Post-polypectomy surveillance interval based on flexible spectral color imaging enhancement (FICE) with magnifying zoom imaging for optical biopsy

Abstract

Background and study aims Post-polypectomy surveillance interval (SI) is determined based on the number, size, and histology of colorectal polyps. Electronic chromoendoscopy in association with magnifying imaging colonoscopy allows “in vivo” polyp histology prediction. Colorectal polyps ≤ 5 mm can be resected and discarded without pathologic assessment if the endoscopic technology when used with high confidence provides ≥ 90 % agreement between the post-polypectomy SI and the SI based on pathological assessment. The aim of this study was to evaluate the agreement between the post-polypectomy SI based on flexible spectral color imaging enhancement (FICE) chromoendoscopy in association with magnified imaging and the pathology-based SI.

Patients and methods Each diagnosed colorectal polyp received a histology prediction (neoplastic or non-neoplastic) based on the FICE capillary-vessel pattern classification. Each prediction was classified as high or low confidence. SI based on the FICE prediction was compared to the pathology-based SI recommendation according to the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer guideline. Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of FICE in diagnosing neoplastic lesions were compared with the pathology assessment. Interobserver and intraobserver agreement for FICE-based SI predictions was evaluated using the kappa coefficient.

Results A total of 267 polyps had histology prediction assessed with high confidence in 136 patients. Sensitivity of FICE was 98.7 % (95 % CI: 93.5 – 99.3) and specificity was 62.5 % (95 % CI: 43.6 – 78.9). Prediction accuracy was 94.4 % (95 % CI: 88.6 – 96 – 1) in differentiating between neoplastic and non-neoplastic lesions. Therefore, magnifying FICE colonoscopy-based SI recommendation was consistent with pathological assessment in 88.3 % of general cases (95 % CI: 82.1 – 92.6) and in 89.7 % (95 % CI: 83 – 94.5) of the high-confidence evaluation cases. The intraobserver agreement value for FICE-based SI predictions was 0.87 (high-confidence evaluations), and the interobserver agreement values were 0.78 (high- and low-confidence evaluations) and 0.82 (high-confidence evaluations) (95 % CI: 0.79 – 0.95).

Conclusions FICE-based SI demonstrated 89.7 % concordance with the pathology-based SI.

• References

• 1 ACS – American Cancer Society (2016) Cancer facts & figures. [cited 2016 Abr 3]. Available from: http://www.inca.gov.br/estimativa/2016
• 2 Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Ho MN. et al. Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. The National Polyp Study Workgroup. N Engl J Med 1993; 329: 1977-1981
• 3 Vieth M, Quirke P, Lambert R. et al. Chapter 7 Annex: annotations of colorectal lesions. In: Segnan N, Patnick J, von Karsa L. (editors). European guidelines for quality assurance in colorectal cancer screening and diagnosis. Luxembourg: European Union; 2010: 235-250
• 4 Rex DK, Kahi C, OʼBrien M. et al. The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy PIVI (Preservation and Incorporation of Valuable Endoscopic Innovations) on real-time endoscopic assessment of the histology of diminutive colorectal polyps. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 419-422
• 5 Teixeira CR, Torresini RS, Canali C. et al. Endoscopic classification of the capillary-vessel pattern of colorectal lesions by spectral estimation technology and magnifying zoom imaging. Gastrointest Endosc 2009; 69: 750-756
• 6 Abu DayyehBK, Thosani N, Konda V. et al. ASGE Technology Committee systematic review and meta-analysis assessing the ASGE PIVI thresholds for adopting real-time endoscopic assessment of the histology of diminutive colorectal polyps. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 81: 502-516
• 7 Williams JE, Le TD, Faigel DO. Polypectomy rate as a quality measure for colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 498-506
• 8 Ignjatovic A, East JE, Suzuki N. et al. Optical diagnosis of small colorectal polyps at routine colonoscopy (Detect InSpect ChAracterise Resect and Discard; DISCARD trial): a prospective cohort study. Lancet Oncol 2009; 10: 1171-1178
• 9 Hassan C, Pickhardt PJ, Rex DK. A resect and discard strategy would improve cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2010; 8: 865-869
• 10 dos CEO Santos, Malaman D, Lopes CV. et al. Digital chromoendoscopy for diagnosis of diminutive colorectal lesions. Diagn Ther Endosc 2012; 2012: 279521
• 11 Longcroft-Wheaton GR, Higgins B, Bhandari P. Flexible spectral imaging color enhancement and indigo carmine in neoplasia diagnosis during colonoscopy: a large prospective UK series. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2011; 23: 903-911
• 12 Longcroft-Wheaton G, Brown J, Cowlishaw D. et al. High-definition vs. standard-definition colonoscopy in the characterization of small colonic polyps: results from a randomized trial. Endoscopy 2012; 44: 905-910
• 13 Kuruvilla N, Paramsothy R, Gill R. et al. A prospective dual-center proof-of-principle study evaluating the incremental benefit of narrow-band imaging with a fixed zoom function in real-time prediction of polyp histology. Can we resect and discard?. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 82: 362-369
• 14 Wallace MB, Crook JE, Coe S. et al. Accuracy of in vivo colorectal polyp discrimination by using dual- focus high-definition narrow-band imaging colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2014; 80: 1072-1087
• 15 Hewett DG, Kaltenbach T, Sano Y. et al. Validation of a simple classification system for endoscopic diagnosis of small colorectal polyps using narrow-band imaging. Gastroenterology 2012; 143: 599-607
• 16 Yoshida N, Naito Y, Kugai M. et al. Efficacy of magnifying endoscopy with flexible spectral imaging color enhancement in the diagnosis of colorectal tumors. J Gastroenterol 2011; 46: 65-72
• 17 Yoshida N, Yagi N, Inada Y. et al. Ability of a novel blue laser imaging system for the diagnosis of colorectal polyps. Dig Endosc 2014; 26: 250-258
• 18 Anderson BW, Smyrk TC, Anderson KS. et al. Endoscopic overestimation of colorectal polyp size. Gastrointest Endosc 2016; 83: 201-208
• 19 Chaptini L, Chaaya A, Depalma F. et al. Variation in polyp size estimation among endoscopists and impact on surveillance intervals. Gastrointest Endosc 2014; 80: 652-659
• 20 Kaz AM, Anwar A, O'Neill DR. et al. Use of a novel polyp “ruler snare” improves estimation of colon polyp size. Gastrointest Endosc 2016; 83: 812-816
• 21 Lieberman DA, Rex DK, Winawer SJ. et al. Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after screening and polypectomy: a consensus update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Gastroenterology 2012; 143: 844-857
• 22 Rex DK, Patel NJ, Vemulapalli KC. A survey of patient acceptance of resect and discard for diminutive polyps. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 82: 376-380.e1