Endoscopic mucosal resection is effective for laterally spreading lesions at the anorectal junction

Objective The optimal approach for removing large laterally spreading lesions at the anorectal junction (ARJ-LSLs) is unknown. Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is a definitive therapy for colorectal LSLs. It is unclear whether it is an effective modality for ARJ-LSLs. Design EMR outcomes for ARJ-LSLs (distal margin of ≤20 mm from the dentate line) in comparison with rectal LSLs (distal margin of >20 mm from the dentate line) were evaluated within a multicentre observational cohort of LSLs of ≥20 mm. Technical success was defined as the removal of all polypoid tissue during index EMR. Safety was evaluated by the frequencies of intraprocedural bleeding, delayed bleeding, deep mural injury (DMI) and delayed perforation. Long-term efficacy was evaluated by the absence of recurrence (either endoscopic or histologic) at surveillance colonoscopy (SC). Results Between July 2008 and August 2019, 100 ARJ-LSLs and 313 rectal LSLs underwent EMR. ARJ-LSL median size was 40 mm (IQR 35-60 mm). Median follow-up at SC4 was 54 months (IQR 33-83 months). Technical success was 98%. Cancer was present in three (3%). Recurrence occurred in 15.4%, 6.8%, 3.7% and 0% at SC1-SC4, respectively. Among 30 ARJ-LSLs that received margin thermal ablation, no recurrence was identified at SC1 (0.0% vs 25.0%, p=0.002). Technical success, recurrence and adverse events were not different between groups, except for DMI (ARJ-LSLs 0% vs rectal LSLs 4.5%, p=0.027). Conclusion EMR is an effective technique for ARJ-LSLs and should be considered a first-line resection modality for the majority of these lesions

Does en bloc resection improve long-term outcomes after endoscopic mucosal resection?—a matched cohort study

Background and Aims: Residual or recurrent adenoma (RRA) is the major limitation of piecemeal EMR (p-EMR) for large colonic laterally spreading lesions (LSLs) ≥20 mm. En bloc EMR (e-EMR) has been shown to achieve low rates of RRA but specific procedural and long-term outcomes are unknown. Our aim was to compare long-term outcomes of size-matched LSLs stratified by whether they were resected e-EMR or p-EMR. Methods: Data from a prospective tertiary referral multicenter cohort of large LSLs referred for EMR over a 10-year period were analyzed. Outcomes were compared between sized-matched LSLs (20-25 mm) resected by p-EMR or e-EMR. Results: Five hundred seventy LSLs met the inclusion criteria of which 259 (45.4%) were resected by e-EMR. The risk of major deep mural injury (DMI) was significantly higher in the e-EMR group (3.5% vs 1.0%, P = .05), whereas rates of other intraprocedural adverse events did not differ significantly. Five of 9 (56%) LSLs, with endoscopic features of submucosal invasion (SMI), resected by e-EMR were saved from surgery. RRA at first surveillance was lower in the e-EMR group (2.0% vs 5.7%, P = .04), but this difference was negated at subsequent surveillance. Rates of surgical referral were not significantly different between the groups at either surveillance interval. Conclusion: When comparing e-EMR against p-EMR for lesions ≤25 mm in size of similar morphology in a large prospective multicenter cohort, e-EMR offered no additional advantage for predicted-benign LSLs. However, it was associated with an increased risk of major DMI. Thus, en bloc resection techniques should be reserved for lesions suspicious for invasive disease. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT01368289.

Dysglycemia in non-functioning pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (NF-PNET): Further insights into an under recognized entity

Objective: Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNETs) are rare, but their incidence has risen significantly in recent years. Whereas diabetes mellitus (DM) is recognized in association with chronic pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer, it has not been well-characterized concerning non-functioning (NF)-PNETs.Study aim: to determine whether NF-PNETs are associated with DM/ Pre-DM and characterize the features of this putative association. Methods: Retrospective study to evaluate rate of Pre-DM /DM in subjects with NF-PNETs. Results: Study cohort of 129 patients with histologically confirmed NF-PNETs, ∼60% were men (M/F: 77/52). Abnormal glucose metabolism that preceded any treatment was seen in 70% of this cohort: overt DM in 34% and Pre-DM in 36% of the subjects. However, during follow-up, the overall prevalence rose to 80.6%, owing exclusively to newly diagnosed DM in subjects who received treatment.Patients with DM/Pre-DM were older (65 ± 11; 54 ± 14; p < 0.0001), the tumor was more commonly localized in the pancreatic body and tail (76.5% vs. 23.5% p = 0.03), while BMI (27 ± 6 vs. 28 ± 5 kg/m2), and tumor size (2.4 ± 2 vs. 2.9 ± 3.2 cm) were similar. The relative prevalence of DM in our cohort of NF-PNETs was 1.6 higher than that in the age and gender-adjusted general Israeli population (95 %CI: 1.197–2.212p = 0.03). Conclusions: We found a high rate of impaired glucose metabolism, either DM or Pre-DM, in a large cohort of NF-PNETs. The high prevalence of diabetes/pre-diabetes was unrelated to obesity or tumor size. This observation should increase awareness of the presence of DM on presentation or during treatment of “NF”-PNETs

A Lymph Node Ratio Model for Prognosis of Patients with Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors

The objective of this study was to determine the prognostic value of lymph node (LN) involvement and the LN ratio (LNR) and their effect on recurrence rates and survival in patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNETs) undergoing surgery. This single-center retrospective study reviewed the medical records of 95 consecutive patients diagnosed with PNETs who underwent surgery at our medical center between 1997 and 2017. The retrieved information included patient demographics, pathology reports, treatments, and oncological outcomes. Results: 95 consecutive potentially suitable patients were identified. The 78 patients with PNETs who underwent surgery and for whom there was adequate data were included in the analysis. Their mean ± standard deviation age at diagnosis was 57.4 ± 13.4 years (range 20–82), and there were 50 males (64%) and 28 females (36%). 23 patients (30%) had LN metastases (N1). The 2.5- and 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rates for the entire cohort were 79.5% and 71.8%, respectively, and their 2- and 5-year overall survival (OS) rates were 85.9% and 82.1%, respectively. The optimal value of the LNR was 0.1603, which correlated with the outcome (2-year OS p = 0.002 HR = 13.4 and 5-year DFS p = 0.016 HR = 7.2, respectively, and 5-year OS and 5-year DFS p = 0.004 HR = 9 and p = 0.001 HR = 10.6, respectively). However, the multivariate analysis failed to show that the LNR was an independent prognostic factor in PNETs. Patients with PNETs grade and stage are known key prognostic factors influencing OS and DFS. According to our results, LNR failed to be an independent prognostic factor

A Lymph Node Ratio Model for Prognosis of Patients with Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors

The objective of this study was to determine the prognostic value of lymph node (LN) involvement and the LN ratio (LNR) and their effect on recurrence rates and survival in patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNETs) undergoing surgery. This single-center retrospective study reviewed the medical records of 95 consecutive patients diagnosed with PNETs who underwent surgery at our medical center between 1997 and 2017. The retrieved information included patient demographics, pathology reports, treatments, and oncological outcomes. Results: 95 consecutive potentially suitable patients were identified. The 78 patients with PNETs who underwent surgery and for whom there was adequate data were included in the analysis. Their mean &plusmn; standard deviation age at diagnosis was 57.4 &plusmn; 13.4 years (range 20&ndash;82), and there were 50 males (64%) and 28 females (36%). 23 patients (30%) had LN metastases (N1). The 2.5- and 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rates for the entire cohort were 79.5% and 71.8%, respectively, and their 2- and 5-year overall survival (OS) rates were 85.9% and 82.1%, respectively. The optimal value of the LNR was 0.1603, which correlated with the outcome (2-year OS p = 0.002 HR = 13.4 and 5-year DFS p = 0.016 HR = 7.2, respectively, and 5-year OS and 5-year DFS p = 0.004 HR = 9 and p = 0.001 HR = 10.6, respectively). However, the multivariate analysis failed to show that the LNR was an independent prognostic factor in PNETs. Patients with PNETs grade and stage are known key prognostic factors influencing OS and DFS. According to our results, LNR failed to be an independent prognostic factor