Background: endoscopic electroexcision is the standard technique for the removal of colorectal polyps. However, it is associated with the postoperative morbidity. In order to reduce the incidence of complications, “cold” excision seems to be an alternative option.Aim: to improve the results of endoscopic treatment for patients with colorectal polyps.Patients and methods: from September 2019 to September 2020, 160 patients ≥ 18 years old (80 in each group), who underwent endoscopic removal of colorectal polyps ≤ 10 mm in size by cold excision (132 lesions) and traditional polypectomy (129 lesions), were included in a prospective randomized trial. All removed specimens were studied histologically with an assessment of the resection margins (R0/R1). The analysis of the postoperative complications after endoscopic polypectomy and the incidence of Rx resection after removal of polyps by both techniques was done.Results: the compared groups were homogenous in the number of patients, gender, age, and comobridities. There were no significant differences in the number of removed polyps, their site and the type according to endoscopic classifications. The operation time was significantly higher in the conventional polypectomy group compared with the “cold” one (p = 0.0001). There were no significant differences in the intraoperative complications rate between the two groups (p = 0.06). There were no postoperative complications in the “cold” group. In the control group postoperative complications occurred after 12 out of 129 polyps removal (p = 0.001). The univariate analysis showed that a risk factor for the development of postoperative complications after conventional polypectomy is the lack of submucosal lifting (OR: 15.3, 95% CI: 1.9-125.6, p = 0.01). Histopathology of the removed specimens showed that in both groups most of the procedures were considered as R0 resections (54% in the main group, 56.4% in the control group, p = 0.8). The polyp size ≤ 4 mm identified as a risk factor for R1, Rx resection (OR: 2.4, 95% CI: 1.3–4.7, p = 0.007).Conclusion: “cold” polypectomy is an effective and safe method and may be recommended as an alternative technique for the removal of non-pedunculated colorectal polyps ≤ 10 mm.

Aim: to identify risk factors for neoplasms recurrence removed by endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR).Patients and methods: the single-center retrospective observational study included 207 patients with 260 benign colon neoplasms. There were 95 (45.9%) males and 112 (54.1%) females. The median age of the patients was 67 (27-80) years. The results obtained were assessed using following criteria: morbidity rate, complication type, hospital stay, tumor site, number of neoplasms in colon, lateral growth, fragmentation rate, technical difficulties (mucosal fold convergence)during surgery, grade of dysplasia, recurrence rate.Results: intraoperative fragmentation of the neoplasms during mucosectomy occurred in 48/260 (18.5%) cases. Postoperative complications within the period of up to 30 days occurred in 13/207 (6.3%) patients. The most frequent 9 (4.2%) postoperative complication arising after mucosectomy was post-polypectomy syndrome. Another 4 (2.0%) patients produced bleeding after the surgery, which required repeated endoscopic procedure. No mortality occurred. The tumor size exceeding 25 mm (Exp (B) = 0.179; 95% CI = 0.05-0.7; p = 0.014), severe dysplasia (Exp (B) = 0.113; 95% CI = 0.03-0.4; p = 0.001) and fold convergence (Exp (B) = 0.2; 95% CI = 0.07-0.7; p = 0.015) are independent risk factors for disease recurrence.Conclusion: mucosectomy is indicated for colon adenomas if its size does not exceed 25 mm and can be removed en bloc.

Aim: to compare the early and long-term results of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and conventional polypectomy for benign epithelial colon neoplasmsPatients and methods: the retrospective study included 344 patients with histologically verified adenomas of the size of up to 40 mm in the colon, who underwent EMR or conventional polypectomy. Mucosectomy (EMR) was performed in 207 patients, while conventional polypectomy was performed in 137.Results: there were no significant differences in the postoperative morbidity rates between the methods (OR = 1.8; 95% CI = 0.7–4.8, p = 0.3). Fragmentation significantly more often occurred in the group of conventional polypectomy (OR = 3.5; 95% CI = 2.3–5.5, p = 0.001, especially when the size of the neoplasm was over 1 cm (OR = 3.1; 95% CI = 1.1–8.9 = 0.037). Recurrence occurred in 19/173 (10.9%) in 12 (8.3%) patients of the EMR group. In the polypectomy group, recurrence developed in 22 (23.1%) patients, in 24/108 (22.2%) cases at the site of the postoperative scar. It was found that the adenoma recurrence in the area of endoscopic excision occurs significantly more often after conventional polypectomy (OR = 2.3; 95% CI = 1.2–4.4; p = 0.016).Conclusion: EMR and conventional polypectomy both are the safe methods with low morbidity rates. However, the EMR is the preferred method of endoscopic excision for adenomas larger than 1 cm due to the fact that it allows for deeper and more complete resection of the tissue than conventional polypectomy.

Aim: to analyze the diagnostic value of the digital rectal examination, colonoscopy, MRI and ERUS for detecting occult adenocarcinoma in rectal adenomas.Patients and methods: the study included 100 patients with newly identified epithelial rectal neoplasms, which undergone transanal endoscopic microsurgery from December 2019 to December 2020. All the patients underwent digital rectal examination, colonoscopy, ERUS with sonoelastography, and pelvic MRI. The diagnostics value of this methods was estimated with determination of sensitivity and specificity.Results: the study included 67 (67%) females and 33 (33%) males. The mean age of the patients was 64.4 ± 10.7 years. The median distance from the tumor to the anal verge was 6.0 ± 2.9 cm. The sensitivity of the digital rectal examination in the occult malignancy verification was 0.44 (95% CI 0.24–0.65), specificity — 0.93 (95% CI 0.85–0.97). The sensitivity of the colonoscopy — 0.56 (95% CI 0.34–0.75), the specificity — 0.84 (95% CI 0.73–0.91). The sensitivity of MRI — 0.40 (95% CI 0.21–0.61), specificity — 0.89 (95% CI 0.80–0.95). The sensitivity of ERUS was 0.48 (95% CI 0.27–0.68), the specificity — 0.73 (95% CI 0.61–0.82). Pair wise comparison of diagnostic methods revealed the absence of significant differences in their diagnostic value (p > 0.05).Conclusion: at least one of diagnostic methods allows to verify the presence of malignant transformation in 100% of cases. So, only combination of diagnostic methods can help to choose the optimal treatment option.

The COVID-19 pandemic, with it is rapid increase in new cases and deaths, has caused hospital overload around the world, creating an unprecedented challenge for health systems and requiring the rapid development of reliable and evidence-based guidelines. Moreover, this has led to urgent identification of non-COVID health priorities. The cancer service must be restructured. Diagnosis and treatment for colorectal cancer in the background of the COVID-19 pandemic requires a restrained approach based on the priority of patient care.