BACKGROUND: Colonoscopic polypectomy plays a major role in preventing colo-rectal cancer. However, resection of sessile, broad-based pedunculated and flat lesions carries a high risk of perforation. Endoscopic Mucosal Resection (EMR) may significantly reduce this risk. We aim to assess the safety and efficacy of EMR in our unit. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A review of a prospective database over a 3-year period identified 87 patients who underwent endoscopic polypectomy for polyps in sizes from 10 to 50 mm, performed by two experienced endoscopists. A total of 33 EMRs were performed on 30 lesions in 24 of these patients. RESULTS: Median size of lesions was 20 mm. Most were located in the rectum and sigmoid. 22 lesions were resected en-bloc while 8 were resected piecemeal. Histologically these lesions were predominantly adenomatous polyps. An incidental focus of adenocarcinoma was found in 7 lesions. Histologically complete excision was achieved in 10 lesions. Although histological completeness of excision was not confirmed in 19 lesions, repeat colonoscopy confirmed successful excision. Only one lesion was incompletely excised requiring surgical resection. Bleeding occurred during 2 EMRs, both times successfully controlled by further injection of adrenaline locally. There was no case of bowel perforation. Further surveillance colonoscopy was performed according to established guidelines. Median follow-up period was 21 months. None of the patients diagnosed with adenocarcinoma showed any evidence of recurrence. CONCLUSION: Within our unit endoscopic mucosal resection appeared to be safe and effective procedure for resecting large colorectal polyps not suitable for conventional polypectomy. This data would support prompt referral of lesions fulfilling these criteria to specialist units offering this service to avoid unnecessary surgery.
BACKGROUND: Colonoscopic polypectomy plays a major role in preventing colo-rectal cancer. However, resection of sessile, broad-based pedunculated and flat lesions carries a high risk of perforation. Endoscopic Mucosal Resection (EMR) may significantly reduce this risk. We aim to assess the safety and efficacy of EMR in our unit. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A review of a prospective database over a 3-year period identified 87 patients who underwent endoscopic polypectomy for polyps in sizes from 10 to 50 mm, performed by two experienced endoscopists. A total of 33 EMRs were performed on 30 lesions in 24 of these patients. RESULTS: Median size of lesions was 20 mm. Most were located in the rectum and sigmoid. 22 lesions were resected en-bloc while 8 were resected piecemeal. Histologically these lesions were predominantly adenomatous polyps. An incidental focus of adenocarcinoma was found in 7 lesions. Histologically complete excision was achieved in 10 lesions. Although histological completeness of excision was not confirmed in 19 lesions, repeat colonoscopy confirmed successful excision. Only one lesion was incompletely excised requiring surgical resection. Bleeding occurred during 2 EMRs, both times successfully controlled by further injection of adrenaline locally. There was no case of bowel perforation. Further surveillance colonoscopy was performed according to established guidelines. Median follow-up period was 21 months. None of the patients diagnosed with adenocarcinoma showed any evidence of recurrence. CONCLUSION: Within our unit endoscopic mucosal resection appeared to be safe and effective procedure for resecting large colorectal polyps not suitable for conventional polypectomy. This data would support prompt referral of lesions fulfilling these criteria to specialist units offering this service to avoid unnecessary surgery.
Authors: Fernando A Angarita; Adina E Feinberg; Stanley M Feinberg; Robert H Riddell; J Andrea McCart Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2017-12-28 Impact factor: 2.571