Varied Trainee Competence in Cold Snare Polypectomy: Results of the COMPLETE Randomized Controlled Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Cold snare polypectomy (CSP) is strongly recommended as the optimal technique for the complete removal of small polyps. Though significant variability in polypectomy technique and quality has been established, the learning curve and impact of targeted training on CSP are unknown. Video feedback has shown promise as an effective pedagogy to improve performance among surgical trainees. We aimed to compare CSP performance between trainees who received video-based feedback and those who received conventional apprentice-based concurrent feedback. We hypothesized that video-based feedback would accelerate competence. METHODS: We conducted a single-blinded, randomized controlled trial on competence for CSP of polyps <1 cm, comparing video-based feedback with conventional feedback. We randomly assigned deidentified consecutively recorded CSP videos to blinded raters to assess using the CSP Assessment Tool. We shared cumulative sum learning curves every 25 CSP with each trainee. The video feedback trainees also received biweekly individualized terminal feedback. Control trainees received conventional feedback during colonoscopy. The primary outcome was CSP competence. We also assessed competence across domains and change over polypectomy volume. RESULTS: We enrolled and randomized 22 trainees, 12 to video-based feedback and 10 to conventional feedback, and evaluated 2,339 CSP. The learning curve was long; 2 trainees (16.7%) in the video feedback achieved competence, after a mean of 135 polyps, and no one in the control ( P = 0.481) achieved competence. Overall and in all steps of CSP, a higher percentage of the video feedback group met competence, increasing 3% every 20 CSP ( P = 0.0004). DISCUSSION: Video feedback aided trainees to competence in CSP. However, the learning curve was long. Our findings strongly suggest that current training methods are not sufficient to support trainees to competency by the completion of their fellowship programs. The impact of new training methods, such as simulation-based mastery learning, should be assessed to determine whether such methods can result in achievement of competence at a faster rate; ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT03115008.

Longitudinal outcomes of the endoscopic resection of nonpolypoid dysplastic lesions in patients with inflammatory bowel disease.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are at risk of developing dysplasia. According to the Surveillance for Colorectal Endoscopic Neoplasia Detection and Management in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients: International Consensus Recommendations, "After complete removal of endoscopically resectable nonpolypoid dysplastic lesions, surveillance colonoscopy is suggested rather than colectomy." We sought to add data to the literature and hypothesized that the endoscopic resection of nonpolypoid colorectal dysplasia (NP-CRD) is safe and effective. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of a large cohort of patients with IBD at 2 medical centers who underwent colonoscopy between 2007 and 2018. Patients with at least 1 nonpolypoid lesion ≥10 mm were identified. We measured the feasibility of endoscopic resection, incidence of local recurrence, incidence of cancer, need for surgery, and frequency of adverse events. RESULTS: We studied 326 patients who underwent a mean ± standard deviation of 3.6 ± 3.0 (range, 1-16) colonoscopies during a total follow-up of 1208 patient-years. In 36 patients, 161 lesions ≥10 mm were identified, 63 of which were nonpolypoid (mean size, 17.8 ± 8.9 mm; range, 10-45 mm) (prevalence, 7.7%). The majority of nonpolypoid lesions (96.8% [61 of 63]) were managed endoscopically. Four lesions (mean index lesion size, 32.5 ±11.0 mm) had small local recurrences that were successfully retreated with endoscopy. There were no severe adverse events related to IBD or colorectal cancer observed in the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: In this IBD cohort, surveillance colonoscopy rather than colectomy was found to be safe and effective in patients with NP-CRD after undergoing endoscopic resection. After complete removal of endoscopically resectable NP-CRD, surveillance colonoscopy should be considered a safe and effective first-line strategy rather than colectomy.

A Case Report of Profuse Bleeding in the Lower Gastrointestinal Tract due to Dieulafoy Lesion in the Rectum.

Dieulafoy lesion is a rare condition that usually occurs in cases of gastric bleeding in the upper gastrointestinal tract. However, this condition can also occur in the lower gastrointestinal tract but less frequently. The lesion is an arteriolar malformation that extends to the submucosa, causing erosion and bleeding. Meanwhile, this is a case of a 67-year-old woman presenting with a bright red bloody stool prior to admission, as well as a history of constipation which was relieved by digital stool evacuation two weeks earlier. The medical history of the patient reveals episodes of  repeated ischaemic stroke for over seven years and three months, which has led to other conditions such as right-sided paralysis, transcortical motor aphasia, and neurogenic dysphagia. The patient was routinely on antithrombotic medications, which was stopped during hospitalisation where repeated packed cell transfusion was done in order to avoid hematochezia. The patient needed the support of her caregiver most of the time since she was bedridden. Furthermore, the haemostasis and platelet function of the patient were normal. On colonoscopy, there was the discovery of a small lesion of about 3mm in her rectum, protruding into the lumen and pulsated, which was discovered to be Dieulafoy's lesion. Subsequently, this lesion was closed using rubber band ligation, and after a month, there was no recurrence of the lower gastrointestinal bleeding.

Adenoma Detection Rate (ADR) Irrespective of Indication Is Comparable to Screening ADR: Implications for Quality Monitoring.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is a key measure of colonoscopy quality. However, efficient measurement of ADR can be challenging because many colonoscopies are performed for non-screening purposes. Measuring ADR without being restricted to screening indication may likely facilitate more widespread implementation of quality monitoring. We hypothesized that the ADR for all colonoscopies, irrespective of the indication, would be equivalent to the ADR for screening colonoscopies. METHODS: We reviewed consecutive colonoscopies at two Veterans Affairs centers performed by 21 endoscopists over 6 months in 2015. We calculated the ADR for screening exams, non-screening (surveillance and diagnostic) exams, and all exams (irrespective of indication), correcting for within-endoscopist correlation. We then performed simulation modeling to calculate the ADRs under 16 hypothetical scenarios of various indication distributions. We simulated 100,000 trials with 3,000 participants, randomly assigned indication (screening, surveillance, diagnostic, and FIT+) from a multinomial distribution, randomly drew adenoma using the observed ADRs per indication, and calculated 95% confidence intervals of the mean differences in ADR of screening and non-screening indications. RESULTS: Among 2628 colonoscopies performed by 21 gastroenterologists, the indication was screening in 28.9%, surveillance in 48.2% and diagnostic in 22.9%. There was no significant difference in the ADR, 50% (95%CI: 45-56%) for all colonoscopies vs 49% (95%CI: 43-56%) for screening exams (p=.55). ADRs were 56% for surveillance and 38% for diagnostic exams. In our simulation modeling, only one out of 16 scenarios (screening 10%, surveillance 70%, diagnostic 10% and FIT+ 10%) resulted in a significant difference between the calculated ADRs for screening and non-screening indications. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, the overall ADR computed from all colonoscopies was not significantly different than the conventional ADR based on screening colonoscopies. Assessing ADR for colonoscopy irrespective of indication may be adequate for quality monitoring, and could facilitate the implementation of quality measurement and reporting. Future prospective studies should evaluate the validity of using overall ADR for quality reporting in other jurisdictions before adopting this method in clinical practice.

Right-Sided Location Not Associated With Missed Colorectal Adenomas in an Individual-Level Reanalysis of Tandem Colonoscopy Studies.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Interval cancers occur more frequently in the right colon. One reason could be that right-sided adenomas are frequently missed in colonoscopy examinations. We reanalyzed data from tandem colonoscopies to assess adenoma miss rates in relation to location and other factors. METHODS: We pooled data from 8 randomized tandem trials comprising 2218 patients who had diagnostic or screening colonoscopies (adenomas detected in 49.8% of patients). We performed a mixed-effects logistic regression with patients as cluster effects with different independent parameters. Factors analyzed included location (left vs right, splenic flexure as cutoff), adenoma size, form, and histologic features. Analyses were controlled for potential confounding factors such as patient sex and age, colonoscopy indication, and bowel cleanliness. RESULTS: Right-side location was not an independent risk factor for missed adenomas (odds ratio [OR] compared with the left side, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.75-1.17). However, compared with adenomas ≤5 mm, the OR for missing adenomas of 6-9 mm was 0.62 (95% CI, 0.44-0.87), and the OR for missing adenomas of ≥10 mm was 0.51 (95% CI, 0.33-0.77). Compared with pedunculated adenomas, sessile (OR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.16-2.85) and flat adenomas (OR, 2.47; 95% CI, 1.49-4.10) were more likely to be missed. Histologic features were not significant risk factors for missed adenomas (OR for adenomas with high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.34-1.37 and OR for sessile serrated adenomas, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.47-1.64 compared with low-grade adenomas). Men had a higher number of adenomas per colonoscopy (1.27; 95% CI, 1.21-1.33) than women (0.86; 95% CI, 0.80-0.93). Men were less likely to have missed adenomas than women (OR for missed adenomas in men, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.57-0.94). CONCLUSIONS: In an analysis of data from 8 randomized trials, we found that right-side location of an adenoma does not increase its odds for being missed during colonoscopy but that adenoma size and histologic features do increase risk. Further studies are needed to determine why adenomas are more frequently missed during colonoscopies in women than men.

Narrow-Band Imaging for Detection of Neoplasia at Colonoscopy: A Meta-analysis of Data From Individual Patients in Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is an important quality assurance measure for colonoscopy. Some studies suggest that narrow-band imaging (NBI) may be more effective at detecting adenomas than white-light endoscopy (WLE) when bowel preparation is optimal. We conducted a meta-analysis of data from individual patients in randomized controlled trials that compared the efficacy of NBI to WLE in detection of adenomas. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases through April 2017 for randomized controlled trials that assessed detection of colon polyps by high-definition WLE vs NBI and from which data on individual patients were available. The primary outcome measure was ADR adjusted for bowel preparation quality. Multilevel regression models were used with patients nested within trials, and trial included as a random effect. RESULTS: We collected data from 11 trials, comprising 4491 patients and 6636 polyps detected. Adenomas were detected in 952 of 2251 (42.3%) participants examined by WLE vs 1011 of 2239 (45.2%) participants examined by NBI (unadjusted odds ratio [OR] for detection of adenoma by WLE vs NBI, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.01-1.29; P = .04). NBI outperformed WLE only when bowel preparation was best: adequate preparation OR, 1.07 (95% CI, 0.92-1.24; P = .38) vs best preparation OR, 1.30 (95% CI, 1.04-1.62; P = .02). Second-generation bright NBI had a better ADR than WLE (second-generation NBI OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.05-1.56; P = .02), whereas first-generation NBI did not. NBI detected more non-adenomatous polyps than WLE (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.06-1.44; P = .008) and flat polyps than WLE (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.02-1.51; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: In a meta-analysis of data from individual patients in randomized controlled trials, we found NBI to have a higher ADR than WLE, and that this effect is greater when bowel preparation is optimal.

Trends in EMR for nonmalignant colorectal polyps in the United States.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Although most large nonpedunculated colorectal lesions can be safely and efficaciously removed using EMR, the use of colectomy for benign colorectal lesions appears to be increasing. The reason(s) is unclear. We aimed to determine the use and adverse events of EMR in the United States. METHODS: We used Optum's de-identified Clinformatics Data Mart Database (2003-2016), a database from a large national insurance provider, to identify all colonoscopies performed with either EMR or simple polypectomy on adult patients from January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2015. We measured time trends, regional variation, and adverse event rates. We assessed risk factors for adverse events using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: The rate of EMR use in the US increased from 1.62% of all colonoscopies in 2011 to 2.48% of colonoscopies in 2015 (P < .001). There were, however, significant regional differences in the use of EMRs, from 2.4% of colonoscopies in the western United States to 2.0% of colonoscopies in the southern United States. Between 2011 and 2015, we found stable rates of perforation, GI bleeding (GIB), infections, and cardiac adverse events and decreasing rates of admissions after EMR. In our multivariate model, EMR was an independent risk factor for adverse events, albeit the rates of adverse events were low (1.35% GIB, .22% perforation). CONCLUSIONS: Use of EMR is rising in the United States, although there is significant regional variation. The rates of adverse events after EMR and polypectomies were low and stable, confirming the continued safety of EMR procedures. A better understanding of the regional barriers and facilitators may improve the use of EMR as the standard management for benign colorectal lesions throughout the United States.

Patients Prescribed Direct-Acting Oral Anticoagulants Have Low Risk of Postpolypectomy Complications.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Use of direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) is increasing, but little is known about the associated risks in patients undergoing colonoscopy with polypectomy. We aimed to determine the risk of post-polypectomy complications in patients prescribed DOACs. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis using Optum's de-identified Clinformatics Data Mart Database (2003-2016) (a de-identified administrative database from a large national insurance provider) to identify adults who underwent colonoscopy with polypectomy or endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) from January 1, 2011, through December 31, 2015. We collected data from 11,504 patients prescribed antithrombotic agents (1590 DOAC, 3471 warfarin, and 6443 clopidogrel) and 599,983 patients not prescribed antithrombotics of interest (controls). We compared 30-day post-polypectomy complications, including gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB), cerebrovascular accident (CVA), myocardial infarction (MI), and hospital admissions, of patients prescribed DOACs, warfarin, or clopidogrel vs controls. RESULTS: Post-polypectomy complications were uncommon but occurred in a significantly higher proportion of patients receiving any antithrombotic vs controls (P < .001). The percentage of patients in the DOAC group with GIB was 0.63% (95% CI, 0.3%-1.2%) vs 0.2% (95% CI, 0.2%-0.3%) in controls. The percentage of patients with CVA in the DOAC group was 0.06% (95% CI, 0.01%-0.35%) vs 0.04% (95% CI, 0.04%-0.05%) in controls. After we adjusted for bridge anticoagulation, EMR, Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), and CHADS2 (congestive heart failure, hypertension, age over 75, diabetes, stroke [double weight]) score, patients prescribed DOACs no longer had a statistically significant increase in the odds of GIB (odds ratio [OR], 0.90; 95% CI, 0.44-1.85), CVA (OR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.06-3.28), MI (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.14-7.72), or hospital admission (OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.64-1.16). Clopidogrel, warfarin, bridge anticoagulation, higher CHADS2, CCI, and EMR were associated with increased odds of complications. CONCLUSION: In our retrospective analysis of a large national dataset, we found that patients prescribed DOACs did not have significantly increased adjusted odds of post-polypectomy GIB, MI, CVA, or hospital admission. Bridge anticoagulation, higher CHADS2 score, CCI, and EMR were risk factors for GIB, MI, CVA, and hospital admissions. Studies are needed to determine the optimal peri-procedural dose for high-risk patients.

Development and validation of a video-based cold snare polypectomy assessment tool (with videos).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Polyps <1 cm are the most commonly found polyps during colonoscopy. Cold snare removal is preferred given the significantly higher rate of incomplete resection associated with piecemeal biopsy forceps resection. There are currently no standardized tools to assess competence in cold snare polypectomy. This study aimed to develop and validate a cold snare polypectomy assessment tool (CSPAT). METHODS: Experts in cold snare polypectomy used a Delphi method to develop the CSPAT. Metrics with a greater than 85% agreement as being "important" or "very important" were included in the CSPAT. The tool included evaluation of polyp inspection, positioning, appropriate ensnarement of tissue to ensure a rim of normal tissue, tissue retrieval, and postpolypectomy site inspection. Experts in cold snare polypectomy used the CSPAT to evaluate preselected videos that were previously evaluated using the Direct Observation of Polypectomy Skills (DOPyS) tool. Interobserver agreement was evaluated. CSPAT scores were compared with DOPyS scores to assess content validity. RESULTS: Sixteen experts developed the 12-item CSPAT, and 13 experts reviewed 55 videos. There was a moderate degree of agreement in 10 metrics (κ = .52-.59) and a substantial degree of agreement (κ = .61-.63) in the other 2. There was a strong correlation between the mean of individual metrics 1 to 12 compared with the global competence assessment (ρ = .88, P < .001). There was a moderate correlation between the average overall DOPyS score and the overall CSPAT competence score (ρ = .56, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: We have developed and validated a customized CSPAT that can be easily applied to video-based assessments to assess competence in training and among practicing endoscopists.

Simplifying Resect and Discard Strategies for Real-Time Assessment of Diminutive Colorectal Polyps.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: During endoscopy, the resect and discard strategy, if performed with high confidence, can be used to determine histologic features of diminutive colorectal polyps (5 mm or less). These polyps can then be removed and discarded without pathology assessment. However, the complexities of real-time optical assessment and follow-up management have provided challenges to widespread use of this approach. We aimed to determine the outcomes of simple alternative strategies, in which all diminutive polyps can be resected and discarded. METHODS: We collected data from 2 previous studies that used narrow-band imaging to assess polyps, performed at 5 medical centers (1658 patients with 2285 diminutive polyps; 15 endoscopists). We compared 3 resect and discard strategies: the currently used optical strategy, which relies on high confidence optical assessment of all diminutive polyps; a location-based strategy that classifies all recto-sigmoid diminutive polyps a priori as hyperplastic and all polyps proximal to the recto-sigmoid colon a priori as neoplastic; and a simplified optical strategy, in which all recto-sigmoid diminutive polyps are classified as hyperplastic unless confidently assessed as neoplastic, and all polyps proximal to the recto-sigmoid colon are classified as neoplastic unless confidently assessed as hyperplastic polyps. The primary outcome was the agreement of the surveillance interval calculated for each strategy with the surveillance interval determined by pathology analysis. RESULTS: The proportion of surveillance intervals that agreed with pathology-based surveillance recommendations was slightly higher when the optical strategy was used compared to the location-based strategy or simplified optical strategy (94% vs 89% and 90%, respectively; P < .001). When the 5-10 year recommendations for patients with low-risk polyps were applied as a 10-year surveillance interval, all 3 strategies resulted in surveillance interval agreement compared to pathology above 90% (the quality benchmark). Use of the simplified or location-based strategy could have avoided pathology analysis for 77% of all polyps, compared to 59% if the optical strategy was used (P < .001). In addition, a higher proportion of patients could receive recommendations immediately after colonoscopy with use of the simplified or location based strategy (65%) compared to the optical strategy (40%) (P < .001). CONCLUSION: A location-based and a simplified optical resect and discard strategy produced surveillance recommendations that were in agreement with those from pathology analysis for at least 90% of patients, assuming a 10-year surveillance interval for patients with low-risk polyps. These strategies could further reduce the number of pathology examinations and provide more patients with immediate surveillance recommendations. Optical assessment might be reduced or might not be required for resect and discard. Clintrials.gov no: NCT01935180 and NCT01288833.

Detection of Sessile Serrated Adenomas in the Proximal Colon Using Wide-Field Fluorescence Endoscopy.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Many cancers in the proximal colon develop via from sessile serrated adenomas (SSAs), which have flat, subtle features that are difficult to detect with conventional white-light colonoscopy. Many SSA cells have the V600E mutation in BRAF. We investigated whether this feature could be used with imaging methods to detect SSAs in patients. METHODS: We used phage display to identify a peptide that binds specifically to SSAs, using subtractive hybridization with HT29 colorectal cancer cells containing the V600E mutation in BRAF and Hs738.St/Int cells as a control. Binding of fluorescently labeled peptide to colorectal cancer cells was evaluated with confocal fluorescence microscopy. Rats received intra-colonic 0.0086 mg/kg, 0.026 mg/kg, or 0.86 mg/kg peptide or vehicle and morbidity, mortality, and injury were monitored twice daily to assess toxicity. In the clinical safety study, fluorescently labeled peptide was topically administered, using a spray catheter, to the proximal colon of 25 subjects undergoing routine outpatient colonoscopies (3 subjects were given 2.25 µmol/L and 22 patients were given 76.4 µmol/L). We performed blood cell count, chemistry, liver function, and urine analyses approximately 24 hours after peptide administration. In the clinical imaging study, 38 subjects undergoing routine outpatient colonoscopies, at high risk for colorectal cancer, or with a suspected unresected proximal colonic polyp, were first evaluated by white-light endoscopy to identify suspicious regions. The fluorescently labeled peptide (76.4 µmol/L) was administered topically to proximal colon, unbound peptide was washed away, and white-light, reflectance, and fluorescence videos were recorded digitally. Fluorescence intensities of SSAs were compared with those of normal colonic mucosa. Endoscopists resected identified lesions, which were analyzed histologically by gastrointestinal pathologists (reference standard). We also analyzed the ability of the peptide to identify SSAs vs adenomas, hyperplastic polyps, and normal colonic mucosa in specimens obtained from the tissue bank at the University of Michigan. RESULTS: We identified the peptide sequence KCCFPAQ and measured an apparent dissociation constant of Kd = 72 nM and an apparent association time constant of K = 0.174 min-1 (5.76 minutes). During fluorescence imaging of patients during endoscopy, regions of SSA had 2.43-fold higher mean fluorescence intensity than that for normal colonic mucosa. Fluorescence labeling distinguished SSAs from normal colonic mucosa with 89% sensitivity and 92% specificity. The peptide had no observed toxic effects in animals or patients. In the analysis of ex vivo specimens, peptide bound to SSAs had significantly higher mean fluorescence intensity than to hyperplastic polyps. CONCLUSIONS: We have identified a fluorescently labeled peptide that has no observed toxic effects in animals or humans and can be used for wide-field imaging of lesions in the proximal colon. It distinguishes SSAs from normal colonic mucosa with 89% sensitivity and 92% specificity. This targeted imaging method might be used in early detection of premalignant serrated lesions during routine colonoscopies. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02156557.

Risk factors for postpolypectomy bleeding in patients receiving anticoagulation or antiplatelet medications.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Balancing the risks for thromboembolism and postpolypectomy bleeding in patients requiring anticoagulation and antiplatelet agents is challenging. We investigated the incidence and risk factors for postpolypectomy bleeding on anticoagulation, including heparin bridge and other antithrombotic therapy. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort and case control study at 2 tertiary-care medical centers from 2004 to 2012. Cases included male patients on antithrombotics with hematochezia after polypectomy. Nonbleeding controls were matched to cases 3 to 1 by antithrombotic type, study site, polypectomy technique, and year of procedure. Our outcomes were the incidence and risk factors for postpolypectomy bleeding. RESULTS: There were 59 cases and 174 matched controls. Postpolypectomy bleeding occurred in 14.9% on bridge anticoagulation. This was significantly higher than the overall incidence of bleeding on antithrombotics at 1.19% (95% confidence interval, 0.91%-1.54%) (59/4923). We identified similarly low rates of bleeding in patients taking warfarin (0.66%), clopidogrel (0.84%), and aspirin (0.92%). Patients who bled tended to have larger polyps (13.9 vs 7.3 mm; P < .001) and more polyps ≥2 cm (41% vs 10%; P < .001). Bleeding risk was increased with restarting antithrombotics within 1 week postpolypectomy (odds ratio [OR] 4.50; P < .001), having polyps ≥2 cm (OR 5.94; P < .001), performing right-sided cautery (OR 2.61; P = .004), and having multiple large polyps (OR 2.92; P = .001). Among patients on warfarin, the presence of bridge anticoagulation was an independent risk factor for postpolypectomy bleeding (OR 12.27; P = .0001). CONCLUSION: We conclude that bridge anticoagulation is associated with a high incidence of postpolypectomy bleeding and is an independent risk factor for hemorrhage compared with patients taking warfarin alone. A higher threshold to use bridge anticoagulation should be considered in patients with an elevated bleeding risk.

Endoscopic subtypes of colorectal laterally spreading tumors (LSTs) and the risk of submucosal invasion: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Many studies have reported on laterally spreading tumors (LSTs), but systematic reviews of the data to determine their risk of containing submucosal invasion (SMI) are lacking. We systematically screened and analyzed the available literature to provide a more solid basis for evidence-based treatment. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search in PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Scopus for published articles until July 2017. We estimated pooled prevalence or odds ratios (ORs) with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs), using random-effects models. We classified endoscopic subtypes into granular LST, which comprises the homogeneous and nodular mixed subtypes, and non-granular LST, which comprises the flat elevated and pseudodepressed subtypes. RESULTS: We identified 2949 studies, of which 48 were included. Overall, 8.5 % (95 %CI 6.5 % - 10.5 %) of LSTs contained SMI. The risk of SMI differed among the LST subtypes: 31.6 % in non-granular pseudodepressed LSTs (95 %CI 19.8 % - 43.4 %), 10.5 % in granular nodular mixed LSTs (95 %CI 5.9 % - 15.1 %), 4.9 % in non-granular flat elevated LSTs (95 %CI 2.1 % - 7.8 %), and 0.5 % in granular homogenous LSTs (95 %CI 0.1 % - 1.0 %). SMI was more common in distally rather than in proximally located LSTs (OR 2.50, 95 %CI 1.24 - 5.02). The proportion of SMI increased with lesion size (10 - 19 mm, 4.6 %; 20 - 29 mm, 9.2 %; ≥ 30 mm, 16.5 %). The pooled prevalence of patients with one or more LSTs in the general colonoscopy population was 0.8 % (95 %CI 0.6 % - 1.1 %). CONCLUSION: The majority of LSTs are non-invasive at the time of colonoscopic detection and can be treated with (piecemeal) endoscopic mucosal resection. Pretreatment diagnosis of endoscopic subtype, specifying areas of concern (nodule or depression), determines those LSTs at highest risk of containing SMI, where en bloc resection is the preferred therapy.

Patients With Nonpolypoid (Flat and Depressed) Colorectal Neoplasms at Increased Risk for Advanced Neoplasias, Compared With Patients With Polypoid Neoplasms.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Nonpolypoid colorectal neoplasms (NP-CRNs) are more likely to contain high-grade dysplasia or early-stage cancer than polypoid neoplasms. We aimed to determine the long-term outcomes of patients with at least 1 NP-CRN. METHODS: We performed a longitudinal cohort study of 4454 patients at a Veterans' Affairs hospital who underwent colonoscopy from 2000 through 2005; 341 were found to have 1 or more NP-CRNs and were matched (3:1) with patients found to have 1 or more polypoid neoplasms (controls, n = 1025). We collected and analyzed data on baseline colonoscopy findings and first follow-up colonoscopy results through August 2014. We calculated the incidence of advanced neoplasia at first follow-up colonoscopy, as defined by the presence of ≥1 tubular or sessile serrated adenomas ≥10 mm in diameter, tubulovillous adenoma, high-grade dysplasia, or invasive cancer. RESULTS: A significantly higher proportion of patients with 1 or more NP-CRNs (16.0%) were found to have advanced neoplasia at their first follow-up colonoscopy than controls (8.6%); the adjusted risk ratio was 1.6 (95% confidence interval, 1.05-2.6; P = .03). A significantly higher proportion of patients with 1 or more NP-CRNs were found to have additional NP-CRNs at the follow-up colonoscopy (17%) than controls (7%; relative risk, 2.3; 95% confidence interval, 1.5-3.5; P < .001). Similar proportions of patients in each group developed cancers after colonoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: In a longitudinal cohort study, we found that patients with NP-CRN were more likely to develop additional NP-CRNs and to have advanced neoplasms at their first follow-up colonoscopy than patients with only polypoid neoplasms. However, patients with NP-CRN were not more likely to develop cancers after colonoscopy when surveillance guidelines were followed. Larger studies are needed to determine risk of colorectal cancer in patients with NP-CRN.

Optimizing the quality of endoscopy in inflammatory bowel disease: focus on surveillance and management of colorectal dysplasia using interactive image- and video-based teaching.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Varying recommendations regarding the detection and management of dysplasia can lead to uncertainty and may impede the uptake of strategies that could improve surveillance in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). An educational event was held to assist in disseminating the recently published Surveillance for Colorectal Endoscopic Neoplasia Detection and Management in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients: International Consensus Recommendations (SCENIC). METHODS: Specialists in IBD and endoscopy led the Optimizing Quality of Endoscopy in IBD course. The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) organized the course, and the Crohn's and Colitis Foundation of America (CCFA) provided endorsement. One was held in March 2015 at the ASGE Institute for Training and Technology in Chicago, Illinois, and the second in September 2016 preceding the ASGE Endofest in Chandler, Arizona. The program included interactive case-based discussions and didactic presentations on topics including the rationale and current approach of surveillance in IBD; endoscopic characterization and nomenclature of active and quiescent disease; detection of dysplasia during IBD surveillance; role of image-enhanced endoscopy in IBD surveillance, with a focus on chromoendoscopy technique; and management of dysplasia in IBD. Participants were surveyed before and after the course to assess their perspectives and practice. RESULTS: Eighteen presenters or panel members and approximately 92 IBD and endoscopist physician leaders attended the meeting. Most attendees were aged 30 to 49 years (88.1%), had been in practice less than 10 years (89.7%), were from academic medical centers (90.7%), and spent >50% of their time caring for patients with IBD (59.7%). Recommended quality improvements for endoscopy in IBD included the use of endoscopic scoring systems to describe disease activity, the use of a modified Paris classification to characterize visible dysplastic lesions (polypoid, nonpolypoid with description of presence of ulcer and distinct or indistinct borders), the use of chromoendoscopy for dysplasia detection, and the endoscopic removal of visible dysplastic lesions. In the follow-up survey, participants were asked to indicate whether they had changed their practice as a result of attending the course. Ninety-three percent (93%) indicated they had changed their practice. For dysplasia detection, the use of chromoendoscopy increased: 51.7% of respondents reported using chromoendoscopy in most surveillance colonoscopies compared with 34.3% before the course. For dysplasia management, the use of EMR increased for polypoid and nonpolypoid lesions 10 to 20 mm in size; and the referral of dysplastic lesions 20 mm or larger that appeared endoscopically resectable shifted toward removal by an experienced endoscopist. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence-based advances in endoscopy have occurred in the characterization and nomenclature of active and quiescent disease, polypoid and nonpolypoid dysplasia in IBD, and in the detection and management of dysplasia in colonic IBD. Implementation of updated guidelines and recommendations into clinical practice may be facilitated by interactive image- and video-based courses on the topic.

Large Sessile Serrated Polyps Can Be Safely and Effectively Removed by Endoscopic Mucosal Resection.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: As many as 50% of large sessile serrated adenomas/polyps (SSPs) are removed incompletely, which is significant because SSPs have been implicated in the development of interval cancers. It is unclear if endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is an optimal method for removal of SSPs. We assessed the efficacy and safety of removal of SSPs 10 mm and larger using a standardized inject-and-cut EMR technique. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of colonoscopy data, collected over 7 years (2007-2013) at 2 centers, from 199 patients with proximal colon SSPs 10 mm and larger (251 polyps) removed by EMR by 4 endoscopists. The primary outcome measure was local recurrence. The secondary outcome measure was safety. RESULTS: At the index colonoscopy, patients had a median of 1 serrated lesion (range, 1-12) and 1 nonserrated neoplastic lesion (range, 0-15). The mean SSP size was 15.9 ± 5.3 mm; most were superficially elevated (84.5%) and located in the ascending colon (51%), and 3 SSPs (1.2%) had dysplasia. Surveillance colonoscopies were performed on 138 patients (69.3%) over a mean follow-up period of 25.5 ± 17.4 months. Of these patients, 5 had local recurrences (3.6%; 95% confidence interval, 0.5%-6.7%), detected after 17.8 ± 15.4 months, with a median size of 4 mm. No patients developed postprocedural bleeding, perforation, or advanced colon cancer, or had a death related to the index colorectal lesion during the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Inject-and-cut EMR is a safe and effective technique for the resection of SSPs. Less than 5% of patients have a local recurrence, which is usually small and can be treated endoscopically.