筛查发现的结直肠息肉癌的评估和管理的显著差异。

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Sally Hallam, Alexia Farrugia, David N Naumann, Nigel Trudgill, Shantanu Rout, Sharad Karandikar
{"title":"筛查发现的结直肠息肉癌的评估和管理的显著差异。","authors":"Sally Hallam, Alexia Farrugia, David N Naumann, Nigel Trudgill, Shantanu Rout, Sharad Karandikar","doi":"10.1007/s00384-024-04780-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Endoscopic resection is appropriate for selected colorectal polyp cancers, but significant variation exists in treatment. This study aims to investigate variation in management of screen-detected polyp cancers (T1), factors predicting primary endoscopic polypectomy and threshold for subsequent surgical resection.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Patients with polyp cancers (T1) diagnosed by the bowel cancer screening programme (BCSP) were investigated at two screening centres (5 individual sites and 4 MDTs, 2012-2022). Patient demographics, pathological characteristics, management and outcomes were recorded. Variation in management was compared between sites. Risk factors for primary endoscopic polypectomy and the need for subsequent surgical resection were analysed using multivariable binary logistic regression models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 220 polyp cancers, 178 (81%) underwent primary endoscopic resection. Secondary surgical excision was required in 54 (30%). Study sites were not significantly different in their primary management for colonic or rectal polyps. Only the size of colonic polyps was associated with primary surgery rather than endoscopic polypectomy (OR 1.05 (95% CI 1.00-1.11); p = 0.038). There was a difference between study sites in the odds ratio for secondary surgery after primary polypectomy for colonic polyps (OR 3.97 (95% CI 1.20-16.0); p = 0.033) but not rectal. Other factors associated with the requirement for secondary surgery were as follows: sessile morphology for colonic polyps (OR 2.92 (95% CI 1.25-6.97); p = 0.013) and en-bloc resection for rectal polyps (OR 0.14 (0.02-0.85); p = 0.043).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There was significant variation in the assessment and treatment of colonic polyp cancers. Standardising pathology reporting and treatment algorithms may lead to better consistency of care and a reduction in secondary surgery.</p>","PeriodicalId":13789,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Colorectal Disease","volume":"39 1","pages":"209"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11663814/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Significant variation in the assessment and management of screen-detected colorectal polyp cancers.\",\"authors\":\"Sally Hallam, Alexia Farrugia, David N Naumann, Nigel Trudgill, Shantanu Rout, Sharad Karandikar\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00384-024-04780-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Endoscopic resection is appropriate for selected colorectal polyp cancers, but significant variation exists in treatment. This study aims to investigate variation in management of screen-detected polyp cancers (T1), factors predicting primary endoscopic polypectomy and threshold for subsequent surgical resection.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Patients with polyp cancers (T1) diagnosed by the bowel cancer screening programme (BCSP) were investigated at two screening centres (5 individual sites and 4 MDTs, 2012-2022). Patient demographics, pathological characteristics, management and outcomes were recorded. Variation in management was compared between sites. Risk factors for primary endoscopic polypectomy and the need for subsequent surgical resection were analysed using multivariable binary logistic regression models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 220 polyp cancers, 178 (81%) underwent primary endoscopic resection. Secondary surgical excision was required in 54 (30%). Study sites were not significantly different in their primary management for colonic or rectal polyps. Only the size of colonic polyps was associated with primary surgery rather than endoscopic polypectomy (OR 1.05 (95% CI 1.00-1.11); p = 0.038). There was a difference between study sites in the odds ratio for secondary surgery after primary polypectomy for colonic polyps (OR 3.97 (95% CI 1.20-16.0); p = 0.033) but not rectal. Other factors associated with the requirement for secondary surgery were as follows: sessile morphology for colonic polyps (OR 2.92 (95% CI 1.25-6.97); p = 0.013) and en-bloc resection for rectal polyps (OR 0.14 (0.02-0.85); p = 0.043).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There was significant variation in the assessment and treatment of colonic polyp cancers. Standardising pathology reporting and treatment algorithms may lead to better consistency of care and a reduction in secondary surgery.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13789,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Colorectal Disease\",\"volume\":\"39 1\",\"pages\":\"209\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11663814/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Colorectal Disease\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-024-04780-y\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Colorectal Disease","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-024-04780-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:内镜下切除对部分结直肠息肉癌是适宜的,但治疗方法存在较大差异。本研究旨在探讨筛查发现的息肉癌(T1)的治疗差异、预测原发性内镜下息肉切除术的因素和随后手术切除的阈值。方法:在两个筛查中心(2012-2022年,5个单独地点和4个MDTs)对经肠癌筛查计划(BCSP)诊断的息肉癌(T1)患者进行调查。记录患者人口统计学、病理特征、管理和结果。比较了不同地点在管理上的差异。采用多变量二元logistic回归模型分析原发性内镜息肉切除术的危险因素和后续手术切除的必要性。结果:在220例息肉癌中,178例(81%)行初次内镜切除。54例(30%)需要二次手术切除。研究地点在结肠或直肠息肉的主要治疗方法上没有显著差异。只有结肠息肉的大小与初次手术有关,而与内镜息肉切除术无关(OR 1.05 (95% CI 1.00-1.11);p = 0.038)。研究地点间结肠息肉原发切除术后二次手术的优势比存在差异(OR 3.97 (95% CI 1.20-16.0);P = 0.033),但直肠没有。与需要二次手术相关的其他因素如下:结肠息肉的无根形态(OR 2.92 (95% CI 1.25-6.97);p = 0.013)和直肠息肉整体切除(OR 0.14 (0.02-0.85);p = 0.043)。结论:结肠息肉癌的评估和治疗存在显著差异。标准化病理报告和治疗算法可能导致更好的一致性护理和减少二次手术。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Significant variation in the assessment and management of screen-detected colorectal polyp cancers.

Purpose: Endoscopic resection is appropriate for selected colorectal polyp cancers, but significant variation exists in treatment. This study aims to investigate variation in management of screen-detected polyp cancers (T1), factors predicting primary endoscopic polypectomy and threshold for subsequent surgical resection.

Method: Patients with polyp cancers (T1) diagnosed by the bowel cancer screening programme (BCSP) were investigated at two screening centres (5 individual sites and 4 MDTs, 2012-2022). Patient demographics, pathological characteristics, management and outcomes were recorded. Variation in management was compared between sites. Risk factors for primary endoscopic polypectomy and the need for subsequent surgical resection were analysed using multivariable binary logistic regression models.

Results: Of 220 polyp cancers, 178 (81%) underwent primary endoscopic resection. Secondary surgical excision was required in 54 (30%). Study sites were not significantly different in their primary management for colonic or rectal polyps. Only the size of colonic polyps was associated with primary surgery rather than endoscopic polypectomy (OR 1.05 (95% CI 1.00-1.11); p = 0.038). There was a difference between study sites in the odds ratio for secondary surgery after primary polypectomy for colonic polyps (OR 3.97 (95% CI 1.20-16.0); p = 0.033) but not rectal. Other factors associated with the requirement for secondary surgery were as follows: sessile morphology for colonic polyps (OR 2.92 (95% CI 1.25-6.97); p = 0.013) and en-bloc resection for rectal polyps (OR 0.14 (0.02-0.85); p = 0.043).

Conclusion: There was significant variation in the assessment and treatment of colonic polyp cancers. Standardising pathology reporting and treatment algorithms may lead to better consistency of care and a reduction in secondary surgery.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
3.60%
发文量
206
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Colorectal Disease, Clinical and Molecular Gastroenterology and Surgery aims to publish novel and state-of-the-art papers which deal with the physiology and pathophysiology of diseases involving the entire gastrointestinal tract. In addition to original research articles, the following categories will be included: reviews (usually commissioned but may also be submitted), case reports, letters to the editor, and protocols on clinical studies. The journal offers its readers an interdisciplinary forum for clinical science and molecular research related to gastrointestinal disease.
×
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