Search

Background: The Japanese Society of Gastroenterology (JSGE) published ''Daicho Polyp Shinryo Guideline 2014'' in Japanese and a part of this guideline was published in English as "Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for management of colorectal polyps" in the Journal of Gastroenterology in 2015. A revised version of the Japanese-language guideline was published in 2020, and here we introduce a part of the contents of revised version., Methods: The guideline committee discussed and drew up a series of clinical questions (CQs). Recommendation statements for the CQs were limited to items with multiple therapeutic options. Items with established conclusions that had 100% agreement with previous guidelines (background questions) and items with no (or old) evidence that are topics for future research (future research questions: FRQs) were given descriptions only. To address the CQs and FRQs, PubMed, ICHUSHI, and other sources were searched for relevant articles published in English from 1983 to October 2018 and articles published in Japanese from 1983 to November 2018. The Japan Medical Library Association was also commissioned to search for relevant materials. Manual searches were performed for questions with insufficient online references., Results: The professional committee created 18 CQs and statements concerning the current concept and diagnosis/treatment of various colorectal polyps, including their epidemiology, screening, pathophysiology, definition and classification, diagnosis, management, practical treatment, complications, and surveillance after treatment, and other colorectal lesions (submucosal tumors, nonneoplastic polyps, polyposis, hereditary tumors, ulcerative colitis-associated tumors/carcinomas)., Conclusions: After evaluation by the moderators, evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for management of colorectal polyps were proposed for 2020. This report addresses the therapeutic related CQs introduced when formulating these guidelines.

Suitable lesions for endoscopic treatment include not only early colorectal carcinomas but also several types of precarcinomatous adenomas. It is important to establish practical guidelines wherein preoperative diagnosis of colorectal neoplasia and selection of endoscopic treatment procedures are appropriately outlined and to ensure that actual endoscopic treatment is useful and safe in general hospitals when carried out in accordance with guidelines. In cooperation with the Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum, the Japanese Society of Coloproctology, and the Japanese Society of Gastroenterology, the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society compiled colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection/endoscopic mucosal resection guidelines by using evidence-based methods in 2014. The first edition of these guidelines was published 5 years ago. Accordingly, we have published the second edition of these guidelines based on recent new knowledge and evidence., (© 2019 Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society.)

Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has become common in recent years. Suitable lesions for endoscopic treatment include not only early colorectal carcinomas but also many types of precarcinomatous adenomas. It is important to establish practical guidelines in which the preoperative diagnosis of colorectal neoplasia and the selection of endoscopic treatment procedures are properly outlined, and to ensure that the actual endoscopic treatment is useful and safe in general hospitals when carried out in accordance with the guidelines. In cooperation with the Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum, the Japanese Society of Coloproctology, and the Japanese Society of Gastroenterology, the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society has recently compiled a set of colorectal ESD/endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) guidelines using evidence-based methods. The guidelines focus on the diagnostic and therapeutic strategies and caveat before, during, and after ESD/EMR and, in this regard, exclude the specific procedures, types and proper use of instruments, devices, and drugs. Although eight areas, ranging from indication to pathology, were originally planned for inclusion in these guidelines, evidence was scarce in each area. Therefore, grades of recommendation were determined largely through expert consensus in these areas., (© 2015 The Authors. Digestive Endoscopy © 2015 Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society.)

Background: Familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) patients develop various extracolonic lesions; however, the relationship between germline mutation of the APC gene and extracolonic manifestations is mostly unknown. To examine the genotype-phenotype relationship, we compared the APC mutation and clinical data., Methods: Germline mutations from codon 157 to 1465 of the APC gene were identified in 39 families of FAP and clinical data were collected from 80 patients of these families. Germline mutations were classified into two groups: mutations from exon 4 to 9 (codon 157 to 416, Group 1) and those from exon 10 to 15H (codon 564 to 1465, Group 2). The complication rates of extracolonic manifestations were compared between these two groups., Results: Frequencies of duodenal polyps and gastric adenomas in Group 2 were higher than those in Group 1 (p < 0.0001 and p < 0.0004, respectively) and development of osteoma was more frequent in Group 2 (p = 0.01). The number of colorectal polyps and retinal pigments also correlated with the germline mutation, which was consistent with previous reports. However, such correlations were less obvious with regard to gastric fundic polyps, desmoid tumors, soft tissue tumors and colorectal cancer., Conclusion: There are two types with regard to extracolonic manifestations of FAP: one is more severely affected according to the position of germline mutation of the APC gene and the other is not affected.