Endoscopic mucosal resection of colorectal polyps in typical UK hospitals

Unlocking quality in endoscopic mucosal resection

A review of the development of the key performance metrics of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), learning from the experience of the establishment of widespread colonoscopy quality measurements. Potential future performance markers for both colonoscopy and EMR are also evaluated to ensure continued high quality performance is maintained with a focus service framework and predictors of patient outcome.

Clinical and financial impacts of introducing an endoscopic mucosal resection service for treatment of patients with large colonic polyps into a regional tertiary hospital

Background and study aims  Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of large sessile or laterally spreading colonic lesions is a safe alternative to surgery. We assessed reductions in Surgical Resection (SR) rates and associated clinical and financial benefits following the introduction of an EMR service to a large regional center. Patients and methods  Ongoing prospective intention-to-treat analysis of EMR was undertaken from time of service inception in 2009 to 2017. Retrospective data for SR of large sessile/laterally spreading colonic lesions were collected for the period 4 years before commencement of the EMR service (2005 - 2008) and 9 years after its introduction (2009 - 2017). Results  From 2005 to 2008, 32 surgical procedures were performed for non-malignant colonic neoplasia (50 % male, median age 68 years, median Length of Stay (LoS) 10 days). Following the introduction of the EMR service, there was a 56 % reduction in the number of patients referred for surgery (32 surgical procedures, 47 % male, median age 70 years, median LoS 8.5 days). During this period, EMR was successfully performed in 183 patients with 216 lesions resected (60 % male, median age 68 years, median LoS 1 day). Compared to the SR group, the EMR cohort had a lower peri-procedural complication rate (7.7 % vs 54.7 %, P  < 0.0001), and shorter average LoS (1 vs 9 days, P  < 0.0001). A cost saving of AUD $ 19 543.5 was seen per lesion removed with EMR compared to SR. Conclusions  The introduction of a dedicated EMR service into a large regional center as an alternative to SR can lead to a substantial decrease in unnecessary surgery with subsequent clinical and financial benefits.

Size of colorectal polyps determines time taken to remove them endoscopically

BACKGROUND AN STUDY AIMS

 Polypectomy and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) are effective and safe ways of removing polyps from the colon at endoscopy. Guidelines exist for advising the time allocation for diagnostic endoscopy but not for polypectomy and EMR. The aim of this study was to identify if time allocated for polypectomy and EMR at planned therapeutic lists in our endoscopy unit is sufficient for procedures to be carried out. We also wanted to identify factors that might be associated with procedures taking longer than the allocated time and to identify factors that might predict duration of these procedures.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

 A retrospective case study of planned 100 lower gastrointestinal EMR and polypectomy procedures at colonoscopy and sigmoidoscopy was performed and analyzed with quantitative analysis.

RESULTS

 The mean actual procedural time (APT) for 100 procedures was 52 minutes and the mean allocated time (AT) was 43.05 minutes. Hence the mean APT was 9 minutes longer than the mean AT. Factors that were significantly associated with procedures taking longer than the allocated time were patient age ( P  = 0.029) and polyp size ( P  = 0.005). Factors that significant changed the actual procedure time were patient age ( P  = 0.018), morphology ( P  = 0.002) and polyp size ( P  < 0.001). Procedures involving flat and lateral spreading tumor (LST) type polyps took longer than the protruding ones. On multivariate analysis, polyp size was the only factor that associated with actual procedure time. Number of polyps, quality of bowel preparation, and distance of polyp from insertion did significantly change procedure duration.

CONCLUSION

 Factors that significantly contribute to duration of polypectomy and EMR at lower gastrointestinal endoscopy include patient age and polyp size and morphology on univariate analysis, with polyp size being the factor with a significant association on multivariate analysis. We recommend that endoscopy units take these factors into consideration locally when allocating time for these procedures to be safe and effective.

One-to-One Correspondence Locations of Resected Polyps after Endoscopic Resection Using Catcher Tagged Method: A Randomized Prospective Study

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Multiple colorectal polyps with a diameter in the range of 10-19 mm are unable to be retrieved through a 3-mm endoscopic channel by the aspiration method. This study aims to assess the usefulness of Catcher Tag retrieval, which not only allows the accurate identification of the resected location but also enables the easiest retrieval in a short time without any special device.

METHODS

One hundred thirty five patients (483 polyps) were diagnosed with colorectal neoplasm, and 64 patients (225 polyps) were enrolled and randomly allocated into the Net forceps group (NET) and the Catcher Tagged group (TAG). In TAG, 3 types of colored ring-threads were used to retrieve resected polyps. After local injection of natural saline, ring-threads were placed close to polyps. The primary outcome was the number of one-to-one correspondence locations (UMIN000020826).

RESULTS

There was significant difference in one-to-one correspondence (p = 0.004). The average retrieval procedure time was 13.56 ± 3.47 (min) in NET and 3.55 ± 1.68 in TAG (p = 0.006). In NET, 1 polyp in each of 4 cases was lost during endoscopic mucosal resection and 2 polyps were lost in 1 case. In TAG, no polyp was lost (p = 0.016).

CONCLUSION

The Catcher Tagged method is very useful for accurate one-to-one correspondence locations and pathological evaluation, and easy-to-retrieve multiple resected specimens.

Endoscopic Resection of Cecal Polyps Involving the Appendiceal Orifice: A KASID Multicenter Study

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic resection of polyps located at the appendiceal orifice (AO) is challenging, and the feasibility and outcomes of endoscopic resection for cecal polyps involving AO are unconfirmed.

AIMS

We evaluated the feasibility and outcomes of endoscopic resection for cecal polyps involving AO.

METHODS

In this retrospective, multicenter study involving nine tertiary referral centers, we evaluated 131 patients who underwent endoscopic resection for cecal polyps involving AO.

RESULTS

The median size of polyps resected was 10 mm (range 3-60 mm). Endoscopic mucosal resection, endoscopic piecemeal mucosal resection, and endoscopic submucosal dissection were performed in 75 (57.3%), 31 (23.7%), and 5 (3.8%) patients, respectively. The en bloc resection rate was 68.7%. Endoscopic complete resection was achieved in 123 lesions (93.9%). Intraprocedural and delayed bleeding occurred in 14 (10.7%) and three patients (2.3%), respectively, and perforation occurred in two patients (1.5%). Seven patients (5.3%) underwent additional surgery because of treatment failure or recurrence. Polyps of ≥20 mm in size showed significantly higher rates of perforation and additional surgery (p < 0.05), and a lower rate of en bloc resection (p < 0.005). Patients with polyps involving ≥75% of AO circumference exhibited a significantly lower rate of en bloc resection (p < 0.001), and significantly higher rates of surgery and recurrence (p < 0.05). Recurrence during follow-up occurred in 12 patients (15.6%); polyps involving ≥75% of AO circumference were an independent risk factor for recurrence.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic resection of cecal polyps involving AO is safe and effective in select patients.

Management of early colonic neoplasia: where are we now and where are we heading?

There have been considerable advances in the endoscopic treatment of colorectal neoplasia. The development of endoscopic submucosal dissection and full thickness resection techniques is changing the way benign disease and early cancers are managed. This article reviews the evidence behind these new techniques and discusses where this field is likely to move in the future. Areas covered: A PubMed literature review of resection techniques for colonic neoplasia was performed. The clinical and cost effectiveness of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is examined. The development of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and knife assisted resection is described and issues around training reviewed. Efficacy is compared to both EMR and transanal endoscopic microsurgery. The future is considered, including full thickness resection techniques and robotic endoscopy. Expert commentary: The perceived barriers to ESD are falling, and views that such techniques are only possible in Japan are disappearing. The key barriers to uptake will be training, and the development of educational programmes should be seen as a priority. The debate between TEMS and ESD will continue, but ESD is more flexible and cheaper. This will become less significant as the number of endoscopists trained in ESD grows and some TEMS surgeons may shift across towards ESD.

Safety of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of large non-pedunculated colorectal adenomas in the elderly

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) has been proven to be safe and effective for the treatment of colorectal adenomas. However, data are limited on the safety of this technique for large polyps and in elderly patients. Aims of our study were to examine the bleeding and perforation rates in patients with large non-pedunculated adenomas (≥20mm) and to evaluate the influence of size (≥40mm) and age (≥75 years) on the complication rates.

METHODS

In this multicenter retrospective study, patients who underwent EMR of non-pedunculated adenomas ≥20mm between January 2012 and March 2016 were included. The demographics of the patients, the use of antithrombotic drugs, size of the polyps, type of resection, pathology report, occurrence of post-polypectomy bleeding, and perforation- and recurrence rate were collected.

RESULTS

In 343 patients, 412 adenomas were removed. Eighty patients (23.3%) were ≥75 years of age, 138 polyps (33.5%) were ≥40mm. Bleeding complications were observed in 28 cases (6.8%) and were found significantly more frequent in adenomas ≥40mm, independent of the use of antithrombotic therapy. Five perforations (1.2%) were described, not related to the size of the polyp. There was no significant difference in complication rates between patients <75 years and patients ≥75 years. Bleeding complications rates were significantly higher in patients receiving double antithrombotic therapy.

CONCLUSION

EMR is safe in elderly patients. EMR of adenomas of ≥40mm was associated with more bleeding complications. Future studies should address how the bleeding rates can be reduced in these patients, especially in those who use double antithrombotic treatment.

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.

Large Colorectal Lesions: Evaluation and Management

In the last years, a distinctive interest has been raised on large polypoid and non-polypoid colorectal tumors, and specially on flat neoplastic lesions ≥20 mm tending to grow laterally, the so called laterally spreading tumors (LST). Real or virtual chromoendoscopy, endoscopic ultrasound or magnetic resonance should be considered for the estimation of submucosal invasion of these neoplasms. Lesions suitable for endoscopic resection are those confined to the mucosa or selected cases with submucosal invasion ≤1000 μm. Polypectomy or endoscopic mucosal resection remain a first-line therapy for large colorectal neoplasms, whereas endoscopic submucosal dissection in high-volume centers or surgery should be considered for large LSTs for which en bloc resection is mandatory.

Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection from a Western perspective: Today’s promises and future challenges

Over the last few years, endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has shown to be effective in the management of early colorectal neoplasms, particularly in Asian countries where the technique was born. In the Western world, its implementation has been slow and laborious. In this paper, the indications for ESD, its learning model, the available methods to predict the presence of deep submucosal invasion before the procedure and the published outcomes from Asia and Europe will be reviewed. Since ESD has several limitations in terms of learning achievement in the West, and completion of the procedure for the first cases is difficult in our part of the world, a short review on colorectal assisted ESD has been included. Finally, other endoscopic and surgical treatment modalities that are in competition with colorectal ESD will be summarized.

Factors associated with increased bleeding post-endoscopic mucosal resection

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to identify patient and procedure characteristics that correlate with increased likelihood of bleeding during and after endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), and thus anticipate the need for preventative therapy.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, observational, descriptive study using a prospective EMR database, performed in a tertiary-care center. A total of 935 EMR of various locations within the gastrointestinal tract were collected. The main outcome measurement was early bleeding (occurring during the procedure) and delayed bleeding (occurring after the completion of the procedure and up to 30 days after).

RESULTS

Early bleeding occurred in 5.3% (50/935) of the procedures. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, esophageal EMR (OR 2.5, 95% CI 1.2-5, P = 0.0009) and increase in lesion size (OR 1.24, 95% CI 1.1-1.5, P = 0.003) were both associated with higher odds of early bleeding in EMR when controlling for age, gender and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs)/clopidogrel use. Delayed bleeding occurred after 3.1% (n = 29) of the procedures. Of these, 86.2% (25/29) required hospital admission and endoscopic intervention to confirm and/or treat bleeding site. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, increased lesion size (OR 1.3, 95% CI 1.1-1.5, P = 0.004) was associated with higher incidence of delayed bleeding post-EMR.

CONCLUSIONS

In experienced hands bleeding during and after EMR appears to be uncommon. Larger lesions are at increased risk of early and delayed bleeding.

Does endoscopic mucosal resection for large colorectal polyps allow ambulatory management?

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is an efficacious endoscopic therapy for large adenoma or confined neoplasia. The most frequent complication is delayed hemorrhage, and hemoclips appear to be an effective therapeutic option. The aim of this study was to determine if large EMR could allow ambulatory management.

METHODS

Colorectal polyps ≥20 mm in size treated by EMR in one endoscopy unit were prospectively included. The period from September 2007 to September 2008 was considered as the reference period (period 1). From September 2008 on, patients were hospitalized in an ambulatory unit. Periods from September 2008 to September 2009 (period 2), from September 2009 to September 2010 (period 3), and from September 2010 to September 2011 (period 4) were compared to the reference period. Patients receiving anticoagulation drugs were excluded from the study.

RESULTS

A total of 138 patients were treated by 139 EMRs for large colorectal polyps. EMRs were completed by at least one clip per centimeter in 10.7 %, 30.2 % (p = NS), 50 % (p = 0.015), and 76 % (p = 0.001). Ambulatory EMRs were performed in 21 %, 52.4 % (p = 0.008), 67.6 % (p = 0.02), and 88.2 % (p = 0.004) of cases during periods 1, 2, 3, and 4. The complication rate was stable during the four periods. No patients with more than one hemoclip per EMR centimeter experienced delayed bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

The low complication rate during the four periods allows us to consider ambulatory EMR for large colorectal lesions ≥20 mm in diameter as an option. One hemoclip per centimeter may help prevent delayed hemorrhage in patients without anticoagulation drugs.

In vivo endoluminal ultrasound biomicroscopic imaging in a mouse model of colorectal cancer

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

The gold-standard tool for colorectal cancer detection is colonoscopy, but it provides only mucosal surface visualization. Ultrasound biomicroscopy allows a clear delineation of the epithelium and adjacent colonic layers. The aim of this study was to design a system to generate endoluminal ultrasound biomicroscopic images of the mouse colon, in vivo, in an animal model of inflammation-associated colon cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirteen mice (Mus musculus) were used. A 40-MHz miniprobe catheter was inserted into the accessory channel of a pediatric flexible bronchofiberscope. Control mice (n = 3) and mice treated with azoxymethane and dextran sulfate sodium (n = 10) were subjected to simultaneous endoluminal ultrasound biomicroscopy and white-light colonoscopy. The diagnosis obtained with endoluminal ultrasound biomicroscopy and colonoscopy was compared and confirmed by postmortem histopathology.

RESULTS

Endoluminal ultrasound biomicroscopic images showed all layers of the normal colon and revealed lesions such as lymphoid hyperplasias and colon tumors. Additionally, endoluminal ultrasound biomicroscopy was able to detect two cases of mucosa layer thickening, confirmed by histology. Compared to histologic results, the sensitivities of endoluminal ultrasound biomicroscopy and colonoscopy were 0.95 and 0.83, respectively, and both methods achieved specificities of 1.0.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoluminal ultrasound biomicroscopy can be used, in addition to colonoscopy, as a diagnostic method for colonic lesions. Moreover, experimental endoluminal ultrasound biomicroscopy in mouse models is feasible and might be used to further develop research on the differentiation between benign and malignant colonic diseases.

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.

Outcomes of EMR of defiant colorectal lesions directed to an endoscopy referral center

BACKGROUND

Flat and sessile lesions are being identified more frequently because of increased awareness, improved endoscopic skills, and enhanced imaging. The defiant polyp (DP) is a lesion identified at colonoscopy that defies resection by the standard snare polypectomy technique. Increasingly, the DP undergoes photodocumentation and tissue sampling, and the patient is referred for an attempt at curative colonoscopic resection.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the current nature of the DPs and outcomes of their endoscopic resection.

DESIGN

Retrospective study.

SETTING

Tertiary referral center.

PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS

Patients with colorectal polyps not amenable to standard snare polypectomy were referred to a single endoscopist at a tertiary center for an attempt at curative endoscopic resection. The indication DP was applied prospectively, as defined previously, beginning in June 2007. An electronic endoscopy report database was searched for this indication from June 2007 to October 2009 for a single endoscopist at an endoscopy referral center. Data pertaining to patient age and sex, polyp site and histopathology, resection technique, use of adjunctive ablation, adverse events, and residual/recurrent neoplasia at follow-up were culled. Submucosal injection of varying quantities of normal saline solution tinted with methylene blue dye was used for endoscopic resection. Standard and mini-snares were used with pure coagulation current.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Complete resection, complications, recurrence.

RESULTS

This study included 274 patients (50.4% women, age 65 [standard deviation 12] years) with a total of 315 DPs who were referred for attempted endoscopic resection. The majority of DPs were located in the right side of the colon (226; 72%). The mean size was estimated at 23 mm (range 8-100 mm; standard deviation 13). In 29 DPs (10%), surgery was required because endoscopic resection was deemed unsuitable because of the unfavorable appearance (n = 3), the location (n = 9), or the inability to lift (n = 10) or because of submucosal invasion on post-EMR histopathology (n = 7). Complete endoscopic eradication (R0) was achieved in a single session in 286 DPs (91%). En bloc resection was performed in 153 polyps (53.5%) and piecemeal resection in 132 (46%). Histopathology revealed 178 tubular adenomas (56.5%), 62 serrated adenomas (20%), 27 tubulovillous adenomas (9%), 10 hyperplastic polyps (3%), and 14 adenocarcinomas (4.5%). Adjunctive ablation of focal residual neoplastic tissue was applied in 69 DPs (24%) to achieve R0. Procedure-related adverse events were recorded in 29 of 249 patients (11.6%). Acute bleeding occurred in 9 patients (1 required hospitalization and repeat endoscopy). There was 1 microperforation managed with clip closure and antibiotics. Delayed bleeding (1-6 days post-procedure) was observed in 18 patients (7.2%), of whom 8 required hospitalization and 4 colonoscopy for hemostasis. Among the patients who underwent follow-up surveillance colonoscopy (135 of 258 patients), residual/recurrent neoplastic tissue at the site of the previous EMR was identified in 36 (27%). Residual/recurrent neoplasia was successfully eradicated with further endoscopic resection or ablation.

LIMITATIONS

A retrospective design.

CONCLUSIONS

DPs consist predominantly of sessile and flat adenomas including serrated adenomas. Most DPs can be successfully eradicated at dedicated therapeutic colonoscopy by using adjunctive resection and ablation techniques. The R0 rate is high and the adverse event rate is low. A relatively high rate of local residual/recurrent neoplasia at the resection site underscores the importance of follow-up colonoscopy.

Approach to rectal cancer surgery

Rectal cancer is a distinct subset of colorectal cancer where specialized disease-specific management of the primary tumor is required. There have been significant developments in rectal cancer surgery at all stages of disease in particular the introduction of local excision strategies for preinvasive and early cancers, standardized total mesorectal excision for resectable cancers incorporating preoperative short- or long-course chemoradiation to the multimodality sequencing of treatment. Laparoscopic surgery is also increasingly being adopted as the standard rectal cancer surgery approach following expertise of colorectal surgeons in minimally invasive surgery gained from laparoscopic colon resections. In locally advanced and metastatic disease, combining chemoradiation with radical surgery may achieve total eradication of disease and disease control in the pelvis. Evidence for resection of metastases to the liver and lung have been extensively reported in the literature. The role of cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for peritoneal metastases is showing promise in achieving locoregional control of peritoneal dissemination. This paper summarizes the recent developments in approaches to rectal cancer surgery at all these time points of the disease natural history.

Subacute reaction to endoscopic mucosal resection mimicking perforation

A 25-year-old woman underwent routine day-case endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of two ascending colonic polyps. Six hours later she re-presented with severe abdominal pain. On examination she was tachycardic with tenderness and peritonism in the right lower quadrant. Urgent abdominal computed tomography (CT) did not reveal any signs of free intra-abdominal gas or fluid but did detect transmural thickening and oedema in the ascending colon and caecum. As there was no radiological evidence of perforation, the patient was managed conservatively and made a full recovery. The exact aetiology of this patient's symptoms is not known. She may have developed post-polypectomy electrocoagulation (a transmural diathermy injury), localised ischaemia of the colonic wall (secondary to the adrenaline used during EMR) or an allergic reaction to the dye used during EMR. As EMR is an increasingly used treatment modality in the management of colonic polyps, clinicians should have an awareness of the complications of treatment. We would advocate a low threshold for prompt CT investigation in any patient presenting with abdominal pain after EMR to detect any evidence of free intraperitoneal air. Patients without signs of perforation may be managed conservatively, as in this case.

Endoscopic mucosal resection in colorectal lesion: a safe and effective procedure even in lesions larger than 2 cm and in carcinomas

CONTEXT: Endoscopic mucosal resection is a minimally invasive technique used in the treatment of colorectal neoplasms, including early carcinomas of different size and morphology. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate procedure safety, efficacy, outcomes, and recurrence rate in endoscopic mucosal resection of colorectal lesions. METHODS: A total of 172 lesions in 156 patients were analyzed between May 2003 and May 2009. All lesions showed pit pattern suggestive of neoplasia (Kudo types III-V) at high-magnification chromocolonoscopy with indigo carmine. The lesions were evaluated for macroscopic classification, size, location, and histopathology. Lesions 20 mm or smaller were resected en bloc and lesions larger than 20 mm were removed using the piecemeal technique. Complications and recurrence were analyzed. Patients were followed up for 18 months. RESULTS: There were 83 (48.2%) superficial lesions, 57 (33.1%) depressed lesions, 44 (25.6%) laterally spreading tumors, and 45 (26.2%) protruding lesions. Mean lesion size was 11.5 mm ± 9.6 mm (2 mm-60 mm). Patients' mean age was 61.6 ± 12.5 years (34-93 years). Regarding lesion site, 24 (14.0%) lesions were located in the rectum, 68 (39.5%) in the left colon, and 80 (46.5%) in the right colon (transverse, ascending, and cecum). There were 167 (97.1%) neoplasms: 142 (82.5%) adenomatous lesions, 24 (14.0%) intramucosal carcinomas, and 1 (0.6%) invasive carcinoma. En bloc resection was performed in 158 (91.9%) cases and piecemeal resection in 14 (8.1%). Bleeding occurred in 5 (2.9%) cases. Recurrence was observed in 4.1% (5/122) of cases and was associated with lesions larger than 20 mm (P<0.01), piecemeal resection (P<0.01), advanced neoplasm (P = 0.01), and carcinoma compared to adenoma (P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic mucosal resection of colorectal lesions is a safe and effective procedure, with low complication and local recurrence rates. Recurrence is associated with lesions larger than 20 mm and carcinomas.

Endoscopic resection and histological evaluation of colorectal polyps: Is it a definitive treatment?

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Primary aim of the present study was the evaluation of efficacy and safety of endoscopic polypectomy in a tertiary advanced endoscopic laboratory in Northwestern Greece. Additional aim was to estimate the effectiveness of endoscopic treatment of colorectal polyps and record the clinical course.

METHODS

One hundred and fifty consecutive patients (97 men) with colorectal polyps of size larger than 0.5 cm were included. The size, topography, shape and presence of pedicle were recorded for every polyp. Concerning the size, polyps were divided into: <1 cm, between 1-2 cm, >2 cm.

RESULTS

The rectum and sigmoid were the most common sites of detection (76.6%). Endoscopic resection was successful and the complication rate was very low (2.6%). The majority of the removed polyps were neoplastic (87.1%). Most neoplastic polyps were tubulovillous adenomas (50.8%). Low-grade dysplasia was detected in most of the polyps (82.9%), but highgrade dysplasia or invasive carcinoma was also detected in some patients. In total, 10 patients underwent surgical resection. Regular follow-up did not reveal significant residual polyps or recurrence of the lesions.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic polypectomy is effective and safe and leads to complete resection of neoplastic polyps in the majority of cases.