1
|
Barendse RM, Musters GD, de Graaf EJR, van den Broek FJC, Consten ECJ, Doornebosch PG, Hardwick JC, de Hingh IHJT, Hoff C, Jansen JM, van Milligen de Wit AWM, van der Schelling GP, Schoon EJ, Schwartz MP, Weusten BLAM, Dijkgraaf MG, Fockens P, Bemelman WA, Dekker E. Randomised controlled trial of transanal endoscopic microsurgery versus endoscopic mucosal resection for large rectal adenomas (TREND Study). Gut 2018; 67:837-846. [PMID: 28659349 DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2016-313101] [Citation(s) in RCA: 42] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/26/2016] [Revised: 05/02/2017] [Accepted: 05/03/2017] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Non-randomised studies suggest that endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is equally effective in removing large rectal adenomas as transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM), but EMR might be more cost-effective and safer. This trial compares the clinical outcome and cost-effectiveness of TEM and EMR for large rectal adenomas. DESIGN Patients with rectal adenomas ≥3 cm, without malignant features, were randomised (1:1) to EMR or TEM, allowing endoscopic removal of residual adenoma at 3 months. Unexpected malignancies were excluded postrandomisation. Primary outcomes were recurrence within 24 months (aiming to demonstrate non-inferiority of EMR, upper limit 10%) and the number of recurrence-free days alive and out of hospital. RESULTS Two hundred and four patients were treated in 18 university and community hospitals. Twenty-seven (13%) had unexpected cancer and were excluded from further analysis. Overall recurrence rates were 15% after EMR and 11% after TEM; statistical non-inferiority was not reached. The numbers of recurrence-free days alive and out of hospital were similar (EMR 609±209, TEM 652±188, p=0.16). Complications occurred in 18% (EMR) versus 26% (TEM) (p=0.23), with major complications occurring in 1% (EMR) versus 8% (TEM) (p=0.064). Quality-adjusted life years were equal in both groups. EMR was approximately €3000 cheaper and therefore more cost-effective. CONCLUSION Under the statistical assumptions of this study, non-inferiority of EMR could not be demonstrated. However, EMR may have potential as the primary method of choice due to a tendency of lower complication rates and a better cost-effectiveness ratio. The high rate of unexpected cancers should be dealt with in further studies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Renée M Barendse
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | | | | | | | | | | | - James C Hardwick
- Gastroenterology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | | | - Chrisiaan Hoff
- Surgery, Medical Centre Leeuwarden, Leeuwarden, the Netherlands
| | - Jeroen M Jansen
- Gastroenterology, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - Erik J Schoon
- Gastroenterology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | | | - Bas L A M Weusten
- Gastroenterology, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | | | - Paul Fockens
- Gastroenterology, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Willem A Bemelman
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Evelien Dekker
- Gastroenterology, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Eshuis EJ, Bemelman WA, van Bodegraven AA, Sprangers MAG, Bossuyt PMM, van Milligen de Wit AWM, Crolla RMPH, Cahen DL, Oostenbrug LE, Sosef MN, Voorburg AMCJ, Davids PHP, van der Woude CJ, Lange J, Mallant RC, Boom MJ, Lieverse RJ, van der Zaag ES, Houben MHMG, Vecht J, Pierik REGJM, van Ditzhuijsen TJM, Prins HA, Marsman WA, Stockmann HB, Brink MA, Consten ECJ, van der Werf SDJ, Marinelli AWKS, Jansen JM, Gerhards MF, Bolwerk CJM, Stassen LPS, Spanier BWM, Bilgen EJS, van Berkel AM, Cense HA, van Heukelem HA, van de Laar A, Slot WB, Eijsbouts QA, van Ooteghem NAM, van Wagensveld B, van den Brande JMH, van Geloven AAW, Bruin KF, Maring JK, Oldenburg B, van Hillegersberg R, de Jong DJ, Bleichrodt R, van der Peet DL, Dekkers PEP, Goei TH, Stokkers PCF. Laparoscopic ileocolic resection versus infliximab treatment of distal ileitis in Crohn's disease: a randomized multicenter trial (LIR!C-trial). BMC Surg 2008; 8:15. [PMID: 18721465 PMCID: PMC2533646 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2482-8-15] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/07/2008] [Accepted: 08/22/2008] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Background With the availability of infliximab, nowadays recurrent Crohn's disease, defined as disease refractory to immunomodulatory agents that has been treated with steroids, is generally treated with infliximab. Infliximab is an effective but expensive treatment and once started it is unclear when therapy can be discontinued. Surgical resection has been the golden standard in recurrent Crohn's disease. Laparoscopic ileocolic resection proved to be safe and is characterized by a quick symptom reduction. The objective of this study is to compare infliximab treatment with laparoscopic ileocolic resection in patients with recurrent Crohn's disease of the distal ileum with respect to quality of life and costs. Methods/design The study is designed as a multicenter randomized clinical trial including patients with Crohn's disease located in the terminal ileum that require infliximab treatment following recent consensus statements on inflammatory bowel disease treatment: moderate to severe disease activity in patients that fail to respond to steroid therapy or immunomodulatory therapy. Patients will be randomized to receive either infliximab or undergo a laparoscopic ileocolic resection. Primary outcomes are quality of life and costs. Secondary outcomes are hospital stay, early and late morbidity, sick leave and surgical recurrence. In order to detect an effect size of 0.5 on the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire at a 5% two sided significance level with a power of 80%, a sample size of 65 patients per treatment group can be calculated. An economic evaluation will be performed by assessing the marginal direct medical, non-medical and time costs and the costs per Quality Adjusted Life Year (QALY) will be calculated. For both treatment strategies a cost-utility ratio will be calculated. Patients will be included from December 2007. Discussion The LIR!C-trial is a randomized multicenter trial that will provide evidence whether infliximab treatment or surgery is the best treatment for recurrent distal ileitis in Crohn's disease. Trial registration Nederlands Trial Register NTR1150
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emma J Eshuis
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|