Endoscopic features of rectal mucosal prolapse syndrome (RMPS): Differentiation from malignant rectal tumor

Abstract

Background and study aims Rectal mucosal prolapse syndrome (RMPS) usually manifests as rectal bleeding and tenesmus. Endoscopically it can be easily misdiagnosed as malignant rectal tumor (MRT). This study aimed to investigate factors to distinguish RMPS and MRT and to explore endoscopic features of RMPS.

Patients and methods Data from patients endoscopically diagnosed with rectal lesions, masses, or tumors, were retrospectively collected. Clinical information, endoscopic images, and histologic reports were reviewed. Patients endoscopically and histologically diagnosed with RMPS were included for phenotype classification.

Results 826 patients were enrolled, among them 755 (91.4%), 22 (2.7%), 10 (1.2%), and 39 (4.7%) were respectively diagnosed with MRT, RMPS, endometriosis, and neuroendocrine tumors. Compared with MRT, patients with RMPS were significantly younger (33.5 vs. 62, P < 0.001) and lesions were significantly smaller (2 cm vs. 3 cm, P = 0.007). Moreover, the clinical course of patients with RMPS was significantly longer than for those with MRT (12 months vs. 3 months, P < 0.001). Morphologically, we classified lesions of RMPS into five phenotypes, that is, lesions with circumferential stenosis (19.4%), protrusions (41.7%), both ulcers and protrusions (11.1%), ulcers (11.1%), and flat manifestations (16.7%). Protruding lesions were more frequently observed in females (P = 0.039), whereas ulcerative lesions were found involving a smaller proportion of the rectal circumference (P = 0.028). Lesions with only ulcers were found with a shorter distance compared with those with only protrusions (5 cm vs. 10 cm, P = 0.034).

Conclusions Age, clinical course, and size of the lesion can be applied to distinguish MRT and RMPS. Five phenotypes have been identified and features of ulcers/protrusions should be further explored.

Keywords

Endoscopy Lower GI Tract - Polyps / adenomas / ... - Colorectal cancer - Diagnosis and imaging (inc chromoendoscopy, NBI, iSCAN, FICE, CLE...)

Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 02. Mai 2024

Angenommen nach Revision: 19. August 2024

Accepted Manuscript online:
30. September 2024

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
18. November 2024

• References

• 1 Tang X, Han C, Sheng L. et al. Rectal mucosal prolapse with an emphasis on endoscopic ultrasound appearance. Digesti Liver Dis 2021; 53: 427-433
• 2 Forootan M, Darvishi M. Solitary rectal ulcer syndrome: A systematic review. Medicine (Baltimore) 2018; 97: e0565
• 3 Prakash N, Vyas SJ, Mohammed A. et al. Inflammatory cloacogenic polyp: A rare benign colorectal polyp. Cureus 2022; 14: e22014
• 4 Abid S, Khawaja A, Bhimani SA. et al. The clinical, endoscopic and histological spectrum of the solitary rectal ulcer syndrome: a single-center experience of 116 cases. BMC Gastroenterol 2012; 12: 72
• 5 Mathai V, Seow-Choen F. Anterior rectal mucosal prolapse: an easily treated cause of anorectal symptoms. Br J Surgery 1995; 82: 753-754
• 6 Feczko PJ, O'Connell DJ, Riddell RH. et al. Solitary rectal ulcer syndrome: radiologic manifestations. Am J Roentgenol 1980; 135: 499-506
• 7 Tendler DA, Aboudola S, Zacks JF. et al. Prolapsing mucosal polyps: an underrecognized form of colonic polyp--a clinicopathological study of 15 cases. Am J Gastroenterol 2002; 97: 370-376
• 8 Abreu M, Azevedo Alves R, Pinto J. et al. Solitary rectal ulcer syndrome: A paediatric case report. GE Port J Gastroenterol 2017; 24: 142-146
• 9 Bishop PR, Nowicki MJ. Nonsurgical therapy for solitary rectal ulcer syndrome. Curr Treatment Options Gastroenterol 2002; 5: 215-223
• 10 du Boulay CE, Fairbrother J, Isaacson PG. Mucosal prolapse syndrome--a unifying concept for solitary ulcer syndrome and related disorders. J Clin Pathol 1983; 36: 1264-1268
• 11 Alrashidi S, AlAmery T, Alshanbary A. et al. Disease patterns among Saudi children undergoing colonoscopy for lower gastrointestinal bleeding: Single tertiary care center experience. Saudi J Gastroenterol 2023; 29: 388-395
• 12 Kwan B, Gillespie C, Warwick A. Colonoscopic findings in patients with pelvic floor dysfunction. ANZ J Surg 2023; 93: 1609-1612
• 13 Halligan S, Sultan A, Rottenberg G. et al. Endosonography of the anal sphincters in solitary rectal ulcer syndrome. Int J Colorectal Dis 1995; 10: 79-82
• 14 Oruc M, Erol T. Current diagnostic tools and treatment modalities for rectal prolapse. World J Clin Case 2023; 11: 3680-3693
• 15 Arévalo Suarez F, Cárdenas I Vela, Rodríguez Rodríguez K. et al. Rectal mucosal prolapse syndrome: study of cases. Hospital Daniel A Carrion, Lima, Peru, 2010–2013. Rev Gastroenterol Peru 2014; 34: 133-137
• 16 Sadeghi A, Biglari M, Forootan M. et al. Solitary Rectal Ulcer Syndrome: A Narrative Review. Middle East J Digest Dis 2019; 11: 129-134
• 17 Madigan MR, Morson BC. Solitary ulcer of the rectum. Gut 1969; 10: 871-888
• 18 Levine DS. "Solitary" rectal ulcer syndrome. Are "solitary" rectal ulcer syndrome and "localized" colitis cystica profunda analogous syndromes caused by rectal prolapse?. Gastroenterology 1987; 92: 243-253
• 19 Li SC, Hamilton SR. Malignant tumors in the rectum simulating solitary rectal ulcer syndrome in endoscopic biopsy specimens. Am J Surg Pathol 1998; 22: 106-112
• 20 Ball CG, Dupre MP, Falck V. et al. Sessile serrated polyp mimicry in patients with solitary rectal ulcer syndrome: is there evidence of preneoplastic change?. Arch Pathol Lab Mede 2005; 129: 1037-1040