Is Piecemeal Endoscopic Resection Acceptable for Early Colorectal Cancers in Certain Situations? A Single-Center French Study

Archive ouverte

Ratone, Jean-Philippe | Caillol, Fabrice | Zemmour, Christophe | Bories, Erwan | Pesenti, Christian | Godat, Sébastien | Hoibian, Solene | de Chaisemartin, Cécile | Meillat, Hélène | Lelong, Bernard | Poizat, Flora | Giovannini, Marc

Edité par CCSD ; Romanian Societies of Gastroenterology -

International audience. Background & Aims: The use of endoscopic treatment for early colorectal cancer (ECC) is increasing. The European guidelines suggest performing piecemeal endoscopic resection (pmR) for benign lesions and en bloc resection for ECC, especially for patients with favorable lymph node involvement risk evaluations. However, en bloc resections for lesions larger than two centimeters require invasive endoscopic techniques. Our retrospective single-center study aimed to determine the clinical impact of performing pmR for ECC rather than traditional en bloc resection. Methods: A single-center study was performed between January 2012 and September 2017. All ECC patients were included. The main objective was to evaluate the number of patients who potentially underwent unnecessary surgery due to piecemeal resection. The secondary endpoints were as follows: disease-free survival (DFS), defined as the time from pmR to endoscopic failure (local recurrence not treatable by endoscopy), complication rate, number of patients who did not undergo surgery by default, and factors predictive of outcomes and complications. Results: One hundred and forty-six ECC endoscopically treated patients were included. In total, 85 patients were excluded (71 who underwent en bloc resection, 14 with pending follow-up). Data from 61 patients (33 women and 28 men) were analyzed. Two patients underwent potentially unnecessary surgery [3.28% (0.9%-11.2%)]. The DFS rate was 87% (75%-93%) at 6 months and 85% [72%-92%] at 12 months. The median followup time was 16.5 months (12.4-20.9). Three patients (4.9%) had complications. One patient did not undergo surgery by default. A Paris classification of 0-2c (HR=9.3 (2.4-35.9), p<0.001) and Vienna classification of 5 [HR=16.3 (3.3-80.4), p<0.001] were factors associated with poor DFS. Conclusion: Performing pmR in place of en bloc resection for ECC had a limited impact on patients. If the pathology (especially deep margins) is analyzable, careful monitoring could be acceptable in ECC patients who undergo pmR.

Suggestions

Du même auteur

Piecemeal Resection for Large Colorectal Adenomas Remains Essential in 2022: A Single-Center Experience in a Tertiary French Center

Archive ouverte | Ratone, Jean-Philippe | CCSD

International audience. Background and aims: Colorectal lesions measuring greater than 20 mm are unsuitable for en bloc endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR): piecemeal EMR (PM-EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection...

Outcomes of duodenal stenting: Experience in a French tertiary center with 220 cases

Archive ouverte | Ratone, Jean-Philippe | CCSD

International audience. Introduction: Endoscopic stenting for malignant gastroduodenal outlet obstruction (MGOO) is described as ineffective and not long-lasting despite a few favorable studies. This study aimed to ...

EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy in patients with obstructive jaundice after failed or impossible endoscopic retrograde drainage: A multicenter, randomized phase II Study

Archive ouverte | Marx, Mariola | CCSD

International audience

Chargement des enrichissements...