Cargando…

Multicenter evaluation of recurrence in endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection in the colon: A Western perspective

BACKGROUND: While colon endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is an effective technique, removal of larger polyps often requires piecemeal resection, which can increase recurrence rates. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the colon offers the ability for en bloc resection and is well-described i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wei, Mike T, Zhou, Margaret J, Li, Andrew A, Ofosu, Andrew, Hwang, Joo Ha, Friedland, Shai
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Baishideng Publishing Group Inc 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10308275/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37397977
http://dx.doi.org/10.4253/wjge.v15.i6.458
_version_ 1785066212715134976
author Wei, Mike T
Zhou, Margaret J
Li, Andrew A
Ofosu, Andrew
Hwang, Joo Ha
Friedland, Shai
author_facet Wei, Mike T
Zhou, Margaret J
Li, Andrew A
Ofosu, Andrew
Hwang, Joo Ha
Friedland, Shai
author_sort Wei, Mike T
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: While colon endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is an effective technique, removal of larger polyps often requires piecemeal resection, which can increase recurrence rates. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the colon offers the ability for en bloc resection and is well-described in Asia, but there are limited studies comparing ESD vs EMR in the West. AIM: To evaluate different techniques in endoscopic resection of large polyps in the colon and to identify factors for recurrence. METHODS: The study is a retrospective comparison of ESD, EMR and knife-assisted endoscopic resection performed at Stanford University Medical Center and Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System between 2016 and 2020. Knife-assisted endoscopic resection was defined as use of electrosurgical knife to facilitate snare resection, such as for circumferential incision. Patients ≥ 18 years of age undergoing colonoscopy with removal of polyp(s) ≥ 20 mm were included. The primary outcome was recurrence on follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 376 patients and 428 polyps were included. Mean polyp size was greatest in the ESD group (35.8 mm), followed by knife-assisted endoscopic resection (33.3 mm) and EMR (30.5 mm) (P < 0.001). ESD achieved highest en bloc resection (90.4%) followed by knife-assisted endoscopic resection (31.1%) and EMR (20.2%) (P < 0.001). A total of 287 polyps had follow-up (67.1%). On follow-up analysis, recurrence rate was lowest in knife-assisted endoscopic resection (0.0%) and ESD (1.3%) and highest in EMR (12.9%) (P = 0.0017). En bloc polyp resection had significantly lower rate of recurrence (1.9%) compared to non-en bloc (12.0%, P = 0.003). On multivariate analysis, ESD (in comparison to EMR) adjusted for polyp size was found to significantly reduce risk of recurrence [adjusted hazard ratio 0.06 (95%CI: 0.01-0.57, P = 0.014)]. CONCLUSION: In our study, EMR had significantly higher recurrence compared to ESD and knife-assisted endoscopic resection. We found factors including resection by ESD, en bloc removal, and use of circumferential incision were associated with significantly decreased recurrence. While further studies are needed, we have demonstrated the efficacy of ESD in a Western population.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10308275
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Baishideng Publishing Group Inc
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-103082752023-06-30 Multicenter evaluation of recurrence in endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection in the colon: A Western perspective Wei, Mike T Zhou, Margaret J Li, Andrew A Ofosu, Andrew Hwang, Joo Ha Friedland, Shai World J Gastrointest Endosc Retrospective Cohort Study BACKGROUND: While colon endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is an effective technique, removal of larger polyps often requires piecemeal resection, which can increase recurrence rates. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the colon offers the ability for en bloc resection and is well-described in Asia, but there are limited studies comparing ESD vs EMR in the West. AIM: To evaluate different techniques in endoscopic resection of large polyps in the colon and to identify factors for recurrence. METHODS: The study is a retrospective comparison of ESD, EMR and knife-assisted endoscopic resection performed at Stanford University Medical Center and Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System between 2016 and 2020. Knife-assisted endoscopic resection was defined as use of electrosurgical knife to facilitate snare resection, such as for circumferential incision. Patients ≥ 18 years of age undergoing colonoscopy with removal of polyp(s) ≥ 20 mm were included. The primary outcome was recurrence on follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 376 patients and 428 polyps were included. Mean polyp size was greatest in the ESD group (35.8 mm), followed by knife-assisted endoscopic resection (33.3 mm) and EMR (30.5 mm) (P < 0.001). ESD achieved highest en bloc resection (90.4%) followed by knife-assisted endoscopic resection (31.1%) and EMR (20.2%) (P < 0.001). A total of 287 polyps had follow-up (67.1%). On follow-up analysis, recurrence rate was lowest in knife-assisted endoscopic resection (0.0%) and ESD (1.3%) and highest in EMR (12.9%) (P = 0.0017). En bloc polyp resection had significantly lower rate of recurrence (1.9%) compared to non-en bloc (12.0%, P = 0.003). On multivariate analysis, ESD (in comparison to EMR) adjusted for polyp size was found to significantly reduce risk of recurrence [adjusted hazard ratio 0.06 (95%CI: 0.01-0.57, P = 0.014)]. CONCLUSION: In our study, EMR had significantly higher recurrence compared to ESD and knife-assisted endoscopic resection. We found factors including resection by ESD, en bloc removal, and use of circumferential incision were associated with significantly decreased recurrence. While further studies are needed, we have demonstrated the efficacy of ESD in a Western population. Baishideng Publishing Group Inc 2023-06-16 2023-06-16 /pmc/articles/PMC10308275/ /pubmed/37397977 http://dx.doi.org/10.4253/wjge.v15.i6.458 Text en ©The Author(s) 2023. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is an open-access article that was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial.
spellingShingle Retrospective Cohort Study
Wei, Mike T
Zhou, Margaret J
Li, Andrew A
Ofosu, Andrew
Hwang, Joo Ha
Friedland, Shai
Multicenter evaluation of recurrence in endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection in the colon: A Western perspective
title Multicenter evaluation of recurrence in endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection in the colon: A Western perspective
title_full Multicenter evaluation of recurrence in endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection in the colon: A Western perspective
title_fullStr Multicenter evaluation of recurrence in endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection in the colon: A Western perspective
title_full_unstemmed Multicenter evaluation of recurrence in endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection in the colon: A Western perspective
title_short Multicenter evaluation of recurrence in endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection in the colon: A Western perspective
title_sort multicenter evaluation of recurrence in endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection in the colon: a western perspective
topic Retrospective Cohort Study
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10308275/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37397977
http://dx.doi.org/10.4253/wjge.v15.i6.458
work_keys_str_mv AT weimiket multicenterevaluationofrecurrenceinendoscopicsubmucosaldissectionandendoscopicmucosalresectioninthecolonawesternperspective
AT zhoumargaretj multicenterevaluationofrecurrenceinendoscopicsubmucosaldissectionandendoscopicmucosalresectioninthecolonawesternperspective
AT liandrewa multicenterevaluationofrecurrenceinendoscopicsubmucosaldissectionandendoscopicmucosalresectioninthecolonawesternperspective
AT ofosuandrew multicenterevaluationofrecurrenceinendoscopicsubmucosaldissectionandendoscopicmucosalresectioninthecolonawesternperspective
AT hwangjooha multicenterevaluationofrecurrenceinendoscopicsubmucosaldissectionandendoscopicmucosalresectioninthecolonawesternperspective
AT friedlandshai multicenterevaluationofrecurrenceinendoscopicsubmucosaldissectionandendoscopicmucosalresectioninthecolonawesternperspective