Additional staining for lymphovascular invasion is associated with increased estimation of lymph node metastasis in patients with T1 colorectal cancer: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Lymphovascular invasion (LVI) is a critical risk factor for lymph node metastasis (LNM), which requires additional surgery after endoscopic resection of T1 colorectal cancer (CRC). However, the impact of additional staining on estimating LNM is unclear. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the impact of additional staining on determining LNM in T1 CRC. METHODS: We searched five electronic databases. Outcomes were diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), assessed using hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic curves, and interobserver agreement among pathologists for positive LVI, assessed using Kappa coefficients (κ). We performed a subgroup analysis of studies that simultaneously included a multivariable analysis for other risk factors (deep submucosal invasion, poor differentiation, and tumor budding). RESULTS: Among the 64 studies (18,097 patients) identified, hematoxylin-eosin (HE) and additional staining for LVI had pooled sensitivities of 0.45 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.32-0.58) and 0.68 (95% CI 0.44-0.86), specificities of 0.88 (95% CI 0.78-0.94) and 0.76 (95% CI 0.62-0.86), and DORs of 6.26 (95% CI 3.73-10.53) and 6.47 (95% CI 3.40-12.32) for determining LNM, respectively. In multivariable analysis, the DOR of additional staining for LNM (DOR 5.95; 95% CI 2.87-12.33) was higher than that of HE staining (DOR 1.89; 95% CI 1.13-3.16) (P = 0.01). Pooled κ values were 0.37 (95% CI 0.22-0.52) and 0.62 (95% CI 0.04-0.99) for HE and additional staining for LVI, respectively. CONCLUSION: Additional staining for LVI may increase the DOR for LNM and interobserver agreement for positive LVI among pathologists.

Possible Association of Mutations in the MEFV Gene with the Intestinal Phenotype of Behçet's Disease and Refractoriness to Treatment.

BACKGROUND: Mediterranean fever (MEFV) gene mutations are responsible for familial Mediterranean fever (FMF) and associated with other inflammatory diseases. However, the effects of MEFV gene mutations on intestinal Behçet's disease (BD) are unknown. In this study, we investigated these mutations and clinical features in patients with intestinal BD. METHODS: MEFV gene analysis was performed in 16 patients with intestinal BD, 10 with BD without intestinal lesions, and 50 healthy controls. Clinical features of patients with intestinal BD were retrospectively assessed. RESULTS: The rates of MEFV gene mutations in patients with intestinal BD, BD without intestinal lesions, and healthy controls were 75%, 50%, and 38%, respectively. Only 2 of 12 patients with intestinal BD harboring MEFV gene mutations (17%) were controlled without immunosuppressive treatment, while 8 patients (67%) required therapy with tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors. Among patients with intestinal BD without MEFV gene mutations (four patients), three (75%) were controlled by the administration of 5-aminosalicylic acid with or without colchicine, and one (25%) required TNF inhibitors. All patients who underwent intestinal resection had MEFV gene mutations. Immunohistochemical analysis and in situ hybridization with interleukin-1ß (IL-1ß) showed a high expression of IL-1ß only in injured areas, suggesting that IL-1ß may be involved in the formation of ulcers in patients with intestinal BD carrying MEFV gene mutations. CONCLUSION: Mutations in the MEFV gene may be associated with intestinal lesions of BD and refractoriness to treatment.

Comparison of endoscopic submucosal resection with ligation and endoscopic submucosal dissection for small rectal neuroendocrine tumors: A multicenter retrospective study.

Objectives: Endoscopic submucosal resection with band ligation (ESMR-L) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) are both standard endoscopic resection methods for rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) <10 mm in size. However, there is no definitive consensus on which is better. Here, we compared the efficacy of ESMR-L and ESD for small rectal NETs. Methods: This was a multicenter retrospective cohort study including 205 patients with rectal NETs who underwent ESMR-L or ESD. Treatment outcomes were compared by univariate analysis, multivariate analysis, and inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) using propensity scores. Subgroup analysis evaluated the impact of the endoscopist's experience on the technical outcome. Results: Eighty-nine patients were treated by ESMR-L and 116 by ESD. The R0 resection rate was not significantly different between the two (90% vs. 92%, p = 0.73). The procedure time of ESMR-L was significantly shorter than for ESD (17 min vs. 52 min, p < 0.01) and the hospitalization period was also significantly shorter (3 days vs. 5 days, p < 0.01). These results were confirmed by multivariate analysis and also after IPTW adjustment. The procedure time of ESD was significantly prolonged by a less-experienced endoscopist (49 min vs. 70 min, p = 0.02), but that of ESMR-L was not affected (17 min vs. 17 min, p = 0.27). Conclusions: For small rectal NETs, both ESMR-L and ESD showed similar high complete resection rates. However, considering the shorter procedure time and shorter hospitalization period, ESMR-L is the more efficient treatment method, especially for less-experienced endoscopists.

Risk stratification for advanced colorectal neoplasia based on the findings of the index and first surveillance colonoscopies.

Risk stratification by index colonoscopy is well established for first surveillance endoscopy, but whether the previous two colonoscopies affect the subsequent advanced neoplasias has not been established. Therefore, the subsequent risk based on the findings of the index and first surveillance colonoscopies were investigated. This retrospective, cohort study was conducted in two clinics and included participants who had undergone two or more colonoscopies after index colonoscopy. High-risk was defined as advanced adenoma (≥ 1 cm, or tubulovillous or villous histology, or high-grade dysplasia). Based on the findings of the index and first surveillance colonoscopies, patients were classified into four categories: category A (both colonoscopy findings were normal), category B (no high-risk findings both times), category C (one time high-risk finding), and category D (high-risk findings both times). The incidence of subsequent advanced neoplasia was examined in each category. A total of 13,426 subjects were included and surveyed during the study periods. The subjects in category D had the highest risk of advanced neoplasia (27.4%, n = 32/117). The subjects in category A had the lowest risk (4.0%, n = 225/5,583). The hazard ratio for advanced neoplasia of category D compared to category A was 9.90 (95% Confidence interval 6.82-14.35, P<0.001). Classification based on the findings of index and first surveillance colonoscopies more effectively stratifies the risk of subsequent advanced neoplasia, resulting in more proper allocation of colonoscopy resources after two consecutive colonoscopies.

Primary mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue (MALT) lymphoma of the gallbladder and review of the literature.

Mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue (MALT) lymphoma is rarely observed in the gallbladder, and its diagnosis before surgery is difficult. This report describes a case of primary MALT lymphoma of the gallbladder in an 80-year-old man. Imaging studies revealed a protruding lesion on the inside of the gallbladder, which led us to diagnose gallbladder carcinoma prior to the patient undergoing extended cholecystectomy. Microscopic examination of the resected specimen of the gallbladder demonstrated lymphoid follicles with atypical lymphocytes and the formation of lymphoepithelial lesions. These findings led to a final pathological diagnosis of primary MALT lymphoma of the gallbladder. The patient has been free of recurrence for 39 months after the surgery. Although precise diagnosis before the surgery was difficult in this case, preoperative examinations revealed a submucosal tumour-like lesion. MALT lymphomas should be considered when imaging findings are atypical for gallbladder carcinoma.