower two thirds of the rectum are suitable for transanal full-thickness resection. This is done by conventional resection or transanal endoscopic microsurgery. The histopathological preparation of these specimens provides diagnostic and therapeutic benefits, particularly compared to piecemeal resection of early carcinoma.

Endoscopic mucosal resection with circumferential incision for treatment of rectal carcinoid tumours

Background

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is simple and quick and has low complication rates. However, the disadvantage of local recurrence or remnant rate limits the use of this technique. We aimed to analyse the outcomes of conventional EMR and EMR with circumferential incision (CIEMR), a simplified modification of EMR, in the endoscopic treatment of rectal carcinoid tumours.

Methods

A total of 59 consecutive patients with rectal carcinoid tumours without regional lymph node enlargement confirmed by endoscopic ultrasonography were included in the study. These patients underwent endoscopic treatment from January 2009 to September 2011 and were randomly designated into CIEMR (n = 31) or EMR group (n = 28). En bloc resection rate, pathological complete resection rate, procedure time, complications and follow-up outcomes were analysed.

Results

The en bloc resection rate was not significantly different between the CIEMR and EMR groups (100% versus 96.55%, P > 0.05). The pathological complete resection rate was higher in the CIEMR group than in the EMR group (96.7% versus 82.14%, P < 0.05). The overall complication rate, delayed bleeding and procedure time were not significantly different between the two groups. No recurrence was observed in either the EMR or CIEMR group.

Conclusions

CIEMR optimises the procedure of EMR and simplifies the technique of endoscopic submucosal dissection; thus, it has a better histologically complete resection rate and more acceptable complication rate than EMR. Thus, CIEMR may be preferable to conventional EMR for resection of rectal carcinoid tumours less than 15 mm.

Colon polypectomy: a review of routine and advanced techniques

The value of performing comprehensive screening colonoscopy with complete colon polypectomy is widely accepted. Colon cancer is a significant cause of worldwide mortality and prospective studies have proven that colonoscopic polypectomy reduces both the incidence and mortality related to this disease. Over the past few decades the array of instruments and techniques have greatly expanded to assist with the safe endoscopic removal of colon polyps. This article will review the published literature regarding efficacy and safety of standard polypectomy techniques such as snare polypectomy, electrocautery, and endoscopic mucosal resection along with newer techniques such as endoscopic submucosal dissection and combined laparoscopic techniques.

Multicenter study of endoscopic mucosal resection using 0.13% hyaluronic acid solution of colorectal polyps less than 20 mm in size

PURPOSE

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of colorectal polyps should be curative and safe. This study aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of colorectal EMR using 0.13% hyaluronic acid (HA) solution.

METHODS

This was a single-armed multicenter prospective open trial conducted at 11 Japanese institutions. Lesion characteristics and various measures of clinical outcome, including en bloc resection, histopathologically complete resection, and postoperative bleeding were analyzed for 624 consecutive patients who underwent EMR of colorectal polyps at ≤20 mm in size from August 2010 to September 2011.

RESULTS

En bloc and complete resection were achieved in 93.3 and 78.3% of 624 lesions. The median EMR procedure time was 2.1 ± 1.5 min. The rates of postoperative bleeding and perforation were 1.1 and 0%. The rate of en bloc resection was higher for polyps at 5-10 mm than for polyps at 11-20 mm (95.1 vs. 85.1%; P < 0.001) and was higher for protruding polyps than for superficial polyps (94.5 vs. 87.1%; P < 0.05). The rate of en bloc resection was also higher for polyps in the left-side colon than for those in the right-side colon or rectum (96.7 vs. 91.6 vs. 90.8%; P < 0.05). Multivariate analysis showed that polyp at 11-20 mm in size and location not on the left-side colon was significantly independent risk factors for failure of en bloc resection.

CONCLUSION

EMR using 0.13% HA of colorectal polyps less than 20 mm in size had high rates of en bloc and complete resection and few complications.

Implementation of endoscopic submucosal dissection for early colorectal neoplasms in Sweden

Objectives. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is an effective method for en bloc removal of large colorectal tumors in Japan, but this technique is not yet widely established in western countries. The purpose here was to report the experience of implementing colorectal ESD in Sweden. Methods. Twenty-nine patients with primarily nonmalignant and early colorectal neoplasms considered to be too difficult to remove en bloc with EMR underwent ESD. Five cases of invasive cancer underwent ESD due to high comorbidity excluding surgical intervention or as an unexpected finding. Results. The median age of the patients was 74 years. The median tumor size was 26 mm (range 11–89 mm). The median procedure time was 142 min (range 57–291 min). En bloc resection rate was 72% and the R0 resection rate was 69%. Two perforations occurred amounting to a perforation rate of 6.9%. Both patients with perforation could be managed conservatively. One bleeding occurred during ESD but no postoperative bleeding was observed. Conclusion. Our data confirms that ESD is an effective method for en bloc resection of large colorectal adenomas and early cancers. This study demonstrates that implementation of colorectal ESD is feasible in Sweden after proper training, careful patient selection, and standardization of the ESD procedure.

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery: what indications in 2013?

Thanks to major advances in the field of surgical techniques and neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy, along with more accurate pre-operative staging tools and the widespread introduction of population-based screening programs, treatment of rectal cancer has been evolving over the past few decades, moving towards a more tailored approach. This has brought a shift in the treatment algorithm of benign rectal lesions and selected early rectal cancers, for which today transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) is accepted as an effective alternative to abdominal surgery.

In 2013, topics of controversy are the role of TEM in the treatment of more advanced rectal cancers, in cases of complete pathological response after chemoradiation therapy and the role of TEM as a platform for single-port surgery and NOTES. This article reviews the current indications for TEM and the future perspectives of this approach in the treatment of rectal tumors.

Factors influencing quality of bowel preparation for colonoscopy

Recent technological advances in colonoscopy have led to improvements in both image enhancement and procedural performance. However, the utility of these technological advancements remain dependent on the quality of bowel preparation during colonoscopy. Poor bowel preparation has been shown to be associated with lower quality indicators of colonoscopy performance, such as reduced cecal intubation rates, increased patient discomfort and lower adenoma detection. The most popular bowel preparation regimes currently used are based on either Polyethylene glycol-electrolyte, a non-absorbable solution, or aqueous sodium phosphate, a low-volume hyperosmotic solution. Statements from various international societies and several reviews have suggested that the efficacy of bowel preparation regimes based on both purgatives are similar, although patients’ compliance with these regimes may differ somewhat. Many studies have now shown that factors other than the type of bowel preparation regime used, can influence the quality of bowel preparation among adult patients undergoing colonoscopy. These factors can be broadly categorized as either patient-related or procedure-related. Studies from both Asia and the West have identified patient-related factors such as an increased age, male gender, presence of co-morbidity and socio-economic status of patients to be associated with poor bowel preparation among adults undergoing routine out-patient colonoscopy. Additionally, procedure-related factors such as adherence to bowel preparation instructions, timing of bowel purgative administration and appointment waiting times for colonoscopy are recognized to influence the quality of colon cleansing. Knowledge of these factors should aid clinicians in modifying bowel preparation regimes accordingly, such that the quality of colonoscopy performance and delivery of service to patients can be optimised.

Managing difficult polyps: techniques and pitfalls

There is no standardized definition of difficult polyps. However, polyps become difficult and challenging to remove endoscopically when they are large in size, flat in nature, situated in a high-risk location and when access to them is very awkward. Recently, an SMSA (Size, Morphology, Site, Access) classification has been proposed that helps to qualify the degree of difficulty by scoring on the above parameters. This article reviews the features that make polyps difficult to remove and provides some practical tips in managing these difficult polyps. We believe that 'difficult polyp' is a relative term and each endoscopist should define their own level of difficulty and what they would be able to handle safely. However, in expert trained hands, most difficult polyps can be safely removed by an endoscopic approach.