261
Views
1
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Article

Endoscopic resection is feasible for high-grade dysplasia in patients with ulcerative colitis

ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon & ORCID Icon show all
Pages 101-106 | Received 07 Apr 2022, Accepted 26 Jul 2022, Published online: 06 Oct 2022
 

Abstract

Background

Endoscopic resection (ER) is feasible for treating well-circumscribed dysplasia in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). However, long-term prognosis of ER for high-grade dysplasia (HGD) in patients with UC remains unclear. We aimed to evaluate the long-term prognoses of ER for HGD compared with low-grade dysplasia (LGD) and verify the feasibility of ER and follow-up with surveillance colonoscopy for HGD.

Methods

An observational, single-center retrospective study included 38 and 22 patients with LGD and HGD who were followed-up with surveillance colonoscopy after ER. We evaluated the cumulative incidence rate of metachronous HGD or colorectal cancer (CRC) and identified the characteristics of metachronous dysplasia.

Results

The median follow-up period was 56 months, and surveillance colonoscopies were performed 3.6 times (mean). The 5-year cumulative incidence rate of HGD/CRC was relatively high in HGD (24.6%) than in LGD (13.7%), but the difference was not significant (p = .16). In HGD cases, six metachronous dysplasia lesions (two LGD and four HGD) were detected 11.6–40.5 months after ER. However, these patients did not progress to CRC. All metachronous lesions were well-circumscribed and with no invisible dysplasia surrounding them; they were ‘endoscopically resectable’ lesions. Two of the four metachronous HGD lesions were treated endoscopically and two, by colectomy. No synchronous HGD or CRC was detected in the colectomy specimens.

Conclusions

Our results suggest that ER and follow-up with surveillance colonoscopy is feasible in patients with HGD when histological complete resection is achieved.

Author contributions

M.N., K.H., and S.M. contributed to conception and design, analysis and interpretation of the data, drafting of the article, critical revision of the article for important intellectual content, and final approval of the article; R.K. contributed to conception and design, critical revision of the article for important intellectual content, and final approval of the article; S.C. and Y.I. contributed to histological diagnosis, critical revision of the article for important intellectual content, and final approval of the article. Y.O., A.S., R.I., T.F., R.K., and C.S. contributed to analysis and interpretation of the data, critical revision of the article for important intellectual content, and final approval of the article. The corresponding author had full access to all the study data and had the final responsibility of deciding to submit the article for publication.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.