Performance of endoscopic submucosal dissection for undifferentiated early gastric cancer: a multicenter retrospective cohort.

Background and study aims Undifferentiated early gastric cancer (UD-EGC) represents an extended indication for endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) based on the existing guidelines. This study evaluated the prevalence of UD-EGC recurrence after ESD, and potentially implicated risk factors. Patients and methods Data from 17 centers were collected retrospectively including demographics, endoscopic and pathological findings, and follow-up data from UD-EGC cases treated by ESD. Patients with incomplete resection or advanced disease were excluded. Descriptive statistics quantified variables and calculated the incidence of recurrence. Chi-square test was applied to assess any link between independent variables and relapse; significantly associated variables were inserted to a multivariable regression model. Results Seventy-one patients were eligible, with 2:1 female to male ratio and age of 65.8 ± 11.8 years. Mean lesion size was 33.5 ± 18.8 mm and the most frequent histological subtype was signet ring-cells UGC (2:1). Patients were followed-up every 5.6 ± 3.7 months with a mean surveillance period of 29.3 ± 15.3 months until data collection. Four patients (5.6%) developed local recurrence 8.8 ± 6.5 months post-ESD, with no lymph node or distal metastases been reported. Lesion size was not associated with recurrence ( P = 0.32), in contrast to lymphovascular and perineural invasion which were independently associated with local recurrence ( P = 0.006 and P < 0.001, respectively). Conclusions ESD could be considered as the initial step to manage UD-EGC, providing at least an "entire-lesion" biopsy to guide therapeutic strategy. When histology confirms absence of lymphovascular and perineural invasion, this modality could be therapeutic, providing low recurrence rates.

Seguimiento a largo plazo tras disección submucosa endoscópica de lesiones colorrectales en una cohorte española / No disponible

INTRODUCCIÓN: la disección submucosa endoscópica (DSE) en colon es una técnica en expansión en países occidentales. Existen pocos estudios con seguimiento a largo plazo. OBJETIVO: analizar supervivencia libre de enfermedad a largo plazo tras DSE y comparar las tasas de recidiva en función de diferentes factores. MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS: cohorte prospectiva de pacientes con DSE planeada entre septiembre de 2008 y diciembre de 2015. Cuando no fue posible técnicamente completar DSE se realizó disección híbrida en bloque o fragmentada. Se analizó la tasa de recurrencia a cinco años mediante curvas de Kaplan-Meier y se compararon en función de diferentes factores usando test de log-rank. RESULTADOS: se incluyó una cohorte inicial de 89 pacientes en los que se consiguió seguimiento en 69. De los 69 pacientes, en 31 (45 %) se realizó DSE; en once (16 %), DSE híbrida; y en 27 (39 %), DSE híbrida fragmentada. La mediana de seguimiento fue de 27 meses. La supervivencia libre de enfermedad a cinco años fue del 81 %. La media de endoscopias para eliminar la recurrencia fueron dos (rango 1-7) y ninguna requirió cirugía. La tasa de recidiva fue significativamente menor tras DSE "en bloque" respecto a fragmentada (15 % vs. 27 %, p = 0,036) y en resecciones R0 respecto a R1 (0 % vs. 26 %, p = 0,034). Las resecciones con márgenes laterales negativos en lesiones resecadas en bloque presentaron menor tasa de recidiva respecto a aquellas con márgenes afectos/desconocidos, que no alcanzaron la significación estadística (0 % vs. 28 %, p = 0,09). CONCLUSIONES: en nuestro estudio, la supervivencia libre de enfermedad a cinco años fue del 81 % y ningún paciente requirió cirugía durante el seguimiento. Las resecciones fragmentadas y R1 se asociaron de forma significativa con mayor tasa de recurrencia

No disponible

Use of electrosurgical units in the endoscopic resection of gastrointestinal tumors / Empleo de las unidades electroquirúrgicas en la resección endoscópica de neoplasias digestivas

Electrosurgical units (ESUs) are indispensable devices in our endoscopy units. However, many endoscopists are not well-trained on their use and their physical bases are usually not properly studied or understood. In addition, comparative data concerning the settings that may be applied in different circumstances are scarce in the medical literature. Given that it is important to be aware of their strengths and risks, we conducted a review of the available information and research on this topic

Las unidades electroquirúrgicas (UES) son dispositivos indispensables en nuestras unidades de endoscopia. Sin embargo, muchos endoscopistas no están bien entrenados en su uso y sus bases físicas generalmente no son estudiadas o comprendidas adecuadamente. Además, los datos comparativos sobre los ajustes que pueden aplicarse en diferentes circunstancias son escasos en la literatura médica. Dado que es importante conocer sus fortalezas y riesgos, realizamos una revisión de la información existente y la investigación sobre este tema

Use of electrosurgical units in the endoscopic resection of gastrointestinal tumors.

Electrosurgical units (ESUs) are indispensable devices in our endoscopy units. However, many endoscopists are not well-trained on their use and their physical bases are usually not properly studied or understood. In addition, comparative data concerning the settings that may be applied in different circumstances are scarce in the medical literature. Given that it is important to be aware of their strengths and risks, we conducted a review of the available information and research on this topic.

Switching from endoscopic submucosal dissection to salvage piecemeal knife-assisted snare resection to remove a lesion: a preoperative risk score from the beginning

Background and aims: endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the Western setting remains a challenge. Therefore, other simplified techniques such as knife-assisted snare resection (KAR) have been reported to overcome this issue. Methods: patients who underwent an ESD for the treatment of gastrointestinal neoplasms were included in a retrospective cross-sectional observational study. Factors associated with the end of ESD as a salvage p-KAR were identified and a logistic regression model was developed. Results: a total of 136 lesions in 133 patients were analyzed. Operator experience of under 50 cases and the combination of lesion size > 30 mm and colorectal location were independent predictive factors for switching to a salvage p-KAR according to the multivariate logistic regression analysis. We developed a risk scoring system based on these four variables (experience, size, location and the combination of size and location) with a receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.81 (95% CI: 0.74-0.89). The diagnostic accuracy of the score for a cut-off point ≥ 5 had a sensitivity of 0.79 (95% CI: 0.66-0.93) and a specificity of 0.71 (95% CI: 0.61-0.80). Conclusion: a simple predictive score system that includes four preoperative factors accurately predicts ESD to finish as a p-KAR. A careful selection of cases considering these variables could be useful to achieve better outcomes in the Western setting

No disponible

Switching from endoscopic submucosal dissection to salvage piecemeal knife-assisted snare resection to remove a lesion: A preoperative risk score from the beginning.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the Western setting remains a challenge. Therefore, other simplified techniques such as knife-assisted snare resection (KAR) have been reported to overcome this issue. METHODS: patients who underwent an ESD for the treatment of gastrointestinal neoplasms were included in a retrospective cross-sectional observational study. Factors associated with the end of ESD as a salvage p-KAR were identified and a logistic regression model was developed. RESULTS: a total of 136 lesions in 133 patients were analyzed. Operator experience of under 50 cases and the combination of lesion size > 30 mm and colorectal location were independent predictive factors for switching to a salvage p-KAR according to the multivariate logistic regression analysis. We developed a risk scoring system based on these four variables (experience, size, location and the combination of size and location) with a receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.81 (95% CI: 0.74-0.89). The diagnostic accuracy of the score for a cut-off point ≥ 5 had a sensitivity of 0.79 (95% CI: 0.66-0.93) and a specificity of 0.71 (95% CI: 0.61-0.80). CONCLUSION: a simple predictive score system that includes four preoperative factors accurately predicts ESD to finish as a p-KAR. A careful selection of cases considering these variables could be useful to achieve better outcomes in the Western setting.

Endoscopist characteristics that influence the quality of colonoscopy.

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.

Risk of cancer in cases of suspected lynch syndrome without germline mutation.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Colorectal cancers (CRCs) with microsatellite instability (MSI) and a mismatch repair (MMR) immunohistochemical deficit without hypermethylation of the MLH1 promoter are likely to be caused by Lynch syndrome. Some patients with these cancers have not been found to have pathogenic germline mutations and are considered to have Lynch-like syndrome (LLS). The aim of this study was to determine the risk of cancer in families of patients with LLS. METHODS: We studied a population-based cohort of 1705 consecutive patients, performing MSI tests and immunohistochemical analyses of MMR proteins. Patients were diagnosed with Lynch syndrome when they were found to have pathogenic germline mutations. Patients with MSI and loss of MSH2 and/or MSH6 expression, isolated loss of PMS2 or loss of MLH1 without MLH1 promoter hypermethylation, and no pathogenic mutation were considered to have LLS. The clinical characteristics of patients and the age- and sex-adjusted standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) of cancer in families were compared between groups. RESULTS: The incidence of CRC was significantly lower in families of patients with LLS than in families with confirmed cases of Lynch syndrome (SIR for Lynch syndrome, 6.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.58-9.54; SIR for LLS, 2.12; 95% CI, 1.16-3.56; P < .001). However, the incidence of CRC was higher in families of patients with LLS than in families with sporadic CRC (SIR for sporadic CRC, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.27-0.79; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The risk of cancer in families with LLS is lower that of families with Lynch syndrome but higher than that of families with sporadic CRC. These results confirm the need for special screening and surveillance strategies for these patients and their relatives.

Modifiable endoscopic factors that influence the adenoma detection rate in colorectal cancer screening colonoscopies.

BACKGROUND: Adenoma detection rate (ADR) has become the most important quality indicator for colonoscopy. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate which modifiable factors, directly related to the endoscopic procedure, influenced the ADR in screening colonoscopies. DESIGN: Observational, nested study. SETTING: Multicenter, randomized, controlled trials. PATIENTS: Asymptomatic people aged 50 to 69 years were eligible for a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial designed to compare colonoscopy and fecal immunochemical testing in colorectal cancer screening. A total of 4539 individuals undergoing a direct screening colonoscopy were included in this study. INTERVENTION: Colonoscopy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Bowel cleansing, sedation, withdrawal time in normal colonoscopies, and cecal intubation were analyzed as possible predictors of adenoma detection by using logistic regression analysis, adjusted for age and sex. RESULTS: In multivariate analysis, after adjustment for age and sex, factors independently related to the ADR were a mean withdrawal time longer than 8 minutes (odds ratio [OR] 1.51; 95% CI, 1.17-1.96) in normal colonoscopies and split preparation (OR 1.26; 95% CI, 1.01-1.57). For advanced adenomas, only withdrawal time maintained statistical significance in the multivariate analysis. For proximal adenomas, withdrawal time and cecal intubation maintained independent statistical significance, whereas only withdrawal time longer than 8 minutes and a <10-hour period between the end of preparation and colonoscopy showed independent associations for distal adenomas. LIMITATIONS: Only endoscopic variables have been analyzed. CONCLUSION: Withdrawal time was the only modifiable factor related to the ADR in colorectal cancer screening colonoscopies associated with an increased detection rate of overall, advanced, proximal, and distal adenomas.