A Head-to-Head Comparison of Computed Tomography Colonography, Optical Colonoscopy, and Colon Endoscopic Capsule for the Detection of Polyps After Partial Colectomy or Rectosigmoidectomy for Colorectal Cancer: A Pilot Study.

Background and objective Optical colonoscopy is the gold standard method for the diagnosis of colorectal cancer (CRC) and it allows for biopsy and resection, as well as documentation of synchronous lesions. CT colonography (CTC) and colon endoscopic capsule (CEC) are also recommended as alternative minimally invasive or non-invasive procedures. Prospective studies comparing these three approaches are scarce in the current literature. In light of this, the aim of this pilot study was to compare the efficacy of polyp detection between these three methods in patients with a history of curative surgical resection of CRC. Methods Patients were consecutively recruited and all procedures were sequentially conducted on the same day. The primary endpoint was the detection rate of polyps, whereas secondary endpoints were the detection of polyps according to size and location, and the adverse events caused by these procedures. Results A total of 21 patients were consecutively included and all of them underwent all three interventions. No adverse events, local recurrences, or metachronous lesions were detected. In two cases with elevated carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), CTC unveiled distant metastasis. Optical colonoscopy registered a mean of 0.4 polyp >6 mm and 1.3 polyps <6 mm per patient. CTC unveiled only 0.5 polyp >6 mm/patient and no smaller lesions were documented, whereas findings for the colon capsule comprised an average of 0.4 polyps >6 mm and 0.7 polyps <6 mm per patient. Statistical difference was not demonstrated, except for virtual colonoscopy in terms of the total number of polyps detected in comparison to optical colonoscopy. Conclusions Optical colonoscopy showed superior results in comparison to virtual colonoscopy while there was no statistical difference in comparison to colon capsule. Notwithstanding occasional difficulties, all three techniques were well tolerated. Hence, decisions concerning the use of each diagnostic method should be based on their availability, professional expertise, contraindications, and patient preferences.

Impact of a Routine Colorectal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection in the Surgical Management of Nonmalignant Colorectal Lesions Treated in a Referral Cancer Center.

BACKGROUND: Recent data show an increasing number of abdominal surgeries being performed for the treatment of nonmalignant colorectal polyps in the West but in settings in which colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection is not routinely performed. This study evaluated the number of nonmalignant colorectal lesions referred to surgical treatment in a tertiary cancer center that incorporated magnification chromoendoscopy and endoscopic submucosal dissection as part of the standard management of complex colorectal polyps. OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to estimate the number of patients with nonmalignant colorectal lesions referred to surgical resection at our institution after the standardization of routine endoscopic submucosal dissection and to describe outcomes for patients undergoing colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection. DESIGN: Single-center retrospective study from a prospectively collected database of endoscopic submucosal dissections and colorectal surgeries performed between January 2016 and December 2019. SETTING: Reference cancer center. PATIENTS: Consecutive adult patients with complex nonmalignant colorectal polyps were included. INTERVENTIONS: Patients with nonmalignant colorectal polyps were treated by endoscopic submucosal dissection or surgery (elective colectomy, rectosigmoidectomy, low anterior resection, or proctocolectomy). MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was the percentage of patients referred to colorectal surgery for nonmalignant lesions. RESULTS: In the study period, 1.1% of 825 colorectal surgeries were performed for nonmalignant lesions, and 97 complex polyps were endoscopically removed by endoscopic submucosal dissection. The en bloc, R0, and curative resection rates of endoscopic submucosal dissection were 91.7%, 83.5%, and 81.4%, respectively. The mean tumor size was 59 (SD 37.8) mm. Perforations during endoscopic submucosal dissection occurred in 3 cases, all treated with clipping. One patient presented with a delayed perforation 2 days after the endoscopic resection and underwent surgery. The mean follow-up period was 3 years, with no tumor recurrence in this cohort. LIMITATIONS: Single-center retrospective study. CONCLUSIONS: A workflow that includes assessment of the lesions with magnification chromoendoscopy and resection through endoscopic submucosal dissection can lead to a very low rate of abdominal surgery for nonmalignant colorectal lesions. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/C123 . IMPACTO DE LA DISECCIN SUBMUCOSA ENDOSCPICA COLORRECTAL DE RUTINA EN EL MANEJO QUIRRGICO DE LESIONES COLORRECTALES NO MALIGNAS TRATADAS EN UN CENTRO ONCOLGICO DE REFERENCIA: ANTECEDENTES:Datos recientes muestran un número cada vez mayor de cirugías abdominales realizadas para el tratamiento de pólipos colorrectales no malignos en Occidente, pero no en los entornos donde la disección submucosa endoscópica colorrectal se realiza de forma rutinaria. El estudio evaluó el número de lesiones colorrectales no malignas referidas a tratamiento quirúrgico en un centro oncológico terciario, que incorporó cromoendoscopia de aumento y disección submucosa endoscópica como parte del manejo estándar de pólipos colorrectales complejos.OBJETIVO:Estimar el número de pacientes con lesiones colorrectales no malignas referidos para resección quirúrgica en nuestra institución, después de la estandarización de la disección submucosa endoscópica de rutina y describir los resultados para los pacientes sometidos a disección submucosa endoscópica colorrectal.DISEÑO:Estudio retrospectivo de un solo centro, a partir de una base de datos recolectada prospectivamente de disecciones submucosas endoscópicas y cirugías colorrectales realizadas entre enero de 2016 y diciembre de 2019.AJUSTE:Centro oncológico de referencia.PACIENTES:Pacientes adultos consecutivos con pólipos colorrectales no malignos complejos.INTERVENCIONES:Pacientes con pólipos colorrectales no malignos tratados mediante disección submucosa endoscópica o cirugía (colectomía electiva, rectosigmoidectomía, resección anterior baja o proctocolectomía).PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:La medida de resultado primario fue el porcentaje de pacientes remitidos a cirugía colorrectal por lesiones no malignas.RESULTADOS:En el período, 1,1% de 825 cirugías colorrectales fueron realizadas por lesiones no malignas y 97 pólipos complejos fueron extirpados por. disección submucosa endoscópica. Las tasas de resección en bloque, R0 y curativa de disección submucosa endoscópica fueron 91,7%, 83,5% y 81,4%, respectivamente. El tamaño tumoral medio fue de 59 (DE 37,8) mm. Se produjeron perforaciones durante la disección submucosa endoscópica en 3 casos, todos tratados con clipaje. Un paciente presentó una perforación diferida 2 días después de la resección endoscópica y fue intervenido quirúrgicamente. El seguimiento medio fue de 3 años, sin recurrencia tumoral en esta cohorte.LIMITACIONES:Estudio retrospectivo de un solo centro.CONCLUSIONES:Un flujo de trabajo que incluye la evaluación de las lesiones con cromoendoscopia de aumento y resección a través de disección submucosa endoscópica, puede conducir a una tasa muy baja de cirugía abdominal para lesiones colorrectales no malignas. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/C123 . (Traducción-Dr. Fidel Ruiz Healy ).

Argon plasma coagulation alone versus argon plasma coagulation plus full-thickness endoscopic suturing to treat weight regain after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a prospective randomized trial (with videos).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: A significant number of patients regain weight after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Ablation with argon plasma coagulation (APC) plus endoscopic full-thickness suturing (FTS-APC) and ablation alone have been reported for treating weight regain when associated with gastrojejunostomy (GJ) dilation. However, comparative controlled data are still lacking. METHODS: This was a pilot single-center open-label randomized trial comparing the effectiveness and safety of APC alone versus FTS-APC for transoral outlet reduction. Patients with at least 20% weight regain from the nadir, and GJ ≥15 mm were considered eligible. The primary outcome was percentage total weight loss (%TWL) at 12 months. Secondary outcomes were the incidence of adverse events, amelioration of metabolic laboratory parameters, and improvement in quality of life and eating behavior. RESULTS: Forty patients meeting the eligibility criteria were enrolled from October 2017 to July 2018. Technical and clinical success rates were similar between the groups. At 12 months, the mean %TWL was 8.3% ± 5.5% in the APC alone group versus 7.5% ± 7.7% in the FTS-APC group (P = .71). The pre-revisional % solid gastric retention at 1 hour positively correlated with the probability of achieving ≥10% TWL at 12 months. Both groups experienced significant reductions in low-density lipoprotein and triglyceride levels at 12 months, and improvement in eating behavior and quality of life at 3 months. There were 2 cases of stenoses (1 from each group), which were successfully treated with endoscopic balloon dilation. CONCLUSION: APC alone is similar to FTS-APC in terms of technical and clinical outcomes within 1 year of follow-up. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03094936.).