Lonne W T Meulen, Roel M M Bogie, Peter D Siersema, Bjorn Winkens, Marije S Vlug, Frank H J Wolfhagen, Martine A M C Baven-Pronk, Michael P J A van der Voorn, Matthijs P Schwartz, Lauran Vogelaar, Tom C J Seerden, Wouter L Hazen, Ruud W M Schrauwen, Lorenza Alvarez Herrero, Ramon-Michel Schreuder, Annick B van Nunen, Gijs J de Bruin, Willem A Marsman, Marc de Bièvre, Robert Roomer, Rogier J J de Ridder, Maria Pellisé, Michael J Bourke, Ad A M Masclee, Leon M G Moons
{"title":"在一家多中心社区医院对大肠息肉内镜粘膜切除术后的疤痕进行光学评估:常规活检是否仍有必要?","authors":"Lonne W T Meulen, Roel M M Bogie, Peter D Siersema, Bjorn Winkens, Marije S Vlug, Frank H J Wolfhagen, Martine A M C Baven-Pronk, Michael P J A van der Voorn, Matthijs P Schwartz, Lauran Vogelaar, Tom C J Seerden, Wouter L Hazen, Ruud W M Schrauwen, Lorenza Alvarez Herrero, Ramon-Michel Schreuder, Annick B van Nunen, Gijs J de Bruin, Willem A Marsman, Marc de Bièvre, Robert Roomer, Rogier J J de Ridder, Maria Pellisé, Michael J Bourke, Ad A M Masclee, Leon M G Moons","doi":"10.1055/a-2498-7114","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong> Piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of large (≥ 20 mm) nonpedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs) is succeeded by a 6-month surveillance endoscopy to evaluate the post-EMR scar for recurrence. Data from expert centers suggest that routine tattoo placement and scar biopsies can be omitted, but data from community hospitals are lacking.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong> The agreement between optical assessment and histological confirmation by routine biopsies was evaluated in a post-hoc analysis of the STAR-LNPCP study (NTR7477), containing prospective data on 6-month post-EMR scar assessments in 30 Dutch community hospitals (October 2019 to May 2022). A standardized protocol was followed for documentation of optical characteristics, imaging, and biopsy of the post-EMR scar. RESULTS : In 1277 post-EMR scar assessments, identification of the scar was achieved in 1215/1277 (95 %). Tattoo placement did not influence scar identification. Scar biopsy was performed in 1050/1215 cases (86 %). Recurrences were seen in 200/1050 cases (19 %). There was good agreement between optical assessment of recurrence and histological confirmation (Cohen's kappa 0.78 [95 %CI 0.73-0.83]). The negative and positive predictive values were 98 % (95 %CI 97 %-99 %) and 74 % (95 %CI 68 %-80 %), respectively. A higher false-positive rate was seen after prior use of clips (11 % vs. 5 %; <i>P</i> = 0.02). Dedicated endoscopists identified the scar more often (96 % vs. 88 %; <i>P</i> < 0.001), and showed a lower optical recurrence miss rate (1 % vs. 3 %; <i>P</i> = 0.11) compared with nondedicated endoscopists. CONCLUSION : Based on this multicenter community hospital study, routine tattoo placement and scar biopsies of the post-EMR scar can be omitted. Assessment of post-EMR scars by dedicated endoscopists is advised.</p>","PeriodicalId":11516,"journal":{"name":"Endoscopy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":11.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Optical assessment of scars after endoscopic mucosal resection of large colorectal polyps in a multicenter, community hospital setting: is routine biopsy still necessary?\",\"authors\":\"Lonne W T Meulen, Roel M M Bogie, Peter D Siersema, Bjorn Winkens, Marije S Vlug, Frank H J Wolfhagen, Martine A M C Baven-Pronk, Michael P J A van der Voorn, Matthijs P Schwartz, Lauran Vogelaar, Tom C J Seerden, Wouter L Hazen, Ruud W M Schrauwen, Lorenza Alvarez Herrero, Ramon-Michel Schreuder, Annick B van Nunen, Gijs J de Bruin, Willem A Marsman, Marc de Bièvre, Robert Roomer, Rogier J J de Ridder, Maria Pellisé, Michael J Bourke, Ad A M Masclee, Leon M G Moons\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-2498-7114\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong> Piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of large (≥ 20 mm) nonpedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs) is succeeded by a 6-month surveillance endoscopy to evaluate the post-EMR scar for recurrence. Data from expert centers suggest that routine tattoo placement and scar biopsies can be omitted, but data from community hospitals are lacking.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong> The agreement between optical assessment and histological confirmation by routine biopsies was evaluated in a post-hoc analysis of the STAR-LNPCP study (NTR7477), containing prospective data on 6-month post-EMR scar assessments in 30 Dutch community hospitals (October 2019 to May 2022). A standardized protocol was followed for documentation of optical characteristics, imaging, and biopsy of the post-EMR scar. RESULTS : In 1277 post-EMR scar assessments, identification of the scar was achieved in 1215/1277 (95 %). Tattoo placement did not influence scar identification. Scar biopsy was performed in 1050/1215 cases (86 %). Recurrences were seen in 200/1050 cases (19 %). There was good agreement between optical assessment of recurrence and histological confirmation (Cohen's kappa 0.78 [95 %CI 0.73-0.83]). The negative and positive predictive values were 98 % (95 %CI 97 %-99 %) and 74 % (95 %CI 68 %-80 %), respectively. A higher false-positive rate was seen after prior use of clips (11 % vs. 5 %; <i>P</i> = 0.02). Dedicated endoscopists identified the scar more often (96 % vs. 88 %; <i>P</i> < 0.001), and showed a lower optical recurrence miss rate (1 % vs. 3 %; <i>P</i> = 0.11) compared with nondedicated endoscopists. CONCLUSION : Based on this multicenter community hospital study, routine tattoo placement and scar biopsies of the post-EMR scar can be omitted. Assessment of post-EMR scars by dedicated endoscopists is advised.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11516,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Endoscopy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":11.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Endoscopy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2498-7114\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Endoscopy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2498-7114","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景和研究目的:对大(≥20mm)无带蒂结直肠息肉(lnpcp)进行分段EMR检查,然后进行6个月的监测内镜检查,以评估EMR后疤痕的复发情况。来自专家中心的数据表明,常规的纹身放置和疤痕活检可以省略,但缺乏来自社区医院的数据。患者和方法:在STAR-LNPCP研究(NTR7477)的事后分析中,包含了30家荷兰社区医院(2019年10月至2022年5月)6个月后pemr疤痕评估的前瞻性数据,评估了光学评估和常规活检组织学确认之间的一致性。根据标准化方案进行emr后疤痕的光学特征、成像和活检的记录。结果:在1277例emr后疤痕评估中,1215/1277例(95%)实现了疤痕的识别。纹身的位置不影响疤痕的识别。1050/1215例(86%)行瘢痕活检。复发率为200/1050例(19%)。光学评估复发和组织学证实之间有很好的一致性(Cohen’s kappa 0.78[0.73-0.83])。NPV为98% [97-99%],PPV为74%[68-80%]。先前使用夹子后出现更高的假阳性率(11%比5%,p=0.017)。专门的内窥镜医生更容易发现疤痕(96% vs. 88%)。结论:基于这项多中心社区医院的研究,可以省去emr后疤痕的常规纹身放置和疤痕活检。建议由专门的内窥镜医师评估emr后疤痕。
Optical assessment of scars after endoscopic mucosal resection of large colorectal polyps in a multicenter, community hospital setting: is routine biopsy still necessary?
Background: Piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of large (≥ 20 mm) nonpedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs) is succeeded by a 6-month surveillance endoscopy to evaluate the post-EMR scar for recurrence. Data from expert centers suggest that routine tattoo placement and scar biopsies can be omitted, but data from community hospitals are lacking.
Methods: The agreement between optical assessment and histological confirmation by routine biopsies was evaluated in a post-hoc analysis of the STAR-LNPCP study (NTR7477), containing prospective data on 6-month post-EMR scar assessments in 30 Dutch community hospitals (October 2019 to May 2022). A standardized protocol was followed for documentation of optical characteristics, imaging, and biopsy of the post-EMR scar. RESULTS : In 1277 post-EMR scar assessments, identification of the scar was achieved in 1215/1277 (95 %). Tattoo placement did not influence scar identification. Scar biopsy was performed in 1050/1215 cases (86 %). Recurrences were seen in 200/1050 cases (19 %). There was good agreement between optical assessment of recurrence and histological confirmation (Cohen's kappa 0.78 [95 %CI 0.73-0.83]). The negative and positive predictive values were 98 % (95 %CI 97 %-99 %) and 74 % (95 %CI 68 %-80 %), respectively. A higher false-positive rate was seen after prior use of clips (11 % vs. 5 %; P = 0.02). Dedicated endoscopists identified the scar more often (96 % vs. 88 %; P < 0.001), and showed a lower optical recurrence miss rate (1 % vs. 3 %; P = 0.11) compared with nondedicated endoscopists. CONCLUSION : Based on this multicenter community hospital study, routine tattoo placement and scar biopsies of the post-EMR scar can be omitted. Assessment of post-EMR scars by dedicated endoscopists is advised.
期刊介绍:
Endoscopy is a leading journal covering the latest technologies and global advancements in gastrointestinal endoscopy. With guidance from an international editorial board, it delivers high-quality content catering to the needs of endoscopists, surgeons, clinicians, and researchers worldwide. Publishing 12 issues each year, Endoscopy offers top-quality review articles, original contributions, prospective studies, surveys of diagnostic and therapeutic advances, and comprehensive coverage of key national and international meetings. Additionally, articles often include supplementary online video content.