Polyps and Polyposis Syndromes in Children: Novel Endoscopic Considerations.

Polypectomy is the most common therapeutic endoscopic intervention in children. Management of sporadic juvenile polyps is limited to polypectomy to resolve symptoms, whereas polyposis syndromes pose a multidisciplinary challenge with broader ramifications. In preparation for polypectomy, there are key patient, polyp, endoscopy unit, and provider characteristics that factor into the likelihood of success. Younger age and multiple medical comorbidities increase the risk of adverse outcomes, classified as intraoperative, immediate postoperative, and delayed postoperative complications. Novel techniques, including cold snare polypectomy, can significantly decrease adverse events but a more structured training process for polypectomy in pediatric gastroenterology is needed.

Malignant polyps in the COVID-19 era: a population-based analysis.

BACKGROUND: Malignant polyps represent the early development of colorectal adenocarcinoma. During 2020, there was widescale rationing of health-care resources in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. In particular there was deferral of some colonoscopy procedures required for timely malignant polyp detection. This study sought to assess how these deferrals affected the diagnosis of malignant polyps. METHODS: A population wide analysis was performed of 2079 malignant polyps, diagnosed in Queensland, Australia from 2011 to 2020. A regression analysis, with 95% prediction intervals, was produced to determine whether there was a significant impact on the number of malignant polyps diagnosed in 2020 compared to previous years. Univariate statistical analysis of patient, procedural, and pathological variables was also performed. RESULTS: In 2020 there were 211 malignant polyps diagnosed, which was significantly lower than was predicted by the univariate regression analysis (r2  = 0.85, 95% prediction interval: 255.07-323.91, P < 0.001). These malignant polyps were less likely to be diagnosed in a private setting (P < 0.001), and exhibited significantly less depth of submucosal invasion (P = 0.017). There was no significant difference in the management strategy (polypectomy, resection or trans-anal resection) between 2011 and 2019 and 2020. CONCLUSION: Because of the significant decrease in the number of malignant polyps, and the natural history of the disease, it is expected that there will be an increase in more advanced colorectal adenocarcinomas presenting in 2021 and beyond. This has implications for healthcare resources, particularly in light of the ongoing strain on health departments as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Colonoscopic-Assisted Laparoscopic Wedge Resection for Colonic Lesions: A Prospective Multicenter Cohort Study (LIMERIC-Study).

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a modified CAL-WR. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: The use of segmental colectomy in patients with endoscopically unresectable colonic lesions results in significant morbidity and mortality. CAL-WR is an alternative procedure that may reduce morbidity. METHODS: This prospective multicenter study was performed in 13 Dutch hospitals between January 2017 and December 2019. Inclusion criteria were (1) colonic lesions inaccessible using current endoscopic resection techniques (judged by an expert panel), (2) non-lifting residual/recurrent adenomatous tissue after previous polypectomy or (3) an undetermined resection margin after endoscopic removal of a low-risk pathological T1 (pT1) colon carcinoma. Thirty-day morbidity, technical success rate and radicality were evaluated. RESULTS: Of the 118 patients included (56% male, mean age 66 years, standard deviation ± 8 years), 66 (56%) had complex lesions unsuitable for endoscopic removal, 34 (29%) had non-lifting residual/recurrent adenoma after previous polypectomy and 18 (15%) had uncertain resection margins after polypectomy of a pT1 colon carcinoma. CAL-WR was technically successful in 93% and R0 resection was achieved in 91% of patients. Minor complications (Clavien-Dindo i-ii) were noted in 7 patients (6%) and an additional oncologic segmental resection was performed in 12 cases (11%). Residual tissue at the scar was observed in 5% of patients during endoscopic follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: CAL-WR is an effective, organ-preserving approach that results in minor complications and circumvents the need for major surgery. CAL-WR, therefore, deserves consideration when endoscopic excision of circumscribed lesions is impossible or incomplete.

Post-polypectomy colonoscopy surveillance: Can we improve the diagnostic yield?

Although adenomas and serrated polyps are the preneoplastic lesions of colorectal cancer, only few of them will eventually progress to cancer. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the present and future of post-polypectomy colonoscopy surveillance. Post-polypectomy surveillance guidelines have recently been updated and all share the aim towards more selective and less frequent surveillance. We have examined these current guidelines and compared the recommendations of each of them. To improve the diagnostic yield of post-polypectomy surveillance it is important to find predictors of metachronous polyps that better identify high-risk individuals of developing advanced neoplasia. For this reason, we have also conducted a literature review of the molecular biomarkers of metachronous advanced colorectal polyps. Finally, we have discussed future directions of post-polypectomy surveillance and identified possible strategies to improve the use of endoscopic resources with the COVID-19 pandemic.

Adoption of Multi-society Guidelines Facilitates Value-Based Reduction in Screening and Surveillance Colonoscopy Volume During COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has caused a backlog of endoscopic procedures; colonoscopy must now be prioritized to those who would benefit most. We determined the proportion of screening and surveillance colonoscopies appropriate for rescheduling to a future year through strict adoption of US Multi-Society Task Force (USMSTF) guidelines. METHODS: We conducted a single-center observational study of patients scheduled for "open-access colonoscopy"-ordered by a primary care provider without being seen in gastroenterology clinic-over a 6-week period during the COVID-19 pandemic. Each chart was reviewed to appropriately assign a surveillance year per USMSTF guidelines including demographics, colonoscopy history and family history. When guidelines recommended a range of colonoscopy intervals, both a "conservative" and "liberal" guideline adherence were assessed. RESULTS: We delayed 769 "open-access" screening or surveillance colonoscopies due to COVID-19. Between 14.8% (conservative) and 20.7% (liberal), colonoscopies were appropriate for rescheduling to a future year. Conversely, 415 (54.0%) patients were overdue for colonoscopy. Family history of CRC was associated with being scheduled too early for both screening (OR 3.9; CI 1.9-8.2) and surveillance colonoscopy (OR 2.6, CI 1.0-6.5). The most common reasons a colonoscopy was inappropriately scheduled this year were failure to use new surveillance colonoscopy intervals (28.9%), incorrectly applied family history guidelines (27.2%) and recommending early surveillance colonoscopy after recent normal colonoscopy (19.3%). CONCLUSION: Up to one-fifth of patients scheduled for "open-access" colonoscopy can be rescheduled into a future year based on USMSTF guidelines. Rigorously applying guidelines could judiciously allocate colonoscopy resources as we recover from the COVID-19 pandemic.