Literature DB >> 30206683

Malignant colorectal polyps: endoscopic polypectomy and watchful waiting is not inferior to subsequent bowel resection. A nationwide propensity score-based analysis.

Katarina Levic1, Orhan Bulut2,3, Tine Plato Hansen3,4,5, Ismail Gögenur3,6,5, Thue Bisgaard2,3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The optimal treatment of patients with malignant colorectal polyps is unsettled. The surgical dilemma following polypectomy is selecting between watchful waiting (WW) and subsequent bowel resection (SBR), but the long-term survival outcomes have not been established yet. This nationwide study compared survival of patients after WW or SBR.
METHODS: Danish nationwide study with 100% follow-up of all patients with malignant colorectal polyps (the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group database) in a 10-year period from 2001 to 2011. All patients' charts and histological reports were individually reviewed. Survival rates were calculated with Cox proportional hazard model after propensity score matching.
RESULTS: A total of 692 patients were included (WW, 424 (61.3%), SBR, 268 (38.7%)) with a mean follow-up of 7.5 years (3-188 months). Following propensity score matching, there was no significant difference in overall or disease-free survival (p = 0.344 and p = 0.184) or rate of local recurrence (WW, 7.2%, SBR, 2%, p = 0.052) or distant metastases (WW, 3.3%, SBR, 4.6%, p = 0.77). In the SBR group, there was no residual tumor or lymph node metastases in the resected specimen in 82.5% of the patients.
CONCLUSION: Subsequent bowel resection may not be superior to endoscopic polypectomy and watchful waiting with regard to overall and disease-free survival in patients with malignant colorectal polyps.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cancer in adenomas; Malignant polyp; Polypectomy; pT1 colorectal cancer

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30206683     DOI: 10.1007/s00423-018-1706-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg        ISSN: 1435-2443            Impact factor:   3.445


  4 in total

1.  Clinical guidance on endoscopic management of colonic polyps in Singapore.

Authors:  Tiing Leong Ang; Jit Fong Lim; Tju Siang Chua; Kok Yang Tan; James Weiquan Li; Chern Hao Chong; Kok Ann Gwee; Vikneswaran S/O Namasivayam; Charles Kien Fong Vu; Christopher Jen Lock Khor; Lai Mun Wang; Khay Guan Yeoh
Journal:  Singapore Med J       Date:  2020-07-16       Impact factor: 3.331

2.  Histopathological factors help to predict lymph node metastases more efficiently than extra-nodal recurrences in submucosa invading pT1 colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Fanny Barel; Mélanie Cariou; Philippe Saliou; Tiphaine Kermarrec; Anaïs Auffret; Laura Samaison; Amélie Bourhis; Bogdan Badic; Julien Jézéquel; Franck Cholet; Jean-Pierre Bail; Pascale Marcorelles; Jean-Baptiste Nousbaum; Michel Robaszkiewicz; Laurent Doucet; Arnaud Uguen
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-06-06       Impact factor: 4.379

3.  Patient and pathological predictors of management strategy for malignant polyps following polypectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Andrew P Zammit; Nicholas J Lyons; Mark D Chatfield; John D Hooper; Ian Brown; David A Clark; Andrew D Riddell
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2022-04-08       Impact factor: 2.796

4.  Revising the definition of vertical margin involvement following endoscopic polypectomy may reduce unnecessary surgery in patients with malignant colorectal polyps.

Authors:  Colin Richards; Priyanthi Kumarasinghe; Hannah Hessamodini; Alice Waldron; Diharah Fernando; Rupert Hodder; Angela Jacques; Spiro Raftopoulos
Journal:  JGH Open       Date:  2019-09-26
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.