Long-term outcomes after endoscopic removal of malignant colorectal polyps: Results from a 10-year cohort

Abstract

BACKGROUND Choosing an optimal post-polypectomy management strategy of malignant colorectal polyps is challenging, and evidence regarding a surveillance-only strategy is limited. AIM To evaluate long-term outcomes after endoscopic removal of malignant colorectal polyps. METHODS A single-center retrospective cohort study was conducted to evaluate outcomes after endoscopic removal of malignant colorectal polyps between 2010 and 2020. Residual disease rate and nodal metastases after secondary surgery and local and distant recurrence rate for those with at least 1 year of follow-up were investigated. Event rates for categorical variables and means for continuous variables with 95% confidence intervals were calculated, and Fisher’s exact test and Mann-Whitney test were performed. Potential risk factors of adverse outcomes were determined with univariate and multivariate logistic regression models. RESULTS In total, 135 lesions (mean size: 22.1 mm; location: 42% rectal) from 129 patients (mean age: 67.7 years; 56% male) were enrolled. The proportion of pedunculated and non-pedunculated lesions was similar, with en bloc resection in 82% and 47% of lesions, respectively. Tumor differentiation, distance from resection margins, depth of submucosal invasion, lymphovascular invasion, and budding were reported at 89.6%, 45.2%, 58.5%, 31.9%, and 25.2%, respectively. Residual tumor was found in 10 patients, and nodal metastasis was found in 4 of 41 patients who underwent secondary surgical resection. Univariate analysis identified piecemeal resection as a risk factor for residual malignancy (odds ratio: 1.74; P = 0.042). At least 1 year of follow-up was available for 117 lesions from 111 patients (mean follow-up period: 5.59 years). Overall, 54%, 30%, 30%, 11%, and 16% of patients presented at the 1-year, 3-year, 5-year, 7-year, and 9-10-year surveillance examinations. Adverse outcomes occurred in 9.0% (local recurrence and dissemination in 4 patients and 9 patients, respectively), with no difference between patients undergoing secondary surgery and surveillance only. CONCLUSION Reporting of histological features and adherence to surveillance colonoscopy needs improvement. Long-term adverse outcome rates might be higher than previously reported, irrespective of whether secondary surgery was performed.