Search

Background: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a reliable method that can replace surgery in the treatment of early colorectal cancer under certain conditions. Aim: The aim of the study was to analyze factors influencing the ESD procedure in early colorectal cancer, with the intention of improving its effectiveness. Patients and Methods: We conducted a multicenter, retrospective cohort study on 214 patients who underwent ESD procedures for early colorectal cancer from January 2016 to October 2023. Results:En bloc resection was achieved in 197 (92.1%) of ESD procedures, R0 resection in 149 (69.6%), and curative resection in 54 (40.9%). The submucosal invasion was classified as level 1 (SM1) in 96 cases (45.3%), level 2 (SM2) in 61 cases (28.8%), and level 3 (SM3) in 36 cases (17%). R0 resection was achieved more often in the rectum—92 (81.4%), compared to the right—24 (64.9%) and left colon—33 (61.1%), p = 0.009. In rectal tumors, R0 resection was achieved in 51 (98.1%) SM1 invasion, 27 (73%) SM2 invasion, and 13 (65%) SM3 invasion (p < 0.001). Lateral and vertical resection margins were positive in 12 (7.7%) and 52 (25.2%) cases, respectively. Vertical resection margins were statistically more often positive in lesions located in the right colon—11 cases (28.9%) and left colon—21 cases (38.9%), than in rectum—20 cases (17.5%); p = 0.010. Complications were found in 32 (15%) cases of ESD procedure—perforation in 12 cases (5.6%) and delayed bleeding in four cases (1.9%). Procedures performed in the right colon were associated with a significantly higher risk of any complications (30%) and perforations (15%) than those performed in the rectum (10.3% and 2.6%) or the left colon (13.8% and 5.2%; p = 0.016; p = 0.015), respectively. Conclusions: ESD for early colon cancer is a viable strategy due to its effectiveness and low complication rate. The ESD technique performed in the rectum yields the best results; however, in the right colon, it still requires careful attention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Colonoscopy screening is underused by first-degree relatives (FDRs) of patients with non-syndromic colorectal cancer (CRC) with screening completion rates below 50%. Studies conducted in FDR referred for screening suggest that fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) was not inferior to colonoscopy in terms of diagnostic yield and tumor staging, but screening uptake of FIT has not yet been tested in this population. In this study, we investigated whether the uptake of FIT screening is superior to the uptake of colonoscopy screening in the familial-risk population, with an equivalent effect on CRC detection. Methods and findings: This open-label, parallel-group, randomized trial was conducted in 12 Spanish centers between February 2016 and December 2021. Eligible individuals included asymptomatic FDR of index cases <60 years, siblings or ≥2 FDR with CRC. The primary outcome was to compare screening uptake between colonoscopy and FIT. The secondary outcome was to determine the efficacy of each strategy to detect advanced colorectal neoplasia (adenoma or serrated polyps ≥10 mm, polyps with tubulovillous architecture, high-grade dysplasia, and/or CRC). Screening-naïve FDR were randomized (1:1) to one-time colonoscopy versus annual FIT during 3 consecutive years followed by a work-up colonoscopy in the case of a positive test. Randomization was performed before signing the informed consent using computer-generated allocation algorithm based on stratified block randomization. Multivariable regression analysis was performed by intention-to-screen. On December 31, 2019, when 81% of the estimated sample size was reached, the trial was terminated prematurely after an interim analysis for futility. Study outcomes were further analyzed through 2-year follow-up. The main limitation of this study was the impossibility of collecting information on eligible individuals who declined to participate. A total of 1,790 FDR of 460 index cases were evaluated for inclusion, of whom 870 were assigned to undergo one-time colonoscopy (n = 431) or FIT (n = 439). Of them, 383 (44.0%) attended the appointment and signed the informed consent: 147/431 (34.1%) FDR received colonoscopy-based screening and 158/439 (35.9%) underwent FIT-based screening (odds ratio [OR] 1.08; 95% confidence intervals [CI] [0.82, 1.44], p = 0.564). The detection rate of advanced colorectal neoplasia was significantly higher in the colonoscopy group than in the FIT group (OR 3.64, 95% CI [1.55, 8.53], p = 0.003). Study outcomes did not change throughout follow-up. Conclusions: In this study, compared to colonoscopy, FIT screening did not improve screening uptake by individuals at high risk of CRC, resulting in less detection of advanced colorectal neoplasia. Further studies are needed to assess how screening uptake could be improved in this high-risk group, including by inclusion in population-based screening programs. Trial registration: This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02567045). In a randomized trial Natalia González-López and co-workers investigate whether fecal immunochemical testing improves screening uptake in first degree relatives of patients with non-syndromic colorectal cancer. Author summary: Why was this study done?: The risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) is 3 to 4 times higher in first-degree relative (FDR) of patients with non-syndromic CRC. These individuals are considered candidates for colonoscopy-based screening starting at 40 years of age, but this approach is associated with a suboptimal acceptance rate of approximately 50%. Recent evidence suggests that annual fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) may be equivalent to colonoscopy for detecting CRC and advanced adenomas, but the acceptance of this strategy is unknown in the familial-risk population. This study was designed to test the hypothesis that the uptake of FIT screening is superior to the uptake of colonoscopy screening in this population, with an equivalent effect on CRC detection. What did the researchers do and find?: This multicenter randomized controlled trial included 870 asymptomatic FDR of patients with non-syndromic CRC. Participants were invited to participate through their affected index case(s). FDR were randomized (1:1) to one-time colonoscopy versus annual FIT during 3 consecutive years followed by a work-up colonoscopy in the case of a positive test. The rate of screening completion was similar in the group assigned to FIT and the group assigned to colonoscopy screening (36% versus 34%, respectively). The detection rate of advanced colorectal neoplasia was significantly lower in subjects receiving annual FIT than in those assigned to receive one-time colonoscopy. What do these findings mean?: The findings of this trial indicate that FIT does not have the capacity of increasing the acceptance of screening in the non-syndromic familial CRC population. The fact that over 50% of eligible individuals refused to participate indicates that novel educational measures should be implemented to improve the awareness of individuals at risk and their providers. Future studies are needed to assess whether screening uptake can be improved for these individuals through their inclusion in population-based screening programs or by offering a choice between FIT and colonoscopy screening. The main limitation of this study was that it was not possible to collect information on eligible individuals who declined to participate, thus impeding our understanding behind low screening uptake in this population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

If suspected, urgent chest computed tomography (CT) can confirm the diagnosis [5]. CT chest showed a large hematoma 10 cm in length in the middle and lower esophagus with no signs of active bleeding. [Extracted from the article]

Background and Study Aim: Several factors have been shown to be related to colonoscopy quality; however, little is known about the effects of endoscopist factors. This study analyzed the influence of endoscopist-related characteristics on quality indicators for colonoscopy. Patients and Methods: The study included 48 endoscopists who each performed at least 20 colonoscopies in the colonoscopy arm of a randomized controlled trial comparing fecal immunochemical test vs. colonoscopy in colorectal cancer screening. These endoscopists performed a total of 3838 procedures in the trial. The following were calculated for each endoscopist: adenoma detection rate (ADR), advanced ADR, proximal ADR, distal ADR, and adenoma per colonoscopy rate (APCR). The characteristics of endoscopists were assessed with regard to colonoscopy quality using multivariate regression analysis. Endoscopist characteristics included age, sex, exclusive endoscopy practice, years as a physician, years as a specialist, specialty, total (life-long) number of colonoscopies performed, annual colonoscopy volume, number of hours/week dedicated to endoscopy and number of educational activities in the previous year. Results: Factors associated with ADR were age of the endoscopist (odds ratio [OR] 1.11, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.01 - 1.21; P = 0.01) and life-long number of colonoscopies (OR 1.06, 95 %CI 1.01 - 1.11; P = 0.01). Only exclusive dedication to endoscopy practice was found to be independently related to proximal ADR (OR 1.71, 95 %CI 1.15 - 2.74; P = 0.001). Life-long number of colonoscopies was independently related to detection of distal adenomas (OR 1.07, 95 %CI 1.01 - 1.13; P = 0.01). None of the analyzed endoscopist characteristics was associated with advanced ADR or APCR. Conclusions: This study found that the experience of the endoscopist and exclusive dedication to endoscopy practice, but not annual colonoscopy volume, were associated with better colonoscopy quality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Study Aims: Endoscopic surveillance in patients with multiple colorectal polyps aims to reduce colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality, as well as the need for colorectal surgery. The aim of this study was to determine the risk of developing CRC or the need for surgery during endoscopic surveillance in a cohort of patients with multiple (10 - 100) colorectal polyps.Patients and Methods: This was a multicentrer, longitudinal, observational study in 15 CRC high risk clinics in Spain, carried out between January 2009 and December 2010. Patients who were included in the EPIPOLIP trial and had at least 1 year of follow-up were included in the study. The primary outcome of interest was the incidence of CRC at least 1 year following the initial colonoscopy. The secondary outcome was the need for colorectal surgery.Results: A total of 265 patients were followed for a median of 3.8 years. Patients underwent a median of 5 colonoscopies, and 17 patients (6.4 %) were diagnosed with CRC. A total of 32 patients (12.1 %) underwent surgery, including 15 (5.7 %) for prophylaxis without a diagnosis of CRC. The corresponding incidence density rates for CRC and colorectal surgery were 1.4 (95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.7 to 2.1) and 2.7 (95 %CI 1.7 to 3.6) per 100 patient-years, respectively. Only the presence of symptoms at first colonoscopy was independently associated with CRC diagnosis (hazard ratio [HR] 7.7, 95 %CI 1.1 to 59.3) and colorectal surgery (HR 4.6, 95 %CI 1.02 to 20.6).Conclusions: Patients with more than 10 neoplastic polyps required frequent colonoscopies within a short follow-up period. More than 10 % of patients required colorectal surgery within 4 years, more than half for incident CRC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Hypersensitivity reaction (HSR) to antineoplastic drugs can force doctors to stop treatment and seek other alternatives. These alternatives may be less effective, not as well tolerated and/or more expensive. Another option is to use desensitization protocols that induce a temporary state of tolerance by gradually administering small quantities of the antineoplastic drug until the therapeutic dosage is reached. The aim of this study is to assess the effectiveness of oxaliplatin desensitization protocols. Materials and methods: A retrospective observational study was carried out between January 2006 and May 2011. The inclusion criteria were patients undergoing chemotherapy treatment with oxaliplatin who had developed an HSR to the drug and who were candidates for continuing the treatment using a desensitization protocol. The patients' clinical records were reviewed and variables were gathered relating to the patient, the treatment, the HSR, and the desensitization protocol administered. The data were analysed using version 18.0 of the statistics program SPSS. Results: A total of 53 desensitization protocols were administered to 21 patients. In 89 % of these cases, no new reactions occurred while the drug was being administered. New reactions of mild severity only occurred in 11 % of cases, and none of these reactions were severe enough for treatment to be stopped. All patients were able to complete the desensitization protocol. Conclusion: This study confirms that oxaliplatin desensitization protocols are safe and effective and allow patients to continue with the treatment that initially caused an HSR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) has proved to be an excellent resection technique for large colorectal polyps. However, a key limitation is the inaccurate histologic assessment of the sample in cases where there is invasion of the submucosa. Thus piecemeal EMR should be avoided if submucosal invasion is suspected. Furthermore, both western and eastern scientific societies have recently recommended that treatment should be based on optical diagnosis (ideally with magnification) which estimates the histology endoscopically. However, experience with magnification in western countries is limited. This study primarily aims to develop a classification system based on endoscopic features to identify intramucosal neoplasia (absence of submucosal invasion) in non-pedunculated lesions ≥20 mm assessed by western endoscopists with narrow band imaging (NBI) and without magnification. We observed that non-ulcerated LST-granular type and LST-non-granular flat elevated lesions represent 58.8% of all non-pedunculated lesions ≥20 mm and are associated with a low risk of submucosal invasion (3.8%). Therefore, we suggest these lesions be treated by piecemeal EMR. In the remaining lesions further diagnostic techniques such as magnifying endoscopy or en bloc resection should be considered. Background: The major limitation of piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is the inaccurate histological assessment of the resected specimen, especially in cases of submucosal invasion. Objective: To classify non-pedunculated lesions ≥20 mm based on endoscopic morphological features, in order to identify those that present intramucosal neoplasia (includes low-grade neoplasia and high-grade neoplasia) and are suitable for piecemeal EMR. Design: A post-hoc analysis from an observational prospective multicentre study conducted by 58 endoscopists at 17 academic and community hospitals was performed. Unbiased conditional inference trees (CTREE) were fitted to analyse the association between intramucosal neoplasia and the lesions' endoscopic characteristics. Result: 542 lesions from 517 patients were included in the analysis. Intramucosal neoplasia was present in 484 of 542 (89.3%) lesions. A conditional inference tree including all lesions' characteristics assessed with white light imaging and narrow-band imaging (NBI) found that ulceration, pseudodepressed type and sessile morphology changed the accuracy for predicting intramucosal neoplasia. In ulcerated lesions, the probability of intramucosal neoplasia was 25% (95%CI: 8.3–52.6%; p < 0.001). In non-ulcerated lesions, its probability in lateral spreading lesions (LST) non-granular (NG) pseudodepressed-type lesions rose to 64.0% (95%CI: 42.6–81.3%; p < 0.001). Sessile morphology also raised the probability of intramucosal neoplasia to 86.3% (95%CI: 80.2–90.7%; p < 0.001). In the remaining 319 (58.9%) non-ulcerated lesions that were of the LST-granular (G) homogeneous type, LST-G nodular-mixed type, and LST-NG flat elevated morphology, the probability of intramucosal neoplasia was 96.2% (95%CI: 93.5–97.8%; p < 0.001). Conclusion: Non-ulcerated LST-G type and LST-NG flat elevated lesions are the most common non-pedunculated lesions ≥20 mm and are associated with a high probability of intramucosal neoplasia. This means that they are good candidates for piecemeal EMR. In the remaining lesions, further diagnostic techniques like magnification or diagnostic +/− therapeutic endoscopic submucosal dissection should be considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a case study of a 70-year-old woman who underwent endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for lesion in a middle rectum. The specimen of the process was retrieved using the large rectal endoscopic submucosal dissection. The rectal enema resulted into the impaction of the specimen without further mechanical retrieval. Pathological evaluation of the patient revealed villous adenoma and dysplasia.

The article presents a case study of a 71-year-old woman who was discovered to have a laterally spreading tumor, using the line-assisted complete closure (LACC) technique as the perforation was large.