TY - JOUR
T1 - Margin marking before colorectal endoscopic mucosal resection and its impact on neoplasia recurrence (with video)
AU - Yang, Dennis
AU - Draganov, Peter V.
AU - King, William
AU - Liu, Nanlong
AU - Sarheed, Ahmed
AU - Bhat, Adnan
AU - Jiang, Peter
AU - Ladna, Michael
AU - Ruiz, Nicole C.
AU - Wilson, Jake
AU - Gorrepati, Venkata S.
AU - Pohl, Heiko
N1 - Funding Information:
DISCLOSURE: The following authors disclosed financial relationships: D. Yang: Consultant for Boston Scientific, Olympus, Lumendi, and Steris. P. V. Draganov: Consultant for Olympus, Boston Scientific, Cook Medical, Merit, Microtech, Steris, Lumendi, and Fujifilm. H. Pohl: Research grants from Steris and Cosmo/Aries Pharmaceuticals. All other authors disclosed no financial relationships.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
PY - 2022/5
Y1 - 2022/5
N2 - Background and Aims: Ablation of resection margins after EMR of large nonpedunculated colorectal polyps decreases recurrence. Margin marking before EMR (EMR-MM) may represent an alternative method to achieve a healthy resection margin. We aimed to determine the efficacy of EMR-MM in reducing neoplasia recurrence. Methods: We conducted a single-center historical control study of EMR cases (EMR-MM vs conventional EMR) for nonpedunculated polyps ≥20 mm between 2016 and 2021. For EMR-MM, cautery marks were placed along the lateral margins of the polyp with the snare tip. EMR was then performed to include resection of the healthy mucosa containing the marks. We compared recurrence at surveillance colonoscopy after EMR-MM versus historical control subjects. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with recurrence. Results: Two hundred ten patients with 210 polyps (median size, 30 mm; interquartile range: 25-40) underwent EMR-MM (n = 74) or conventional EMR (n = 136). Patient and lesion characteristics were similar between the groups. At a median follow-up of 6 months, the recurrence rate was lower with EMR-MM (6/74; 8%) compared with historical control subjects (39/136; 29%) (P < .001). EMR-MM was not associated with an increased rate of adverse events. On multivariable analysis, EMR-MM remained the strongest predictor of recurrence (odds ratio, .20; 95% confidence interval, .13-.64; P = .003) aside from polyp size (odds ratio, 2.81; 95% confidence interval, 1.35-6.01; P = .008). Conclusions: In this single-center historical control study, EMR-MM of large nonpedunculated colorectal polyps reduced the recurrence risk by 80% when compared with conventional EMR. This simple technique may provide an alternative to margin ablation.
AB - Background and Aims: Ablation of resection margins after EMR of large nonpedunculated colorectal polyps decreases recurrence. Margin marking before EMR (EMR-MM) may represent an alternative method to achieve a healthy resection margin. We aimed to determine the efficacy of EMR-MM in reducing neoplasia recurrence. Methods: We conducted a single-center historical control study of EMR cases (EMR-MM vs conventional EMR) for nonpedunculated polyps ≥20 mm between 2016 and 2021. For EMR-MM, cautery marks were placed along the lateral margins of the polyp with the snare tip. EMR was then performed to include resection of the healthy mucosa containing the marks. We compared recurrence at surveillance colonoscopy after EMR-MM versus historical control subjects. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with recurrence. Results: Two hundred ten patients with 210 polyps (median size, 30 mm; interquartile range: 25-40) underwent EMR-MM (n = 74) or conventional EMR (n = 136). Patient and lesion characteristics were similar between the groups. At a median follow-up of 6 months, the recurrence rate was lower with EMR-MM (6/74; 8%) compared with historical control subjects (39/136; 29%) (P < .001). EMR-MM was not associated with an increased rate of adverse events. On multivariable analysis, EMR-MM remained the strongest predictor of recurrence (odds ratio, .20; 95% confidence interval, .13-.64; P = .003) aside from polyp size (odds ratio, 2.81; 95% confidence interval, 1.35-6.01; P = .008). Conclusions: In this single-center historical control study, EMR-MM of large nonpedunculated colorectal polyps reduced the recurrence risk by 80% when compared with conventional EMR. This simple technique may provide an alternative to margin ablation.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85123869430&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85123869430&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.gie.2021.11.023
DO - 10.1016/j.gie.2021.11.023
M3 - Article
C2 - 34861250
AN - SCOPUS:85123869430
SN - 0016-5107
VL - 95
SP - 956
EP - 965
JO - Gastrointestinal endoscopy
JF - Gastrointestinal endoscopy
IS - 5
ER -