Risk of total metachronous advanced neoplasia at surveillance colonoscopy after detection of serrated lesions: a matched case–cohort study

Abstract

Background Serrated lesions are potential colorectal cancer precursors. This study evaluated the presence of total metachronous advanced neoplasia (T-MAN) at follow-up in patients with index serrated lesions compared with a matched cohort without serrated lesions.

Methods Patients aged 45–74 years with serrated lesions were matched 2:1 by sex, age, synchronous polyps, and timing of index colonoscopy, to patients without serrated lesions. The primary outcome was T-MAN (advanced adenoma or high-risk serrated lesion) at follow-up. Secondary outcomes included presence of T-MAN stratified by synchronous polyps and serrated lesion characteristics.

Results 1425 patients were included (475 patients, 642 serrated lesions; 950 controls; median follow-up 2.9 versus 3.6 years). Patients with serrated lesions had greater risk of T-MAN than those without (hazard ratio [HR] 6.1, 95 %CI 3.9–9.6). Patients with serrated lesions and high-risk adenoma (HRA) had higher risk of T-MAN than those with HRA alone (HR 2.6, 95 %CI 1.4–4.7); similarly, patients with serrated lesions plus low-risk adenoma (LRA) had higher risk than those with LRA alone (HR 7.0, 95 %CI 2.8–18.4), as did patients with serrated lesions without adenoma compared with no adenoma (HR 14.9, 95 %CI 6.5–34.0). Presence of proximal sessile serrated lesion (SSL; HR 9.3, 95 %CI 5.4–15.9), large SSL (HR 17.8, 95 %CI 7.4–43.3), and proximal large SSL (HR 25.0, 95 %CI 8.8–71.3), but not distal SSL, were associated with greater risk for T-MAN.

Conclusion Patients with serrated lesions had higher risk for T-MAN regardless of synchronous adenomas. Patients with serrated lesions and HRA, and those with large or proximal SSLs, were at greatest risk.

Publication History

Received: 25 April 2022

Accepted after revision: 26 January 2023

Accepted Manuscript online:
26 January 2023

Article published online:
09 March 2023

• References

• 1 Zauber AG, Winawer SJ, O’Brien MJ. et al. Colonoscopic polypectomy and long-term prevention of colorectal-cancer deaths. N Engl J Med 2012; 366: 687-696
• 2 Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Ho MN. The National Polyp Study Workgroup. et al. Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. N Engl J Med 1993; 329: 1977-1981
• 3 Leddin D, Enns R, Hilsden R. et al. Colorectal cancer surveillance after index colonoscopy: guidance from the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology. Can J Gastroenterol 2013; 27: 224-228
• 4 Lieberman DA, Rex DK, Winawer SJ. et al. Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after screening and polypectomy: a consensus update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Gastroenterology 2012; 143: 844-857
• 5 Hassan C, Quintero E, Dumonceau JM. et al. Post-polypectomy colonoscopy surveillance: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline. Endoscopy 2013; 45: 842-851
• 6 von Karsa L, Patnick J. European Colorectal Cancer Screening Guidelines Working Group. et al. European guidelines for quality assurance in colorectal cancer screening and diagnosis: overview and introduction to the full supplement publication. Endoscopy 2013; 45: 51-59
• 7 Rex DK, Ahnen DJ, Baron JA. et al. Serrated lesions of the colorectum: review and recommendations from an expert panel. Am J Gastroenterol 2012; 107: 1315-1329
• 8 Anderson JC, Butterly LF, Goodrich M. et al. Differences in detection rates of adenomas and serrated polyps in screening versus surveillance colonoscopies, based on the New Hampshire colonoscopy registry. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2013; 11: 1308-1312
• 9 Liang J, Kalady MF, Appau K. et al. Serrated polyp detection rate during screening colonoscopy. Colorectal Disease 2012; 14: 1323-1327
• 10 Gupta S, Lieberman D, Anderson JC. et al. Recommendations for follow-up after colonoscopy and polypectomy: a consensus update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Gastroenterology 2020; 158: 1131-1153
• 11 Hassan C, Antonelli G, Dumonceau JM. et al. Post-polypectomy colonoscopy surveillance: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline – Update 2020. Endoscopy 2020; 52: 687-700
• 12 Macaron C, Vu HT, Lopez R. et al. Risk of metachronous polyps in individuals with serrated polyps. Dis Colon Rectum 2015; 58: 762-768
• 13 Anderson JC, Butterly LF, Robinson CM. et al. Risk of metachronous high-risk adenomas and large serrated polyps in individuals with serrated polyps on index colonoscopy: data from the New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry. Gastroenterology 2018; 154: 117-127
• 14 Melson J, Ma K, Arshad S. et al. Presence of small sessile serrated polyps increases rate of advanced neoplasia upon surveillance compared with isolated low-risk tubular adenomas. Gastrointest Endosc 2016; 84: 307-314
• 15 Pereyra L, Zamora R, Gómez EJ. et al. Risk of metachronous advanced neoplastic lesions in patients with sporadic sessile serrated adenomas undergoing colonoscopic surveillance. Am J Gastroenterol 2016; 111: 871-878
• 16 von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M. et al. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Lancet 2007; 370: 1453-1457
• 17 Austin PC. Balance diagnostics for comparing the distribution of baseline covariates between treatment groups in propensity-score matched samples. Stat Med 2009; 28: 3083-3107
• 18 Djinbachian R, Iratni R, Durand M. et al. Rates of incomplete resection of 1- to 20-mm colorectal polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastroenterology 2020; 159: 904-914
• 19 Djinbachian R, Dubé AJ, Durand M. et al. Adherence to post-polypectomy surveillance guidelines: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Endoscopy 2019; 51: 673-683
• 20 Leggett B, Whitehall V. Role of the serrated pathway in colorectal cancer pathogenesis. Gastroenterology 2010; 138: 2088-2100
• 21 Jung YS, Park JH, Park CH. Serrated polyps and the risk of metachronous colorectal advanced neoplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2022; 20: 31-43
• 22 Li D, Doherty AR, Raju M. et al. Risk stratification for colorectal cancer in individuals with subtypes of serrated polyps. Gut 2021; DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2021-324301.
• 23 He X, Hang D, Wu K. et al. Long-term risk of colorectal cancer after removal of conventional adenomas and serrated polyps. Gastroenterology 2020; 158: 852-861
• 24 Jin EH, Seo JY, Bae JH. et al. Small sessile serrated polyps might not be at a higher risk for future advanced neoplasia than low-risk adenomas or polyp-free groups. Scand J Gastroenterol 2022; 57: 99-104
• 25 Hamoudah T, Vemulapalli KC, Alsayid M. et al. Risk of total metachronous advanced neoplasia in patients with both small tubular adenomas and serrated polyps. Gastrointest Endosc 2022; 96: 95-100
• 26 Djinbachian R, Marchand E, Pohl H. et al. Optical diagnosis of colorectal polyps: a randomized controlled trial comparing endoscopic image-enhancing modalities. Gastrointest Endosc 2021; 93: 712-719
• 27 Taghiakbari M, Pohl H, Djinbachian R. et al. The location-based resect and discard strategy for diminutive colorectal polyps: a prospective clinical study. Endoscopy 2022; 54: 354-363
• 28 von Renteln D, Djinbachian R, Benard F. et al. Incomplete resection of 4–20 mm colorectal polyps when using cold snare and associated factors. Endoscopy 2022; DOI: 10.1055/a-1978-3277.
• 29 Vennelaganti S, Cuatrecasas M, Vennalaganti P. et al. Interobserver agreement among pathologists in the differentiation of sessile serrated from hyperplastic polyps. Gastroenterology 2021; 160: 452-454