BACKGROUND: Endoscopic resection is an alternative to surgery for removal of large duodenal polyps. There are limited data on the safety, efficacy, and long-term recurrence data after endoscopic resection of sporadic, non-ampullary, and large duodenal polyps. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to evaluate the safety and short-term outcomes of the endoscopic removal of the large sporadic duodenal polyps and to determine long-term risk of recurrence and factors predicting recurrence on follow-up. METHODS: Patients with large (>10 mm) sporadic non-ampullary duodenal polyps underwent endoscopic resection from 2001 to 2012 at the Cleveland Clinic. Patients underwent endoscopic polypectomy and argon plasma coagulation. The main outcome measurements were complete polypectomy, complications, short- and long-term recurrence. RESULTS: A total of 54 patients were included. The mean patient age was 66.4 years. The mean polyp size was 15.1 ± 5.4 mm. Most polyps (N = 48, 88.9 %) were sessile polyps. The median follow-up time was 10.8 (range 0.5-120) months. Most lesions were located in the second part of the duodenum (N = 41, 75.9 %). Adenomas were found in 46 (85.2 %) of lesions overall. Tubular adenoma was the most common histology type found in 33 cases (71.7 %). Tubulovillous and villous were found in 12 (26.1 %) and 1 (2.2 %) cases, respectively. On follow-up, 50 (92.6 %) achieved complete resection with tumor free margins post resection. The 30-day risk of major complications was 5.6 % (N = 3), 1 with perforation and 2 with delayed bleeding. Recurrence was documented in 29 % (N = 16) of patients. All recurrences were managed endoscopically except for one patient who required surgery. The recurrence rate was higher for patients who had villous component in their adenomas compared to those with tubular alone (p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic resection is effective for treating large duodenal adenomas. Adenomas with villous features are more likely to recur. Almost all recurrences can be managed endoscopically.
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic resection is an alternative to surgery for removal of large duodenal polyps. There are limited data on the safety, efficacy, and long-term recurrence data after endoscopic resection of sporadic, non-ampullary, and large duodenal polyps. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to evaluate the safety and short-term outcomes of the endoscopic removal of the large sporadic duodenal polyps and to determine long-term risk of recurrence and factors predicting recurrence on follow-up. METHODS:Patients with large (>10 mm) sporadic non-ampullary duodenal polyps underwent endoscopic resection from 2001 to 2012 at the Cleveland Clinic. Patients underwent endoscopic polypectomy and argon plasma coagulation. The main outcome measurements were complete polypectomy, complications, short- and long-term recurrence. RESULTS: A total of 54 patients were included. The mean patient age was 66.4 years. The mean polyp size was 15.1 ± 5.4 mm. Most polyps (N = 48, 88.9 %) were sessile polyps. The median follow-up time was 10.8 (range 0.5-120) months. Most lesions were located in the second part of the duodenum (N = 41, 75.9 %). Adenomas were found in 46 (85.2 %) of lesions overall. Tubular adenoma was the most common histology type found in 33 cases (71.7 %). Tubulovillous and villous were found in 12 (26.1 %) and 1 (2.2 %) cases, respectively. On follow-up, 50 (92.6 %) achieved complete resection with tumor free margins post resection. The 30-day risk of major complications was 5.6 % (N = 3), 1 with perforation and 2 with delayed bleeding. Recurrence was documented in 29 % (N = 16) of patients. All recurrences were managed endoscopically except for one patient who required surgery. The recurrence rate was higher for patients who had villous component in their adenomas compared to those with tubular alone (p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic resection is effective for treating large duodenal adenomas. Adenomas with villous features are more likely to recur. Almost all recurrences can be managed endoscopically.
Authors: Scott B Fanning; Michael J Bourke; Stephen J Williams; Adrian Chung; Viraj C Kariyawasam Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2012-02-03 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Douglas G Adler; Waqar Qureshi; Raquel Davila; S Ian Gan; David Lichtenstein; Elizabeth Rajan; Bo Shen; Marc J Zuckerman; Robert D Fanelli; Trina Van Guilder; Todd H Baron Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2006-12 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Bjorn W H van Heumen; Karlien Mul; Iris D Nagtegaal; Mariëtte C A van Kouwen; Fokko M Nagengast Journal: J Clin Gastroenterol Date: 2012 May-Jun Impact factor: 3.062
Authors: Sina Alexander; Michael J Bourke; Stephen J Williams; Adam Bailey; Jonard Co Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2008-08-23 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Raf Bisschops; Miguel Areia; Emmanuel Coron; Daniela Dobru; Bernd Kaskas; Roman Kuvaev; Oliver Pech; Krish Ragunath; Bas Weusten; Pietro Familiari; Dirk Domagk; Roland Valori; Michal F Kaminski; Cristiano Spada; Michael Bretthauer; Cathy Bennett; Carlo Senore; Mário Dinis-Ribeiro; Matthew D Rutter Journal: United European Gastroenterol J Date: 2016-08-21 Impact factor: 4.623
Authors: Michael J Bartel; Ruchir Puri; Bhaumik Brahmbhatt; Wei-Chung Chen; Daniel Kim; Carlos Roberto Simons-Linares; John A Stauffer; Mauricia A Buchanan; Steven P Bowers; Timothy A Woodward; Michael B Wallace; Massimo Raimondo; Horacio J Asbun Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2018-02-01 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Shria Kumar; Nadim Mahmud; Robert E Roses; Bryson W Katona; Gregory G Ginsberg; David C Metz Journal: Pancreas Date: 2020-01 Impact factor: 3.243
Authors: Udayakumar Navaneethan; Muhammad K Hasan; Vennisvasanth Lourdusamy; Xiang Zhu; Robert H Hawes; Shyam Varadarajulu Journal: Endosc Int Open Date: 2016-06
Authors: Kheman Rajkomar; Michelle Kweon; Imran Khan; Paul Frankish; Michael Rodgers; Jonathan B Koea Journal: World J Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2017-04-16