Local Recurrence Detection Following Transanal Excision Facilitated by EUS-FNA

Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN, USA.
Hepato-gastroenterology (Impact Factor: 0.93). 01/2012; 59(116):1102-7. DOI: 10.5754/hge11898
Source: PubMed


BACKGROUND/ AIMS: Local excision is an alternative management approach for early rectal cancers and patients unfit for radical surgery. It is associated with a high local recurrence rate. Our aims were to evaluate the rate, pattern, method of local recurrence detection, the opportunity for salvage resection and finally to explore the utility of endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration during surveillance.
A retrospective, non-controlled, cohort study from a single tertiary referral center comprised of patients undergoing surveillance following a transanal excision.
Post-operative surveillance was performed in 155 transanal excision patients of which 46 (30%) underwent =1 endoscopic ultrasound examinations. Intra and extra luminal recurrence (n=16/24; (67%)) was detected more frequently in the endoscopic ultrasound surveillance population, p=0.0008. Mucosal scar biopsy (n=10/16;63%) and endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration (6/16; 38%) of either a lymph node or the deep rectal wall were the methods for establishing local recurrence. An unremarkable proctoscopy with endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration positive cytological findings was noted in 4 (9%) of the patients.
Local recurrence following transanal excision is often in an intraluminal location. Endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration confirmed nodal metastases in mesenteric and extra mesenteric locations more frequently than subepithelial locations.

1 Read
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The utility of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) compared with standard white light endoscopy (WLE) following recent polypectomy of high-risk colorectal polyps is unknown. To assess the incremental yield of EUS after endoscopic polypectomy of a high-risk rectal lesion. Retrospective cohort. Tertiary referral center. Patients referred for EUS following attempted endoscopic resection of a high-risk rectal neoplasm, defined as a tubulovillous adenoma, tubular adenoma with high-grade dysplasia, carcinoid, carcinoma in-situ or adenocarcinoma (CA). Sigmoidoscopy ± mucosal biopsy and EUS ± fine-needle aspiration (FNA) to evaluate for: (1) Residual polyp/tumor in the rectal wall or (2) peritumoral adenopathy. Sensitivity and specificity for detection of residual neoplasia for WLE ± biopsy (WLE/BX) and EUS ± FNA for cancer (CA group) or benign disease (non-CA group). The incremental yield of EUS defined as: (1) Residual intramural neoplasia not present on WLE ± BX and; (2) abnormal peritumoral adenopathy. A total of 70 patients (mean age 64 ± 11 years, 61% male) with a final diagnosis of CA (n = 38) and non-CA (n = 32) were identified. There was no difference between the sensitivity and specificity of WLE alone (65% and 84%), WLE with biopsy (71% and 95%), and EUS (59% and 84%), for the detection of residual neoplasia (P > 0.05 for all). EUS identified 3 masses missed by WLE, all in the CA group. A malignant (n = 2) or benign (n = 3) node was identified in 5 (13%) CA patients; EUS-FNA in two showed residual malignancy in one and a reactive lymph node (LN) in one. No LNs were identified in the non-CA patients. Retrospective design, incomplete follow-up in some patients. Following endoscopic polypectomy of high-risk rectal neoplasia, the incremental yield of EUS compared with WLE/BX for evaluation of residual disease appears limited, especially in patients with benign disease.
    Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 05/2014; 79(5):AB406. DOI:10.1016/j.gie.2014.02.534 · 5.37 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Preoperative diagnosis of pelvic lesions remains challenging despite advances in imaging technologies. Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS)-guided biopsy is an effective diagnostic modality for sampling the digestive tract and surrounding areas. However, a meta-analysis summarizing the diagnostic efficacy of EUS-guided biopsy for pelvic lesions has not been published. We aimed to evaluate the utility of EUS-guided biopsy in the diagnosis of pelvic lesions. Articles were identified via structured database search; only studies where pelvic lesions were confirmed by surgery or clinical follow-up were included. Data extracted were selected with strict criteria. A fixed-effects model was used to estimate the sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR). A summary receiver operating characteristic curve (SROC) was also constructed. Ten studies containing a total of 246 patients were included. The pooled sensitivity of EUS-guided biopsy for differential diagnosis of pelvic masses was 0.89 (95 % CI 0.83-0.94), and the specificity was 0.93 (95 % CI 0.86-0.97). The area under the SROC was 0.9631. The combined PLR, NLR, and DOR were 11.75 (95 % CI 5.90-23.43), 0.12 (95 % CI 0.07-0.20), and 100.06 (95 % CI 37.48-267.10) respectively. There is potential presence of publication bias in this meta-analysis. Our meta-analysis shows that EUS-guided biopsy is a powerful tool for differentiating pelvic masses with a high sensitivity and specificity. Furthermore, it is a safe procedure with low rate of complication, although more high-quality prospective studies are required to be done.
    Digestive Diseases and Sciences 09/2015; 60(12). DOI:10.1007/s10620-015-3831-5 · 2.61 Impact Factor