The COlorectal NEoplasia Endoscopic Classification to Choose the Treatment classification for identification of large laterally spreading lesions lacking submucosal carcinomas: A prospective study of 663 lesions.
Adenoma
/ classification
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Carcinoma
/ classification
Colorectal Neoplasms
/ classification
Dermatitis, Allergic Contact
Endoscopic Mucosal Resection
/ statistics & numerical data
Female
Humans
Intestinal Mucosa
/ pathology
Male
Methacrylates
/ adverse effects
Middle Aged
Neoplasm Invasiveness
/ diagnostic imaging
Predictive Value of Tests
Prospective Studies
EMR
ESD
colonoscopy
endoscopy
optical diagnosis
submucosal carcinoma
Journal
United European gastroenterology journal
ISSN: 2050-6414
Titre abrégé: United European Gastroenterol J
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101606807
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 2022
02 2022
Historique:
received:
02
08
2021
accepted:
11
12
2021
pubmed:
29
1
2022
medline:
3
3
2022
entrez:
28
1
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Optical diagnosis is necessary when selecting the resection modality for large superficial colorectal lesions. The COlorectal NEoplasia Endoscopic Classification to Choose the Treatment (CONECCT) encompasses overt (irregular pit or vascular pattern) and covert (macroscopic features) signs of carcinoma in an all-in-one classification using validated criteria. The CONECCT IIC subtype corresponds to adenomas with a high risk of superficial carcinoma that should be resected en bloc with free margins. This prospective multicentre study investigated the diagnostic accuracy of the CONECCT classification for predicting submucosal invasion in colorectal lesions >20 mm. Optical diagnosis before en bloc resection by endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) was compared with the final histological diagnosis. Diagnostic accuracy for the CONECCT IIC subtype was compared with literature-validated features of concern considered to be risk factors for submucosal invasion (non-granular large spreading tumour [NG LST], macronodule >1 cm, SANO IIIA area, and Paris 0-IIC area). Six hundred 63 lesions removed by ESD were assessed. The en bloc, R0, and curative resection rates were respectively 96%, 85%, and 81%. The CONECCT classification had a sensitivity (Se) of 100%, specificity (Sp) of 26.2%, positive predictive value of 11.6%, and negative predictive value (NPV) of 100% for predicting at least submucosal adenocarcinoma. The sensitivity of CONECCT IIC (100%) to predict submucosal cancer was superior to all other criteria evaluated. COlorectal NEoplasia Endoscopic Classification to Choose the Treatment IIC lesions constituted 11.5% of all submucosal carcinomas. The CONECCT classification, which combines covert and overt signs of carcinoma, identifies with very perfect sensitivity (Se 100%, NPV 100%) the 30% of low-risk adenomas in large laterally spreading lesions treatable by piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection or ESD according to expertise without undertreatment. However, the low specificity of CONECCT leads to a large number of potentially not indicated ESDs for suspected high-risk lesions.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35089651
doi: 10.1002/ueg2.12194
pmc: PMC8830277
doi:
Substances chimiques
Methacrylates
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
80-92Informations de copyright
© 2022 The Authors. United European Gastroenterology Journal published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of United European Gastroenterology.
Références
Endosc Int Open. 2019 Sep;7(9):E1166-E1174
pubmed: 31475236
Dig Endosc. 2014 Jan;26 Suppl 1:52-61
pubmed: 24191896
Endoscopy. 2011 Aug;43(8):664-70
pubmed: 21623560
Am J Gastroenterol. 2012 Sep;107(9):1315-29; quiz 1314, 1330
pubmed: 22710576
J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2000 Oct;15 Suppl:G49-57
pubmed: 11100994
Dig Endosc. 2015 May;27(4):417-434
pubmed: 25652022
Dig Endosc. 2018 Sep;30(5):642-651
pubmed: 29603399
Endoscopy. 2018 Jul;50(7):684-692
pubmed: 29370584
Endoscopy. 2015 Sep;47(9):829-54
pubmed: 26317585
Dig Endosc. 2009 Jul;21 Suppl 1:S43-6
pubmed: 19691733
Endoscopy. 2014 May;46(5):435-49
pubmed: 24639382
Gastrointest Endosc. 2003 Dec;58(6 Suppl):S3-43
pubmed: 14652541
Endoscopy. 2001 Apr;33(4):367-73
pubmed: 11315901
Endoscopy. 2016 Mar;48(3):263-70
pubmed: 26340603
Endosc Int Open. 2019 Oct;7(10):E1197-E1206
pubmed: 31579700
Endosc Int Open. 2022 Jan 14;10(1):E145-E153
pubmed: 35047345
Gastrointest Endosc. 2013 Oct;78(4):625-32
pubmed: 23910062
Dig Endosc. 2016 Jul;28(5):526-33
pubmed: 26927367
Gastrointest Endosc. 2017 Apr;85(4):816-821
pubmed: 27460392
Endoscopy. 2017 Mar;49(3):270-297
pubmed: 28212588
Endoscopy. 2019 Oct;51(10):980-992
pubmed: 31470448
Gastrointest Endosc. 2021 Aug;94(2):333-343
pubmed: 33548280
Radiology. 2015 Dec;277(3):826-32
pubmed: 26509226
Dig Endosc. 2011 May;23 Suppl 1:112-5
pubmed: 21535215
Gastrointest Endosc. 2016 Jul;84(1):98-108
pubmed: 26708921
United European Gastroenterol J. 2022 Feb;10(1):80-92
pubmed: 35089651
Endoscopy. 2016 May;48(5):456-64
pubmed: 26919264
Dig Dis Sci. 2020 Apr;65(4):969-977
pubmed: 31493041