Endoscopy 2018; 50(04): S123
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1637395
ESGE Days 2018 ePoster Podium presentations
21.04.2018 – Colorectal polyps: resection 1
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

PREDICTIVE FACTORS OF HIDDEN DEEP INFILTRATIVE CARCINOMA IN COLONIC LESIONS DERIVED FOR ENDOSCOPIC MUCOSAL RESECTION

M Sánchez Alonso
1   Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, Hospital General Universitario Ciudad Real, Ciudad Real, Spain
,
M Úbeda Muñoz
1   Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, Hospital General Universitario Ciudad Real, Ciudad Real, Spain
,
P Olivencia Palomar
1   Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, Hospital General Universitario Ciudad Real, Ciudad Real, Spain
,
E de la Santa Belda
1   Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, Hospital General Universitario Ciudad Real, Ciudad Real, Spain
,
J Olmedo Camacho
1   Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, Hospital General Universitario Ciudad Real, Ciudad Real, Spain
,
J Rodríguez Sánchez
1   Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, Hospital General Universitario Ciudad Real, Ciudad Real, Spain
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
27 March 2018 (online)

 
 

    Aims:

    Tiny areas of deep infiltrating carcinoma in colorectal lesions can go unnoticed even on detailed examination with chromoendoscopy. Therefore, suspicion of this drawback should be taken into account in decision making. So, it is compulsory needed to determine predictive factors related to deep hidden infiltrating carcinoma (DHIC).

    Methods:

    Retrospective analysis with a prospective data source of endoscopic mucosal resection database. Univariate and multivariate analysis of the factors associated to DHIC were carried out.

    Results:

    We assessed 174 lesions (31.72 mm [20 – 120]), 58% located in the proximal colon. In 10/174 (5.74%) DHIC was detected and the patients had to be referred to surgery. In the risk analysis, it was found that: size (>/< 40 mm), location (rectum-sigmoid colon), morphology (0-Is/mixed patterns) and Kudo's Pattern V behaved as independent factors in a univariate analysis (p < 0.01). However, in a multivariate analysis only size > 40 mm [OR 11.40 (p = 0.007)], shape 0-Is [OR = 8.94 (P = 0.02)] and rectosigmoid location [OR 13.50 (P = 0.03)] were noticed as independent risk factors.

    Conclusions:

    The detection of some or all of these factors might be an effective tool for the prediction of DHIC and therefore serve as support to tailor the therapeutic decision.


    #