Objective Wide-field endoscopic mucosal resection (WF-EMR) is an alternative to surgery for treatment of advanced colonic mucosal neoplasia up to 120 mm in size, but has been criticised for its ...potentially high recurrence rates. We aimed to quantify recurrence at 4 months (early) and 16 months (late) following successful WF-EMR and identify its risk factors and clinical significance. Design Ongoing multicentre, prospective, intention-to-treat analysis of sessile or laterally spreading colonic lesions ≥20 mm in size referred for WF-EMR to seven academic endoscopy units. Surveillance colonoscopy (SC) was performed 4 months (SC1) and 16 months (SC2) after WF-EMR, with photographic documentation and biopsy of the scar. Results 1134 consecutive patients were enrolled when 1000 successful EMRs were achieved, of whom 799 have undergone SC1. 670 were normal. Early recurrent/residual adenoma was present in 128 (16.0%, 95% CI 13.6% to 18.7%). One case was unknown. The recurrent/residual adenoma was diminutive in 71.7% of cases. On multivariable analysis, risk factors were lesion size >40 mm, use of argon plasma coagulation and intraprocedural bleeding. Of 670 with normal SC1, 426 have undergone SC2, with late recurrence present in 17 cases (4.0%, 95% CI 2.4% to 6.2%). Overall, recurrent/residual adenoma was successfully treated endoscopically in 135 of 145 cases (93.1%, 95% CI 88.1% to 96.4%). If the initial EMR was deemed successful and did not contain submucosal invasion requiring surgery, 98.1% (95% CI 96.6% to 99.0%) were adenoma-free and had avoided surgery at 16 months following EMR. Conclusions Following colonic WF-EMR, early recurrent/residual adenoma occurs in 16%, and is usually unifocal and diminutive. Risk factors were identified. Late recurrence occurs in 4%. Overall, recurrence was managed endoscopically in 93% of cases. Recurrence is not a significant clinical problem following WF-EMR, as with strict colonoscopic surveillance, it can be managed endoscopically with high success rates. Trial registration number: NCT01368289.
ObjectiveLarge (≥20 mm) sessile serrated lesions (L-SSL) are premalignant lesions that require endoscopic removal. Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is the existing standard of care but carries some ...risk of adverse events including clinically significant post-EMR bleeding and deep mural injury (DMI). The respective risk-effectiveness ratio of piecemeal cold snare polypectomy (p-CSP) in L-SSL management is not fully known.DesignConsecutive patients referred for L-SSL management were treated by p-CSP from April 2016 to January 2020 or by conventional EMR in the preceding period between July 2008 and March 2016 at four Australian tertiary centres. Surveillance colonoscopies were conducted at 6 months (SC1) and 18 months (SC2). Outcomes on technical success, adverse events and recurrence were documented prospectively and then compared retrospectively between the subsequent time periods.ResultsA total of 562 L-SSL in 474 patients were evaluated of which 156 L-SSL in 121 patients were treated by p-CSP and 406 L-SSL in 353 patients by EMR. Technical success was equal in both periods (100.0% (n=156) vs 99.0% (n=402)). No adverse events occurred in p-CSP, whereas delayed bleeding and DMI were encountered in 5.1% (n=18) and 3.4% (n=12) of L-SSL treated by EMR, respectively. Recurrence rates following p-CSP were similar to EMR at 4.3% (n=4) versus 4.6% (n=14) and 2.0% (n=1) versus 1.2% (n=3) for surveillance colonoscopy (SC)1 and SC2, respectively.ConclusionsIn a historical comparison on the endoscopic management of L-SSL, p-CSP is technically equally efficacious to EMR but virtually eliminates the risk of delayed bleeding and perforation. p-CSP should therefore be considered as the new standard of care for L-SSL treatment.
Among patients with large colorectal sessile polyps or laterally spreading lesions, it is important to identify those at risk for submucosal invasive cancer (SMIC). Lesions with overt endoscopic ...evidence of SMIC are referred for surgery, although those without these features might still contain SMIC that is not visible on endoscopic inspection (covert SMIC). Lesions with a high covert SMIC risk might be better suited for endoscopic submucosal dissection than for endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). We analyzed a group of patients with large colon lesions to identify factors associated with SMIC, and examined lesions without overt endoscopic high-risk signs to determine factors associated with covert SMIC.
We performed a prospective cohort study of consecutive patients referred for EMR of large sessile or flat colorectal polyps or laterally spreading lesions (≥20 mm) at academic hospitals in Australia from September 2008 through September 2016. We collected data on patient and lesion characteristics, outcomes of procedures, and histology findings. We excluded serrated lesions from the analysis of covert SMIC due to their distinct phenotype and biologic features.
We analyzed 2277 lesions (mean size, 36.9 mm) from 2106 patients (mean age, 67.7 years; 53.2% male). SMIC was evident in 171 lesions (7.6%). Factors associated with SMIC included Kudo pit pattern V, a depressed component (0–IIc), rectosigmoid location, 0–Is or 0–IIa+Is Paris classification, non-granular surface morphology, and increasing size. After exclusion of lesions that were obviously SMIC or serrated, factors associated with covert SMIC were rectosigmoid location (odds ratio, 1.87; P = .01), combined Paris classification, surface morphology (odds ratios, 3.96−22.5), and increasing size (odds ratio, 1.16/10 mm; P = .012).
In a prospective study of 2106 patients who underwent EMR for large sessile or flat colorectal polyps or laterally spreading lesions, we associated rectosigmoid location, combined Paris classification and surface morphology, and increasing size with increased risk for covert malignancy. Rectosigmoid 0–Is and 0–IIa+Is non-granular lesions have a high risk for malignancy, whereas proximally located 0–Is or 0–IIa granular lesions have a low risk. These findings can be used to inform decisions on which patients should undergo endoscopic submucosal dissection, EMR, or surgery. ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT02000141.
Background & Aims Wide-field endoscopic mucosal resection (WF-EMR) of large sessile colonic polyps is a safe and cost-effective outpatient treatment. Bleeding is the main complication. Few studies ...have examined risk factors for bleeding during the procedure (intraprocedural bleeding IPB) or after it (clinically significant post-endoscopic bleeding CSPEB). We investigated factors associated with IPB and CSPEB in a large prospective study. Methods We analyzed data from WF-EMRs of sessile colorectal polyps ≥20 mm in size (mean size, 35.5 mm), which were performed on 1172 patients (mean age, 67.8 years) from June 2008–March 2013 at 7 tertiary hospitals as part of the Australian Colonic Endoscopic Resection Study. Data were collected on characteristics of patients and lesions, along with outcomes of procedures and clinical and histologic analyses. Independent predictors of IPB and CSPEB were identified by multiple logistic regression analysis. Results Of the patients studied, 133 (11.3%) had IPB. Independent predictors included increasing lesion size (odds ratio, 1.24/10 mm; P < .001), Paris endoscopic classification of 0–IIa + Is (odds ratio, 2.12; P = .004), tubulovillous or villous histology (odds ratio, 1.84; P = .007), and study institutions that performed the procedure on fewer than 75 patients (odds ratio, 3.78; P < .001). All IPB was successfully controlled endoscopically. IPB prolonged procedures and was associated with early recurrence (relative risk, 1.68; P = .011). Seventy-three patients (6.2%) had CSPEB. On multivariable analysis, CSPEB was associated with proximal colon location (odds ratio, 3.72; P < .001), use of an electrosurgical current not controlled by a microprocessor (odds ratio, 2.03; P = .038), and IPB (odds ratio, 2.16; P = .016). Lesion size and comorbidities did not predict CSPEB. Conclusions In a prospective study of patients undergoing WF-EMR of large sessile colonic polyps, IPB is associated with larger lesions, lesion histology, and Paris endoscopic classification of type 0–IIa + Is. IPB prolongs the duration of the procedure, is a marker for recurrence, and is associated with CSPEB. CSPEB occurs most frequently in the proximal colon and less when current is controlled by a microprocessor.
Background
Lesions involving the ampulla of Vater have traditionally been managed by surgical resection, albeit with high rates of morbidity and mortality. Endoscopic ampullectomy is increasingly ...recognized as an efficacious and safer treatment option. This study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of endoscopic ampullectomy for non-invasive ampullary lesions in a single tertiary referral center.
Methods
Patients with non-invasive ampullary lesions, with or without familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), were identified using pathology and endoscopy databases. The study included all patients who underwent the index ampullectomy between January 2007 and January 2017. Outcome parameters included accuracy of forceps biopsies, adverse events, success of endoscopic resection, and rate of recurrence.
Results
A total of 53 patients underwent endoscopic ampullectomy over the 10-year period. Histological upstaging was seen in 37.8% of cases at ampullectomy compared to biopsy, including 5 cases (9.4%) of invasive adenocarcinoma. Adverse events occurred in 10 patients (18.9%) consisting of bleeding (11.3%), benign papillary stenosis (3.8%), acute pancreatitis (1.9%), and duodenal perforation (1.9%). Recurrence occurred in 32.7% over a median follow-up of 30 months (range 6–104 months), with the majority (18.4%) occurring at the first surveillance endoscopy. Nonetheless, 75% of recurrences were able to be cleared endoscopically. Endoscopic resection was successful in 91.1% of patients.
Conclusions
Endoscopic ampullectomy is an effective and safer therapeutic modality for non-invasive ampullary lesions, in addition to being a valuable diagnostic and staging tool. Nevertheless, careful patient selection and a commitment to endoscopic follow-up are of primary importance to achieve an optimal therapeutic outcome.
Background EMR of advanced mucosal neoplasia (AMN) (ie, sessile or laterally spreading lesions of ≥20 mm) of the colon has become an increasingly popular alternative to surgical resection. However, ...data regarding safety and mortality of EMR in comparison to surgery are limited. Objective To compare actual endoscopic with predicted surgical mortality. Design Prospective, observational, multicenter cohort study. Setting Academic, high-volume, tertiary-care referral center. Patients Consecutive patients referred for EMR. Intervention EMR. Main Outcome Measurements To predict hypothetical surgical mortality, the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland score, composed of physiological and surgical components, was calculated for each patient. Predicted surgical mortality was then compared with actual outcomes of EMR. The results were validated by an unselected subcohort by using the Colorectal Physiologic and Operative Severity Score for Enumeration of Mortality and Morbidity. Results Among 1050 patients with AMN treated by EMR, including patients with a predicted mortality rate of greater than 5% (13.8% of cohort), no deaths occurred within 30 days after the procedure. The predicted surgical mortality rate was 3.3% with the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland score ( P < .0001). This suggests a significant advantage of EMR over surgery. The results were validated by using the Colorectal Physiologic and Operative Severity Score for Enumeration of Mortality and Morbidity in 390 patients predicting a surgical mortality rate of 3.2% ( P = .0003). Limitations Nonrandomized study. Conclusion In this large multicenter study of EMR for colonic AMN, the predicted surgical mortality rate was significantly higher than the actual endoscopic mortality rate. Given that endoscopic therapy is less morbid and less expensive than surgery and can be performed as an outpatient treatment, it should be considered as the first line of treatment for most patients with these lesions.
Background & Aims Large sessile colonic polyps usually are managed surgically, with significant morbidity and potential mortality. There have been few prospective, intention-to-treat, multicenter ...studies of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). We investigated whether endoscopic criteria can predict invasive disease and direct the optimal treatment strategy. Methods The Australian Colonic Endoscopic (ACE) resection study group conducted a prospective, multicenter, observational study of all patients referred for EMR of sessile colorectal polyps that were 20 mm or greater in size (n = 479, mean age, 68.5 y; mean lesion size, 35.6 mm). We analyzed data on lesion characteristics and procedural, clinical, and histologic outcomes. Multiple logistic regression analysis identified independent predictors of EMR efficacy and recurrence of adenoma, based on findings from follow-up colonoscopy examinations. Results Risk factors for submucosal invasion were as follows: Paris classification 0–IIa+c morphology, nongranular surface, and Kudo pit pattern type V. The most commonly observed lesion (0–IIa granular) had a low rate of submucosal invasion (1.4%). EMR was effective at completely removing the polyp in a single session in 89.2% of patients; risk factors for lack of efficacy included a prior attempt at EMR (odds ratio OR, 3.8; 95% confidence interval, 1.77–7.94; P = .001) and ileocecal valve involvement (OR, 3.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.20–9.52; P = .021). Independent predictors of recurrence after effective EMR were lesion size greater than 40 mm (OR, 4.37; 95% confidence interval, 2.43–7.88; P < .001) and use of argon plasma coagulation (OR, 3.51; 95% confidence interval, 1.69–7.27; P = .0017). There were no deaths from EMR; 83.7% of patients avoided surgery. Conclusions Large sessile colonic polyps can be managed safely and effectively by endoscopy. Endoscopic assessment identifies lesions at increased risk of containing submucosal cancer. The first EMR is an important determinant of patient outcome—a previous attempt is a significant risk factor for lack of efficacy.
Background and Aims EMR is the primary treatment of large laterally spreading lesions (LSLs) in the colon. Residual or recurrent adenoma (RRA) is a major limitation. We aimed to identify a robust ...method to stratify the risk of RRA. Methods Prospective multicenter data on consecutive LSLs ≥20 mm removed by piecemeal EMR from 8 Australian tertiary-care centers were included (September 2008 until May 2016). A logistic regression model for endoscopically determined recurrence (EDR) was created on a randomly selected half of the cohort to yield the Sydney EMR recurrence tool (SERT), a 4-point score to stratify the incidence of RRA based on characteristics of the index EMR. SERT was validated on the remainder of the cohort. Results Analysis was performed on 1178 lesions that underwent first surveillance colonoscopy (SC1) (median 4.9 months, interquartile range IQR 4.9-6.2). EDR was detected in 228 of 1178 (19.4%) patients. LSL size ≥40 mm (odds ratio OR 2.47; P < .001), bleeding during the procedure (OR 1.78; P = .024), and high-grade dysplasia (OR 1.72; P = .029) were identified as independent predictors of EDR and allocated scores of 2, 1, and 1, respectively to create SERT. Lesions with SERT scores of 0 (SERT = 0) had a negative predictive value of 91.3% for RRA at SC1, and SERT was shown to stratify RRA to specific follow-up intervals by using Kaplan Meier curves (log-rank P < .001). Conclusions Guidelines recommend SC1 within 6 months of EMR. SERT accurately stratifies the incidence of RRA after EMR. SERT = 0 lesions could safely undergo first surveillance at 18 months, whereas lesions with SERT scores between 1 and 4 (SERT 1-4) require surveillance at 6 and 18 months. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT01368289 .)
Abstract
Background
The SMSA (size, morphology, site, access) polyp scoring system is a method of stratifying the difficulty of polypectomy through assessment of four domains. The aim of this study ...was to evaluate the ability of SMSA to predict critical outcomes of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR).
Methods
We retrospectively applied SMSA to a prospectively collected multicenter database of large colonic laterally spreading lesions (LSLs) ≥ 20 mm referred for EMR. Standard inject-and-resect EMR procedures were performed. The primary end points were correlation of SMSA level with technical success, adverse events, and endoscopic recurrence.
Results
2675 lesions in 2675 patients (52.6 % male) underwent EMR. Failed single-session EMR occurred in 124 LSLs (4.6 %) and was predicted by the SMSA score (
P
< 0.001). Intraprocedural and clinically significant postendoscopic
bleeding was significantly less common for SMSA 2 LSLs (odds ratio OR 0.36,
P
< 0.001 and OR 0.23,
P
< 0.01) and SMSA 3 LSLs (OR 0.41,
P
< 0.001 and OR 0.60,
P
= 0.05) compared with SMSA 4 lesions. Similarly, endoscopic recurrence at first surveillance was less likely among SMSA 2 (OR 0.19,
P
< 0.001) and SMSA 3 (OR 0.33,
P
< 0.001) lesions compared with SMSA 4 lesions. This also extended to second surveillance among SMSA 4 LSLs.
Conclusion
SMSA is a simple, readily applicable, clinical score that identifies a subgroup of patients who are at increased risk of failed EMR, adverse events, and adenoma recurrence at surveillance colonoscopy. This information may be useful for improving informed consent, planning endoscopy lists, and developing quality control measures for practitioners of EMR, with potential implications for EMR benchmarking and training.
Thermal ablation of the defect margin after endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR-T) for treating large (≥20 mm) nonpedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs) has shown efficacy in a randomized trial, with ...a 4-fold reduction, in residual or recurrent adenoma (RRA) at first surveillance colonoscopy (SC1). The clinical effectiveness of this treatment, in the real world, remains unknown.
We sought to evaluate the effectiveness of EMR-T in an international multicenter prospective trial (NCT02957058). The primary endpoint was the frequency of RRA at SC1. Detailed demographic, procedural, and outcome data were recorded. Exclusion criteria were LNPCPs involving the ileo-caecal valve, the appendiceal orifice, and circumferential LNPCPs.
During 51 months (May 2016–August 2020) 1049 LNPCPs in 1049 patients (median size, 35 mm; interquartile range, 25–45 mm; right colon location, 53.5%) were enrolled. Uniform completeness of EMR-T was achieved in 989 LNPCPs (95.4%). In this study, 755/803 (94.0%) eligible LNPCPs underwent SC1 (median time to SC1, 6 months; interquartile range, 5–7 months). For LNPCPs that underwent complete EMR-T, the frequency of RRA at SC1 was 1.4% (10/707).
In clinical practice, EMR-T is a simple, inexpensive, and highly effective auxiliary technique that is likely to significantly reduce RRA at first surveillance. It should be universally used for the management of LNPCPs after EMR.
https://clinicaltrials.gov; Clinical Trial Number, NCT02957058.
Display omitted
In this prospective study, 1037 large nonpedunculated colorectal polyps that underwent successful endoscopic mucosal resection with complete thermal ablation of the defect margin after endoscopic mucosal resection were enrolled. Recurrence at first surveillance colonoscopy occurred in 10/707 cases (1.4%). In an international multicenter cohort of more than 1000 large nonpedunculated colorectal polyps, thermal ablation of the defect margin after endoscopic mucosal resection significantly reduced the frequency of recurrence at first surveillance colonoscopy.
PDF
