Need for adjunctive removal techniques for endoscopic mucosal resection of large non-pedunculated colonic polyps is predictive of recurrence

Abstract

Background and study aims Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) allows for safe and effective removal of large non-pedunculated colon polyps, but recurrence remains a significant concern. Risk factors for recurrence have previously been reported, however, the significance of these factors have varied and has uncertain applicability with recent advances in EMR techniques. We aimed to evaluate rates and risk factors for recurrence in recent years from a major Canadian referral center.

Patients and methods Consecutive patients between April 1, 2017 and March 1, 2019 who underwent piecemeal EMR were retrospectively identified. Patients with non-pedunculated colorectal polyps ≥ 2 cm removed by piecemeal EMR with available follow-up data were included.

Results Five hundred and seventeen patients were reviewed, with 265 patients satisfying inclusion criteria. The median age was 67 years (IQR 14); 48 % were female. 15 % had a recurrence on follow-up endoscopy. Adjunctive removal techniques were utilized in 31 % of patients, 95 % of which was hot avulsion. The use of adjunctive removal techniques (OR 2.87, P = 0.004) and male gender (OR 3.31, P = 0.003) was significantly predictive of recurrence on multivariate analysis. Receiver operating curve characteristics demonstrated good performance of these factors in predicting recurrence (area under the curve = 0.70).

Conclusions The use of adjunctive removal techniques, particularly hot avulsion and male gender are predictive of recurrence after piecemeal EMR of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps. Male patients and those who require hot avulsion may be considered high risk for recurrence and warrant closer follow-up.

• References

• 1 Hwang JH, Konda V, Abu Dayyeh BK. et al. Endoscopic mucosal resection. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 82: 215-226
• 2 Moss A, Bourke MJ, Williams SJ. et al. Endoscopic mucosal resection outcomes and prediction of submucosal cancer from advanced colonic mucosal neoplasia. Gastroenterology 2011; 140: 1909-1918
• 3 Kaltenbach T, Anderson JC, Burke CA. et al. Endoscopic removal of colorectal lesions—recommendations by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Gastroenterology 2020; 158: 1095-1129
• 4 Klein A, Tate DJ, Jayasekeran V. et al. Thermal ablation of mucosal defect margins reduces adenoma recurrence after colonic endoscopic mucosal resection. Gastroenterology 2019; 156: 604-613.e3
• 5 Levenick JM, Groff AJ, Manzo C. et al. Hybrid APC colon EMR: A novel approach to reduce local recurrence. Tech Innov Gastrointest Endosc 2021;
• 6 Kumar V, Broadley H, Rex DK. Safety and efficacy of hot avulsion as an adjunct to EMR (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc 2019; 89: 999-1004
• 7 Tate DJ, Bahin FF, Desomer L. et al. Cold-forceps avulsion with adjuvant snare-tip soft coagulation (CAST) is an effective and safe strategy for the management of non-lifting large laterally spreading colonic lesions. Endoscopy 2017; 50: 52-62
• 8 Shahidi N, Vosko S, Gupta S. et al. Previously attempted large nonpedunculated colorectal polyps are effectively managed by endoscopic mucosal resection. Am J Gastroenterol 2021; 116: 958-966
• 9 Tate DJ, Desomer L, Klein A. et al. Adenoma recurrence after piecemeal colonic EMR is predictable: the Sydney EMR recurrence tool. Gastrointest Endosc 2017; 85: 647-656.e6
• 10 Sidhu M, Tate DJ, Desomer L. et al. The size, morphology, site, and access score predicts critical outcomes of endoscopic mucosal resection in the colon. Endoscopy 2018; 50: 684-692
• 11 Singh Dhillon A, Ravindran S, Thomas-Gibson S. Recurrence after endoscopic mucosal resection: there’s more to it than meets the eye. Gastrointest Endosc 2021; 94: 376-378
• 12 Moss A, Williams SJ, Hourigan LF. et al. Long-term adenoma recurrence following wide-field endoscopic mucosal resection (WF-EMR) for advanced colonic mucosal neoplasia is infrequent: Results and risk factors in 1000 cases from the Australian Colonic EMR (ACE) study. Gut 2015; 64: 57-65
• 13 Cifuentes JDG, Sarvepalli S, Sealock RJ. et al. ID: 3524413 Evaluating external validity of sydney endoscopic mucosal resection recurrence tool after resection of polyps larger than 20 mm. Gastrointest Endosc 2021; 93: AB120
• 14 Kandel P, Brand EC, Pelt J. et al. Endoscopic scar assessment after colorectal endoscopic mucosal resection scars: when is biopsy necessary (EMR Scar Assessment Project for Endoscope (ESCAPE) trial). Gut 2019; 68: 1633-1641
• 15 Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S, Sturdivant RX. Applied Logistic Regression: Third Edition. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons; 2013
• 16 Facciorusso A, di Maso M, Serviddio G. et al. Factors associated with recurrence of advanced colorectal adenoma after endoscopic resection. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2016; 14: 1148-1154.e4
• 17 Chang J-J, Chien C-H, Chen S-W. et al. Long term outcomes of colon polyps with high grade dysplasia following endoscopic resection. BMC Gastroenterology 2020; 20: 1-8
• 18 Jang HW, Park SJ, Hong SP. et al. Risk factors for recurrent high-risk polyps after the removal of high-risk polyps at initial colonoscopy. Yonsei Med J 2015; 56: 1559-1565
• 19 Briedigkeit A, Sultanie O, Sido B. et al. Endoscopic mucosal resection of colorectal adenomas > 20 mm: Risk factors for recurrence. World J Gastrointest Endosc 2016; 8: 276
• 20 Zhan T, Hielscher T, Hahn F. et al. Risk factors for local recurrence of large, flat colorectal polyps after endoscopic mucosal resection. Digestion 2016; 93: 311-317
• 21 Emmanuel A, Lapa C, Ghosh A. et al. Risk factors for early and late adenoma recurrence after advanced colorectal endoscopic resection at an expert Western center. Gastrointest Endosc 2019; 90: 127-136
• 22 Emmanuel A, Williams S, Gulati S. et al. Incidence of microscopic residual adenoma after complete wide-field endoscopic resection of large colorectal lesions: evidence for a mechanism of recurrence. Gastrointest Endosc 2021; 94: 368-375
• 23 Nguyen SP, Bent S, Chen Y-H. et al. Gender as a risk factor for advanced neoplasia and colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. YJCGH 2009; 7: 676-681.e3
• 24 Chen SC, Rex DK. Endoscopist can be more powerful than age and male gender in predicting adenoma detection at colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2007; 102: 856-861