Prognostic roles and survival benefits of endoscopic resection versus surgical resection in the management of malignant colon polyps

Background: Due to few sufficient data regarding the comparison between endoscopic and surgical resection of malignant colorectal polyps regarding outcomes and survival benefits, there are no clear guidelines of management strategies of malignant colorectal polyps. The aims of the present study were to compare endoscopic resection alone and surgical resection in patients with malignant polyps in the colon (T1N0M0) readings advantages, disadvantages, recurrence risks, survival benefits, and long-term prognosis to detect how management strategy affects outcome. Patients and methods: we included 350 patients. All included patients were divided into 2 groups; the first group included 100 patients who underwent only endoscopic polypectomy and the second group included 250 patients who underwent endoscopic polypectomy followed by definitive surgical resection after histopathological diagnosis. We followed all patients for about 5 years, ranging from 18 to 55 months. The primarily evaluated parameters are surgical consequences and patients' morbidity. The secondary evaluated parameters are recurrence risks, recurrence free survival, and overall survival rates. Results: The age of patients who underwent polypectomy is usually younger than the surgical group, males have more liability to polypectomy in comparison with females. Patients with tumors in the left colon have more liability to polypectomy in comparison with the right colon (p< 0.0001). Tumor factors associated with more liability to surgical resection are presence of lymphovascular invasion, high grade, and poor tumor differentiation (p< 0.0001). The management strategy was the most significant predictor of overall and recurrence free survival rates in patients with malignant colon polyps (p< 0.001). Conclusions: We found that survival benefits and lower incidence of recurrence are detected in the surgical resection group more than in the polypectomy group. (AU)

Risk factors and outcomes of occurrence of anastomotic leakage and reoperations for its management after colorectal surgery

Background: Anastomotic leakage (AL) is still the most annoying postsurgery complication after colorectal resection due to its serious complications up to death. Limited data were available regarding differences in AL incidence, management, and consequences for different types of colorectal resection. The aim of the present work was to evaluate differences in incidence of AL, incidence of postoperative complications, and length of hospital stay in a large number of patients who underwent elective colorectal resection for management of colorectal lesions. In addition to detect when and what type of reoperation for management of AL occur after colorectal resection. Patients: All 250 included patients underwent elective surgeries for colorectal resection with performance of primary anastomosis for management of colorectal neoplastic and non-neoplastic diseases in the period between May 2016 and July 31, 2021. We followed the patients for 90 days; we registered the follow-up findings. Results: the rates of AL occurrence were variable after the different procedures. The lowest rate of AL occurrence was found in patients who underwent right hemicolectomy, then in patients who underwent sigmoidectomy, left hemicolectomy, transversectomy and anterior resection (p= 0.004). A stoma was frequently performed during reoperation (79.5%) which was significantly different between different procedures: 65.5% in right hemicolectomy, 75.0% in transversectomy, 85.7% in left hemicolectomy, and 93.0% in sigmoid resection (p< 0.001). Conclusion Rates, types, time of occurrence and severity of AL vary according to the type of colectomy performed and selective construction of stoma during AL reoperation is currently safely applied with comparable mortality rates for patients who did and who did not have a stoma after reoperation. (AU)

Prediction of high-risk esophageal varices in patients with compensated cirrhosis using albumin-bilirubin-platelet score.

BACKGROUND: Despite the fact that endoscopy is the gold standard for screening of high-risk varices (HRVs) in patients with compensated cirrhosis, it is invasive, costly and not necessary for all patients. So, noninvasive tests can replace endoscopy. We aimed at evaluating the albumin-bilirubin-platelet (ALBL-PLT) score as a noninvasive test in predicting HRVs in compensated cirrhotic patients versus Baveno VI and extended Baveno VI criteria. METHODS: patients with compensated cirrhosis (n = 204) were included. Laboratory parameters, esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and liver stiffness measurement by transient elastography were done. Classification of patients according to the status of HRVs was done. We compared both groups on the basis of ALBL-PLT score, Baveno VI and extended Baveno VI criteria. RESULTS: Among the total patients, 96/204 (47%) patients had HRVs. They have higher liver stiffness measurement than those without HRVs (33 ± 13.1 versus 19.3 ± 8.25, CI, -19.94, -7.31, P value <0.001). Also, all HRVs patients have an ALBL-PLT score of more than 3. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the ALBL-PLT score is higher than that for Baveno VI and extended Baveno VI criteria (0.894 versus 0.722 and 0.792, respectively). CONCLUSION: ALBL-PLT score of more than three has a good predictive value in predicting HRVs among compensated cirrhotic patients.