Search

Background: Familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) predisposes individuals to duodenal adenomas. This study describes the histopathological features of endoscopic and surgical specimens from the duodenum, as well as genotype-phenotype associations., Methods: All known FAP patients were included from the Danish Polyposis Register. FAP patients were defined as having more than 100 cumulative colorectal adenomas and/or having a known germline pathogenic variant in the APC gene. Endoscopic procedures, histopathology, and genetics were evaluated., Results: Of 500 FAP patients, 70.6% underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) at least once. Of these, 59.2% presented with detectable duodenal adenomas. The most severe morphology was tubular in 62.7% patients, tubulovillous in 25.4%, and villous in 12.0%, while the most severe dysplasia was low-grade in 67.5% patients, high-grade in 25.4%, and 6.7% had adenocarcinoma. In 6.2% of FAP patients, duodenal resection was recommended, including 29% with duodenal adenocarcinoma. The risk of duodenal surgery was 1.31 per 1,000 person-years (median age: 53 years). The predominant reason for surgery was extensive polyposis (67.7%). Of the patients who underwent duodenal resection, a median of six (IQR: 4-8) EGDs were performed within five years prior to surgery, but 67.6% and 83.9% never underwent a duodenal polypectomy or endoscopic mucosa resection, respectively. Of note, seventeen of 500 patients (3.4%) developed duodenal adenocarcinoma, of which 47% were advanced at diagnosis. Genetic evaluations revealed various pathogenic variants in the APC gene, with no strong genotype-phenotype association., Conclusions: The prevalence of duodenal adenomas and cancer in FAP warrants vigilant endoscopic surveillance. Nevertheless, the need for duodenal surgery persists and should together with endoscopic practice be monitored in national registers., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) represents a choice of treatment in patients with neoplastic lesions in the rectum. When TEM fails, completion total mesorectal excision (cTME) is often required. However, a concern is whether cTME increases the rate of abdominoperineal resections (APR) and is associated with higher risk of incomplete mesorectal fascia (MRF) resection. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of cTME with primary TME (pTME) in patients with rectal cancer., Methods: This was a nationwide study on all patients with cTME from the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group database between 2005 and 2015. Patients with cTME were compared to patients with pTME after propensity score matching (matching ratio 1:2). Matching variables were age, gender, tumor distance from anal verge, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score and American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage., Results: A total of 60 patients with cTME were compared with 120 patients with pTME. Patients with cTME experienced more intraoperative complications as compared to pTME patients (18.3% vs. 6.7%, p = 0.021). However, there was no difference in the rate of perforations at or near the tumor/previous TEM site (6.7% vs. 2.5%, p = 0.224), conversion to open surgery (p = 0.733) or 30-day morbidity (p = 0.86). On multivariate analysis, cTME was not a risk factor for APR (OR 2.49; 95% CI 0.95-6.56; p = 0.064) or incomplete MRF (OR 1.32; 95% CI 0.48-3.63; p = 0.596). There was no difference in the rate of local recurrence between cTME and pTME (5.2% vs. 4.3%, p = 0.1), distant metastases (6.8% vs. 6.8%, p = 1), or survival (p = 0.081). The mean follow-up time was 6 years., Conclusion: In our study, the largest so far on the subject, we find no difference in postoperative short- or long-term outcomes between cTME and pTME., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC part of Springer Nature.)