New Model to Predict Recurrence After Endoscopic Mucosal Resection of Non-pedunculated Colonic Polyps ≥ 20 mm.
Colonic polyp recurrence
Colonic polyps
Endoscopic mucosal resection
Gastrointestinal endoscopy
Journal
Digestive diseases and sciences
ISSN: 1573-2568
Titre abrégé: Dig Dis Sci
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7902782
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 2023
10 2023
Historique:
received:
13
03
2023
accepted:
21
07
2023
medline:
25
9
2023
pubmed:
7
8
2023
entrez:
7
8
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Polyp recurrence is common after endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of non-pedunculated colonic polyps ≥ 20 mm. Two models haven been published for polyp recurrence prediction: Sydney EMR recurrence tool (SERT) and the size, morphology, colonic site, and access to target (SMSA) score. None of these models have been evaluated in a real-world United States (U.S.) cohort. We aimed to evaluate the external validity of these two models and develop a new model. Retrospective cohort study of patients with non-pedunculated polyps ≥ 20 mm that underwent EMR between 1/1/2012 and 6/30/2020. Univariate and multivariate analysis were performed to identify predictors of polyp recurrence to build a new model. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves for the new model, SERT and a modified version of SMSA were derived and compared. A total of 461 polyps from 461 unique patients were included for analysis. The average polyp size was 29.1 ± 12.4 mm. Recurrence rate at first or second surveillance colonoscopy was 29.0% at a 15.6 months median follow up (IQR 12.3-17.4). A model was created with 4 variables from index colonoscopy: size > 40 mm, tubulovillous adenoma histology, right colon location and piecemeal resection. ROC curves showed that the Area Under the ROC (AUC) for the new model was 0.618, for SERT 0.538 and for mSMSA 0.550. SERT score and mSMSA have poor external validity to predict polyp recurrence after EMR of non-pedunculated polyps > 20 mm. Our new model is simpler and performs better in this multiethnic, non-referral cohort from the U.S.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Polyp recurrence is common after endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of non-pedunculated colonic polyps ≥ 20 mm. Two models haven been published for polyp recurrence prediction: Sydney EMR recurrence tool (SERT) and the size, morphology, colonic site, and access to target (SMSA) score. None of these models have been evaluated in a real-world United States (U.S.) cohort. We aimed to evaluate the external validity of these two models and develop a new model.
METHODS
Retrospective cohort study of patients with non-pedunculated polyps ≥ 20 mm that underwent EMR between 1/1/2012 and 6/30/2020. Univariate and multivariate analysis were performed to identify predictors of polyp recurrence to build a new model. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves for the new model, SERT and a modified version of SMSA were derived and compared.
RESULTS
A total of 461 polyps from 461 unique patients were included for analysis. The average polyp size was 29.1 ± 12.4 mm. Recurrence rate at first or second surveillance colonoscopy was 29.0% at a 15.6 months median follow up (IQR 12.3-17.4). A model was created with 4 variables from index colonoscopy: size > 40 mm, tubulovillous adenoma histology, right colon location and piecemeal resection. ROC curves showed that the Area Under the ROC (AUC) for the new model was 0.618, for SERT 0.538 and for mSMSA 0.550.
CONCLUSION
SERT score and mSMSA have poor external validity to predict polyp recurrence after EMR of non-pedunculated polyps > 20 mm. Our new model is simpler and performs better in this multiethnic, non-referral cohort from the U.S.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37548897
doi: 10.1007/s10620-023-08054-5
pii: 10.1007/s10620-023-08054-5
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
3935-3942Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.
Références
Carvalho R, Areia M, Brito D, Saraiva S, Alves S, Cadime AT. Endoscopic mucosal resection of large colorectal polyps: prospective evaluation of recurrence and complications. Acta Gastroenterol Belg. 2013;76:225–230.
pubmed: 23898560
Gupta S, Lieberman D, Anderson JC et al. Recommendations for follow-up after colonoscopy and polypectomy: a consensus update by the US multi-society task force on colorectal cancer. Gastroenterology. 2020;158:1131–1153. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2019.10.026 .
doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2019.10.026
pubmed: 32044092
Belderbos TDG, Leenders M, Moons LMG, Siersema PD. Local recurrence after endoscopic mucosal resection of nonpedunculated colorectal lesions: systematic review and meta-analysis. Endoscopy. 2014;46:388–402. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0034-1364970 .
doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1364970
pubmed: 24671869
Rex KD, Vemulapalli KC, Rex DK. Recurrence rates after EMR of large sessile serrated polyps. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015;82:538–541. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2015.01.025 .
doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2015.01.025
pubmed: 25851161
Khashab M, Eid E, Rusche M, Rex DK. Incidence and predictors of “late” recurrences after endoscopic piecemeal resection of large sessile adenomas. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009;70:344–349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2008.10.037 .
doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2008.10.037
pubmed: 19249767
El Rahyel A, Abdullah N, Love E, Vemulapalli KC, Rex DK. Recurrence after endoscopic mucosal resection: early and late incidence, treatment outcomes, and outcomes in non-overt (histologic-only) recurrence. Gastroenterology. 2021;160:949–951. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2020.10.039 .
doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2020.10.039
pubmed: 33130101
Moss A, Williams SJ, Hourigan LF et al. Long-term adenoma recurrence following wide-field endoscopic mucosal resection (WF-EMR) for advanced colonic mucosal neoplasia is infrequent: results and risk factors in 1000 cases from the Australian Colonic EMR (ACE) study. Gut. 2015;64:57–65. https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2013-305516 .
doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2013-305516
pubmed: 24986245
Seitz U, Bohnacker S, Seewald S, Thonke F, Soehendra N. Long-term results of endoscopic removal of large colorectal adenomas. Endoscopy. 2003;35:S41–S44. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2003-41535 .
doi: 10.1055/s-2003-41535
pubmed: 12929053
Urban O, Kijonkova B, Kajzrlikova IM et al. Local residual neoplasia after endoscopic treatment of laterally spreading tumors during 15 months of follow-up. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2013;25:733–738. https://doi.org/10.1097/MEG.0b013e32835eda96 .
doi: 10.1097/MEG.0b013e32835eda96
pubmed: 23442418
Knabe M, Pohl J, Gerges C, Ell C, Neuhaus H, Schumacher B. Standardized long-term follow-up after endoscopic resection of large, nonpedunculated colorectal lesions: a prospective two-center study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2014;109:183–189. https://doi.org/10.1038/ajg.2013.419 .
doi: 10.1038/ajg.2013.419
pubmed: 24343549
Bick BL, Ponugoti PL, Rex DK. High yield of synchronous lesions in referred patients with large lateral spreading colorectal tumors. Gastrointest Endosc. 2017;85:228–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2016.06.035 .
doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2016.06.035
pubmed: 27345133
Tate DJ, Desomer L, Klein A et al. Adenoma recurrence after piecemeal colonic EMR is predictable: the Sydney EMR recurrence tool. Gastrointest Endosc. 2017;85:647-656.e6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2016.11.027 .
doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2016.11.027
pubmed: 27908600
Gupta S, Miskovic D, Bhandari P et al. A novel method for determining the difficulty of colonoscopic polypectomy. Frontline Gastroenterol. 2013;4:244–248. https://doi.org/10.1136/flgastro-2013-100331 .
doi: 10.1136/flgastro-2013-100331
pubmed: 28839733
pmcid: 5369843
Currie AC, Merriman H, Nadia Shah Gilani S, Mackenzie P, McFall MR, Baig MK. Validation of the size morphology site access score in endoscopic mucosal resection of large polyps in a district general hospital. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2019;101:558–562. https://doi.org/10.1308/rcsann.2019.0068 .
doi: 10.1308/rcsann.2019.0068
pubmed: 31233327
pmcid: 6818069
Sidhu M, Tate DJ, Desomer L et al. The size, morphology, site, and access score predicts critical outcomes of endoscopic mucosal resection in the colon. Endoscopy. 2018;50:684–692. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-124081 .
doi: 10.1055/s-0043-124081
pubmed: 29370584
Barosa R, Mohammed N, Rembacken B. Risk stratification of colorectal polyps for predicting residual or recurring adenoma using the size/morphology/site/access score. United Eur Gastroenterol J. 2018;6:630–638. https://doi.org/10.1177/2050640617742485 .
doi: 10.1177/2050640617742485
Alexandrino G, Figueiredo ML, Domingues TD, Lourenço LC, Carvalho R, Martins A. The risk of residual or recurring adenoma after piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps is predictable. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020;32:713–717. https://doi.org/10.1097/MEG.0000000000001739 .
doi: 10.1097/MEG.0000000000001739
pubmed: 32355094
Silva JC, Pinho R, Fernades C et al. Prediction of adenoma recurrence after piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection: interobserver agreement and utilization of the Sydney EMR recurrence tool. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2020;55:492–496. https://doi.org/10.1080/00365521.2020.1749296 .
doi: 10.1080/00365521.2020.1749296
pubmed: 32324086
Sidhu M, Tate DJ, Desomer L et al. Correction: the size, morphology, site, and access score predicts critical outcomes of endoscopic mucosal resection in the colon. Endoscopy. 2018;50:C7. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-0602-1390 .
doi: 10.1055/a-0602-1390
pubmed: 29698988
Seo JY, Chun J, Lee C et al. Novel risk stratification for recurrence after endoscopic resection of advanced colorectal adenoma. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015;81:655–664. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2014.09.064 .
doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2014.09.064
pubmed: 25500328
Pellise M, Burgess NG, Tutticci N et al. Endoscopic mucosal resection for large serrated lesions in comparison with adenomas: a prospective multicentre study of 2000 lesions. Gut. 2017;66:644–653. https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2015-310249 .
doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2015-310249
pubmed: 26786685
Facciorusso A, Di Maso M, Serviddio G et al. Factors associated with recurrence of advanced colorectal adenoma after endoscopic resection. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016;14:1148–1154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cgh.2016.03.017 .
doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2016.03.017
pubmed: 27005802
GomezCifuentes JD, Berger S, Caskey K et al. Evolution of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) technique and the reduced recurrence of large colonic polyps from 2012 to 2020. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1080/00365521.2022.2134734 .
doi: 10.1080/00365521.2022.2134734
Thrift AP, Kanwal F, El-Serag HB. Prediction models for gastrointestinal and liver diseases: too many developed, too few validated. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016;14:1678–1680. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cgh.2016.08.026 .
doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2016.08.026
pubmed: 27574756