Assessing outcomes of full-thickness resection in piecemeal polypectomy scar consolidation of colon adenomas containing cancer

Abstract

Background and study aims

The current standard of care for patients who are found to have malignancy within a resected colorectal polyp segment is surgical resection. Our study aimed to illustrate the efficacy and safety of using endoscopic full thickness resection (EFTR) to achieve histologically complete (R0) resection and formal staging in malignant polypectomy scars.

Patients and methods

This was a prospective case series of 14 patients who underwent scar consolidation via EFTR following piecemeal polypectomy or endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of a malignant colorectal polyp. Variables collected assessed R0 resection, technical success of the procedure, residual disease within the scar, recurrence during follow up, and adverse events (AEs).

Results

Of the 14 patient cases reviewed, there was 100% technical success and residual malignancy (RM) found in 14%. Of the two patients with residual disease, one achieved R0 resection with EFTR whereas the other did not and subsequently underwent surgery with no histopathological evidence of malignancy in the resected tissue. There was one AE of rectal bleeding that did not require any surgical intervention or blood transfusions.

Conclusions

EFTR could offer endoscopists a safe, efficacious, and minimally invasive mechanism for formal tumor (T) staging of malignancies found within polypectomy segments. Further studies with larger sample sizes are needed to assess outcomes in patients with residual neoplastic disease.

Keywords

Endoscopy Lower GI Tract - Colorectal cancer - Polyps / adenomas / ... - CRC screening - Endoscopic resection (polypectomy, ESD, EMRc, ...)

Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 12. Juli 2024

Angenommen nach Revision: 03. Juni 2025

Accepted Manuscript online:
16. Juni 2025

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
01. September 2025

• References

• 1 American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts & Figures 2024. https://www.cancer.org/research/cancer-facts-statistics/all-cancer-facts-figures/2024-cancer-facts-figures.html
• 2 Peery AF, Shaheen NJ, Cools KS. et al. Morbidity and mortality after surgery for nonmalignant colorectal polyps. Gastrointest Endosc 2018; 87: 243-250 e242
• 3 Atla PR, Alao H, Reicher S. Endoscopic submucosal dissection versus endoscopic full-thickness resection for challenging colorectal lesions: Must we choose?. Gastrointest Endosc 2023; 98: 998-999
• 4 Fujiya M, Tanaka K, Dokoshi T. et al. Efficacy and adverse events of EMR and endoscopic submucosal dissection for the treatment of colon neoplasms: a meta-analysis of studies comparing EMR and endoscopic submucosal dissection. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 81: 583-595
• 5 Ito S, Hotta K, Sekiguchi M. et al. Short-term outcomes of endoscopic resection for colorectal neuroendocrine tumors: A Japanese multicenter prospective C-NET STUDY. Dig Endosc 2023; 36: 942-951
• 6 Panzuto F, Magi L, Esposito G. et al. Comparison of endoscopic techniques in the management of type i gastric neuroendocrine neoplasia: A systematic review. Gastroenterol Res Pract 2021; 2021: 6679397
• 7 Dumoulin FL, Hildenbrand R. Endoscopic resection techniques for colorectal neoplasia: Current developments. World J Gastroenterol 2019; 25: 300-307
• 8 Albrecht H, Raithel M, Braun A. et al. Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) in the lower gastrointestinal tract. Tech Coloproctol 2019; 23: 957-963
• 9 Obri M, Ichkhanian Y, Brown P. et al. Full-thickness resection device for management of lesions involving the appendiceal orifice: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Endosc Int Open 2023; 11: E899-E907
• 10 Kahi CJ, Boland CR, Dominitz JA. et al. Colonoscopy surveillance after colorectal cancer resection: recommendations of the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Gastrointest Endosc 2016; 83: 489-498 e410
• 11 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. Am J Gastroenterol 2020; 115: 415-434
• 12 Robertson DJ, Lieberman DA, Winawer SJ. et al. Colorectal cancers soon after colonoscopy: a pooled multicohort analysis. Gut 2014; 63: 949-956
• 13 Belderbos TD, Leenders M, Moons LM. et al. Local recurrence after endoscopic mucosal resection of nonpedunculated colorectal lesions: systematic review and meta-analysis. Endoscopy 2014; 46: 388-402
• 14 Ohata K, Kobayashi N, Sakai E. et al. Long-term outcomes after endoscopic submucosal dissection for large colorectal epithelial neoplasms: A prospective, multicenter, cohort trial from Japan. Gastroenterology 2022; 163: 1423-1434 e1422
• 15 Hotta K, Saito Y, Matsuda T. et al. Local recurrence and surveillance after endoscopic resection of large colorectal tumors. Dig Endosc 2010; 22: S63-S68
• 16 Komeda Y, Watanabe T, Sakurai T. et al. Risk factors for local recurrence and appropriate surveillance interval after endoscopic resection. World J Gastroenterol 2019; 25: 1502-1512
• 17 Draganov PV, Aihara H, Karasik MS. et al. Endoscopic submucosal dissection in north america: A large prospective multicenter study. Gastroenterology 2021; 160: 2317-2327 e2312
• 18 Rotermund C, Djinbachian R, Taghiakbari M. et al. Recurrence rates after endoscopic resection of large colorectal polyps: A systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Gastroenterol 2022; 28: 4007-4018
• 19 Lima Capela T, Ferreira AI, Macedo Silva V. et al. Recurrence rate after piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection of <20 mm non-pedunculated colorectal lesions: should we worry about the risk?. Scand J Gastroenterol 2023; 59: 361-368
• 20 Stier MW, Chapman CG, Shamah S. et al. Endoscopic resection is more effective than biopsy or EUS to detect residual rectal neuroendocrine tumor. Endosc Int Open 2021; 9: E4-E8
• 21 El Edelbi M, Abdallah I, Jaafar RF. et al. Comparing emergent and elective colectomy outcomes in elderly patients: A NSQIP study. Int J Surg Oncol 2021; 2021: 9990434