Prognostic Roles and Survival Benefits of Endoscopic Resection Versus Surgical Resection in the Management of Malignant Colon Polyps

Q4 Medicine
A. Ibrahim, L. Gertallah, M. Abdelaziz, Rehab Hemeda, A. Gomaa, Mahmoud Ghoneme, Mahmoud Sherbeiny, A. Sharaf, O. Harb, M. Amin
{"title":"Prognostic Roles and Survival Benefits of Endoscopic Resection Versus Surgical Resection in the Management of Malignant Colon Polyps","authors":"A. Ibrahim, L. Gertallah, M. Abdelaziz, Rehab Hemeda, A. Gomaa, Mahmoud Ghoneme, Mahmoud Sherbeiny, A. Sharaf, O. Harb, M. Amin","doi":"10.1055/s-0043-1769922","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Background  Due to few sufficient data regarding the comparison between endoscopic and surgical resection of malignant colorectal polyps regarding outcomes and survival benefits, there are no clear guidelines of management strategies of malignant colorectal polyps. The aims of the present study were to compare endoscopic resection alone and surgical resection in patients with malignant polyps in the colon (T1N0M0) readings advantages, disadvantages, recurrence risks, survival benefits, and long-term prognosis to detect how management strategy affects outcome. Patients and methods  we included 350 patients. All included patients were divided into 2 groups; the first group included 100 patients who underwent only endoscopic polypectomy and the second group included 250 patients who underwent endoscopic polypectomy followed by definitive surgical resection after histopathological diagnosis. We followed all patients for about 5 years, ranging from 18 to 55 months. The primarily evaluated parameters are surgical consequences and patients' morbidity. The secondary evaluated parameters are recurrence risks, recurrence free survival, and overall survival rates. Results  The age of patients who underwent polypectomy is usually younger than the surgical group, males have more liability to polypectomy in comparison with females. Patients with tumors in the left colon have more liability to polypectomy in comparison with the right colon ( p  < 0.0001). Tumor factors associated with more liability to surgical resection are presence of lymphovascular invasion, high grade, and poor tumor differentiation ( p  < 0.0001). The management strategy was the most significant predictor of overall and recurrence free survival rates in patients with malignant colon polyps ( p  < 0.001). Conclusions  We found that survival benefits and lower incidence of recurrence are detected in the surgical resection group more than in the polypectomy group.","PeriodicalId":15408,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Coloproctology","volume":"43 1","pages":"126 - 132"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Coloproctology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-1769922","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Background  Due to few sufficient data regarding the comparison between endoscopic and surgical resection of malignant colorectal polyps regarding outcomes and survival benefits, there are no clear guidelines of management strategies of malignant colorectal polyps. The aims of the present study were to compare endoscopic resection alone and surgical resection in patients with malignant polyps in the colon (T1N0M0) readings advantages, disadvantages, recurrence risks, survival benefits, and long-term prognosis to detect how management strategy affects outcome. Patients and methods  we included 350 patients. All included patients were divided into 2 groups; the first group included 100 patients who underwent only endoscopic polypectomy and the second group included 250 patients who underwent endoscopic polypectomy followed by definitive surgical resection after histopathological diagnosis. We followed all patients for about 5 years, ranging from 18 to 55 months. The primarily evaluated parameters are surgical consequences and patients' morbidity. The secondary evaluated parameters are recurrence risks, recurrence free survival, and overall survival rates. Results  The age of patients who underwent polypectomy is usually younger than the surgical group, males have more liability to polypectomy in comparison with females. Patients with tumors in the left colon have more liability to polypectomy in comparison with the right colon ( p  < 0.0001). Tumor factors associated with more liability to surgical resection are presence of lymphovascular invasion, high grade, and poor tumor differentiation ( p  < 0.0001). The management strategy was the most significant predictor of overall and recurrence free survival rates in patients with malignant colon polyps ( p  < 0.001). Conclusions  We found that survival benefits and lower incidence of recurrence are detected in the surgical resection group more than in the polypectomy group.
内镜切除与手术切除在恶性结肠息肉治疗中的预后作用和生存益处
摘要背景 由于很少有足够的数据来比较内镜下和手术切除恶性结肠息肉的疗效和生存益处,因此没有明确的恶性结肠息肉管理策略指南。本研究的目的是比较结肠恶性息肉(T1N0M0)患者的内镜下单独切除和手术切除读数的优缺点、复发风险、生存益处和长期预后,以了解管理策略如何影响结果。患者和方法 我们纳入了350名患者。所有纳入的患者被分为2组;第一组包括100名仅接受内镜息肉切除术的患者,第二组包括250名在组织病理学诊断后接受内镜息肉摘除术并最终手术切除的患者。我们对所有患者进行了约5年的随访,随访时间从18个月到55个月不等。主要评估的参数是手术后果和患者的发病率。次要评估参数为复发风险、无复发生存率和总生存率。后果 接受息肉切除术的患者年龄通常比手术组年轻,与女性相比,男性更容易接受息肉切除手术。与右半结肠相比,左半结肠肿瘤患者更有可能进行息肉切除术(p < 0.0001)。与手术切除可能性更大相关的肿瘤因素是淋巴血管浸润、高级别和肿瘤分化差(p < 0.0001)。治疗策略是预测恶性结肠息肉患者总生存率和无复发生存率的最显著指标(p < 0.001)。结论 我们发现,与息肉切除组相比,手术切除组的生存率和复发率更低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Coloproctology
Journal of Coloproctology Medicine-Gastroenterology
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
41
审稿时长
47 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信