zer

zer

ad2

zer

ad2

zer

Search This Blog

Translate

خلفيات وصور / wallpapers and pictures images / fond d'écran photos galerie / fondos de pantalla en i

Buscar este blog

10/26/25

 


Figure 67-10. Diagram representation of cancer-containing polyps. Pedunculated adenoma is described on the left and a sessile

adenoma on the right. In carcinoma in situ, malignant cells are confined to the mucosa. These lesions are adequately treated by

endoscopic polypectomy. Polypectomy is adequate treatment for invasive carcinoma only if the margin is sufficient (2 mm), the

carcinoma is not poorly differentiated, and no evidence of venous or lymphatic invasion is found. (After Haggitt RC, Glotzbach RE,

Soffen EE, et al. Prognostic factors in colorectal carcinomas arising in adenomas: implications for lesions removed by endoscopic

polypectomy. Gastroenterology 1985;89:328.)

Primary Prevention of Adenoma Recurrence

Primary prevention relates to the ability of identifying genetic, environmental, and biologic factors that

cause cancer, and to mitigate their outcomes. Laboratory, clinical, and epidemiologic evidence suggests

that the regular use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), including aspirin, is associated

with a substantially decreased risk for the development of colorectal cancer. Four published trials have

demonstrated a reduction in adenoma recurrence in chemoprevention trials involving aspirin.50,51 Given

the biologic plausibility, preclinical in vitro and animal data, and data on adenoma regression in

patients with FAP, three large randomized trials, which studied over 6,000 patients in total, were

undertaken to examine the effect of cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2)–selective inhibitors on new adenoma

formation in individuals with a history of sporadic adenomas. All of these trials demonstrated a highly

significant reduction in new adenoma formation in those taking a COX-2–selective inhibitor (celecoxib

or rofecoxib) compared to placebo over 3 years. In the Adenoma Prevention with Celecoxib (APC)

trial,52 the use of celecoxib was associated with a dose-dependent 33% to 45% reduction in the

development of new adenomas by 3 years, with a 57% to 66% reduction in the number of patients

developing advanced adenomas. Unfortunately, adverse thrombotic cardiovascular events were

associated with COX-2 inhibition in two of these trials. Recent data suggest that increased

cardiovascular risk may be associated with most NSAIDs, and not just COX-2 inhibitors.

Other agents currently undergoing study for chemoprevention of colorectal neoplasia include the

ornithine decarboxylase inhibitor difluoromethylornithine (DFMO), the bile acid ursodiol, the 3-

hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitors such as pravastatin and

lovastatin, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors, and matrix metalloproteinase (MMP)

inhibitors. The combination of DFMO and the NSAID sulindac were studied in a randomized placebocontrolled trial to assess their efficacy in preventing sporadic adenoma recurrence in 375 subjects. The

use of this regimen was associated with a 70% reduction in new adenomas at 3 years compared to

placebo.53 Larger studies are underway to confirm this result and to fully assess toxicity of this

combination. A population-based case-control study of individuals with colorectal cancer and matched

controls demonstrated a 47% relative reduction of colorectal cancer associated with statin use, but

further investigation is needed to assess the overall benefits of this group of agents.

1742

Figure 67-11. Invasive carcinoma in the stalk of an adenomatous polyp. A: Low-power view. Malignant glands can be seen

invading fibrovascular stalk. B: High-power magnification of malignant glands in stalk. Nuclei are large, hyperpigmented, and

crowded.

Supplemental calcium reduces proliferative activity in the mucosa of experimental animals and

patients at high risk for the development of colorectal cancer. A large body of observational and

laboratory studies suggests a role for dietary calcium supplementation in chemoprevention. A

prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial showed that supplemental calcium (3,000 mg of

calcium carbonate per day, equivalent to 1,200 mg of elemental calcium) reduced the incidence and

number of recurrent adenomas in subjects with a recent history of such lesions. The protective effect of

calcium supplementation on the risk of colorectal adenoma recurrence extended up to 5 years after

cessation of active treatment, even in the absence of continued supplementation.54 Analysis of serum

vitamin D status in subjects suggested that calcium supplementation and vitamin D status appear to act

together to reduce the risk of adenoma recurrence. A prospective trial designed to assess the individual

effects of calcium and vitamin D and the combination on adenoma recurrence, however, failed to

demonstrate an effect of any of these agents.

“Essential” fatty acids are required for biologic processes, but cannot be synthesized by humans and

must therefore be obtained from dietary sources. The main polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs)

docosahexaenoic acid (DHA, 22:6∆4,7,10,13,16,19) and eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA, 20:5∆5,8,11,14,17) are

considered “essential” and are obtained predominantly from cold water oily fish such as mackerel and

salmon. A randomized trial in subjects with FAP demonstrated that an enteric-coated formulation of

EPA has chemopreventive efficacy in reducing rectal polyp burden to a degree similar to that previously

observed with selective COX-2 inhibitors.55 The role for N-3 PUFAs in “sporadic” colorectal adenoma

prevention is currently being evaluated.

Trials of supplemental dietary fiber, as well as antioxidant vitamins such as β-carotene and vitamins C

and E, have not convincingly demonstrated any effect on adenoma recurrence.

OTHER MUCOSAL SUBMUCOSAL POLYPS

Hyperplastic Polyps

HPs are small, usually sessile lesions most frequently encountered in the distal colon and rectum (Fig.

67-12A). Although grossly indistinguishable from small adenomas, they carry no significant potential for

malignant degeneration particularly when located in the distal colon or rectum. However, HPs must be

distinguished from SSAs, which carry significant malignant potential. Macroscopically, HPs are almost

always less than 1 cm in size, and most are in the distal colon. In fact, when HPs are found proximal to

the rectosigmoid region, one must consider the possibility that this is actually an SSA. Microscopically,

HPs are characterized by a saw-toothed epithelial pattern representing micropapillary luminal infoldings

of columnar absorptive cells and mature, frequently hyperdistended goblet cells (Fig. 67-12B).

Elongation and subsequent infolding of the epithelium may be caused by an expanded, but otherwise

normally located, replication zone in the crypt. The cytologic atypia characteristic of adenomatous

polyps is not seen in these lesions.

HPs are common age-related lesions found in about one-third of the population older than 50 years.

Although they often coexist with adenomas in polyp-bearing patients, no convincing evidence has been

found that HPs per se are harbingers of adenoma development. Because HPs are asymptomatic and carry

1743

no malignant potential, no specific treatment is required for these lesions. If an HP is the only lesion

detected on index-flexible sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy, no further evaluation is indicated.

Sessile Serrated Adenomas

SSAs or SSPs – the terms are essentially interchangeable – are distinct from conventional adenomas with

respect to histology and molecular biology, and are typically nondysplastic in appearance (Fig. 67-5),

but may contain areas of dysplasia or intramucosal carcinoma. They are characterized by the serrated

appearance of the surface epithelium (common to all serrated lesions), distorted crypt bases and crypt

dilation, and by migration of the proliferative zone to the side of the crypt. SSAs represent 3% to 22%

of serrated lesions and 75% to 90% of SSAs are right-sided.9 They are often flat (>90%), and may be

covered by a so-called “mucous cap.” These features often make endoscopic detection difficult,

emphasizing the importance of high-quality endoscopy including an excellent bowel preparation and

adequate withdrawal times to yield high polyp detection rates. These polyps are thought to be the

precursors of sporadic (non-Lynch syndrome) colorectal cancers with MSI, which are overwhelmingly

found in the proximal colon.

Figure 67-12. Hyperplastic polyps. A: Several diminutive hyperplastic polyps seen in the rectum during flexible sigmoidoscopy. B:

Photomicrograph of a hyperplastic polyp, characterized by elongated glands with papillary infoldings that have a typical serrated

epithelial pattern.

Figure 67-13. Inflammatory polyps. A: Severe mucosal inflammation with infiltrates and granulation tissue shown here

microscopically can appear clinically with a polypoid configuration. B: Resolution of inflammation can leave exuberant polyps

covered by normal epithelium, which are called pseudopolyps, a misnomer. These are truly polyps, but are not neoplastic.

Juvenile Polyps

Juvenile polyps can occur sporadically or as part of a juvenile polyposis syndrome (JPS). These mucosal

1744

polyps consist of dilated cystic mucus-filled glands and abundant lamina propria with an inflammatory

infiltrate. Seventy-five percent of these occur in children younger than 10 years of age, often appearing

as single pedunculated cherry-red polyps with a smooth surface and contour. The exact prevalence of

such lesions has not been determined, but they are thought to be acquired lesions detectable in about

2% of children. Juvenile polyps often present with hematochezia because they are highly vascularized

lesions. Rectal prolapse and auto-amputation may occur with distal lesions, whereas intussusception

may be precipitated by proximal juvenile polyps, particularly in the context of familial syndromes.

Individually, these polyps have no malignant potential, but symptomatic polyps should be removed to

prevent further complications. Juvenile polyposis, on the other hand, is associated with an increased

risk for the early development of cancer.

Inflammatory Polyps

Inflammatory mucosal polyps are common in the setting of idiopathic inflammatory bowel disease.

Marked inflammation and ulceration coexist with granulation tissue in a distorted mucosal architecture

that appears polypoid because of confluent areas of ulceration, leaving behind islands of intact

epithelium (Fig. 67-13A). Subsequent healing leads to the appearance of polypoid, nonneoplastic

excrescences covered by normal colonic epithelium, and are called “pseudopolyps,” in spite of the fact

that they are truly polypoid excrescences (Fig. 67-13B). They need not be removed and are important

largely because they make it difficult to recognize subtle, early neoplastic lesions in these high-risk

patients. Severe chronic inflammation of any kind, including a variety of infectious diseases

(tuberculosis, amebiasis, schistosomiasis, and amebic colitis), may result in inflammatory polyps that

resemble those found in idiopathic inflammatory bowel disease.

Submucosal Polyps

Submucosal masses can expand to push the colonic mucosa into the bowel lumen and thus appear as

polypoid lesions. Many submucosal lesions (e.g., lipomas, leiomyomas) are clinically asymptomatic and

must be differentiated from neoplastic lesions. Others are malignant lesions that require early detection,

such as lymphomas and metastatic tumors. Many submucosal lesions are not detected on endoscopic

mucosal biopsy because standard biopsy forceps do not reach beyond the mucosa. If a submucosal lesion

is suspected, multiple biopsy specimens of the same site sometimes provide tissue for diagnosis.

Lipomas are benign fatty tumors that occur throughout the gastrointestinal tract but are most

commonly found in the cecum near the ileocecal valve (Fig. 67-14). They appear endoscopically as soft,

smooth polyps that are pliable and deformable. The overlying mucosa is intact but may be light yellow

in appearance. These are benign lesions that have little clinical significance and are more commonly

seen in obese patients.

Isolated lymphoid nodules consisting of benign lymphoid tissue may appear as sessile smooth polyps of

various sizes, with a predilection for the distal colon and rectum. These are usually asymptomatic.

Diffuse nodular lymphoid hyperplasia also occurs in children as an incidental finding. The nodules must

be distinguished from primary or secondary lymphoma of the large intestine, which may present as

mucosal nodularity resembling the pseudopolyposis of inflammatory bowel disease or even a familial

polyposis syndrome (Fig. 67-15). Flow cytometry of the lymphocytes in the lesion will be helpful;

benign polyposis is polyclonal, whereas lymphomas are monoclonal and may overexpress cyclin D.

Pneumatosis cystoides intestinalis consists of multiple air-filled cysts within the submucosa. This may be

an incidental finding in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, scleroderma, or an

asymptomatic pneumoperitoneum secondary to recent surgery or instrumentation, in which air or

colonic gas diffuses into the cysts. These sometimes resolve with administration of oxygen. A far more

virulent form of pneumatosis is associated with fulminant mucosal inflammation, ischemia, or

necrotizing enterocolitis in children. These cysts are thought to result from mucosal invasion by gasproducing bacteria.

1745

 


screening at 3 or 5 years to a usual-care control group.31 Flexible sigmoidoscopy reduced CRC incidence

by 21% with a benefit observed in both the proximal and distal colon, and reduced overall mortality by

26% (intention-to-treat analyses). Mortality from distal CRC (distal to the splenic flexure) was reduced

by 50%, while mortality from proximal CRC was unaffected. The Italian Randomized Controlled Trial

(SCORE) demonstrated that once-only sigmoidoscopy significantly reduced CRC incidence by 18% and

mortality by 22% (not significant) in intention-to-treat analyses, and by 31% and 38%, respectively in

per-protocol analyses (both significant).32 These results have resulted in once in a lifetime flexible

sigmoidoscopy being included as an option in the UK National Health Service Bowel Cancer Screening

Programme; FOBT is the other option.

Colonoscopy, Barium Enema, Computed Tomography Colonography, and Stool DNA

Testing

Colonoscopy may be the most effective tool to screen for colorectal neoplasia (and especially

adenomas), but data from prospective randomized trials are lacking. The NPS of polypectomy and

surveillance strongly suggested a reduction in colorectal cancer mortality as a result of removing

adenomatous polyps compared to historic reference populations. A Canadian population-based study

compared the risk of developing colorectal cancer after a negative colonoscopy in all Ontario residents

with a history of a complete negative colonoscopy with controls consisting of the Ontario population

without a history of colonoscopy.33 In the negative colonoscopy cohort, the relative risk of distal

colorectal cancer was significantly lower than the control group in each of the 14 years of follow-up,

while the relative risk for proximal colorectal cancer was significantly lower mainly during the last 7

years of follow-up. A second Canadian case-control study demonstrated that complete colonoscopy was

also associated with fewer deaths from left-sided colorectal cancer, but not from right-sided cancer.

Several other population-based analyses and analyses of individual screening programs in the United

States, Canada, and Europe also suggest that increased use of colonoscopy is associated with mortality

reduction from CRC, but this reduction varies by the site of the cancer.34–38 A large case-control study

using SEER-Medicare data demonstrated that colonoscopy was associated with a 60% decreased risk of

CRC-related death, but the association was stronger for distal (OR 0.24; 95% CI: 0.21 to 0.27) than

proximal (OR 0.58; 95% CI: 0.53 to 0.64) CRC, consistent with European and Canadian studies.38 These

reports suggest that either proximal lesions are not detected as reliably as distal ones at colonoscopy,

that the lesions grow at different rates based upon location in the colon, or both.

These findings are of interest in light of arguments that colonoscopy is preferable to sigmoidoscopy,

because there may be a substantial incidence of proximal colonic cancers and advanced adenomas

beyond the reach of the sigmoidoscope. Some of these individuals may not have distal findings on

sigmoidoscopy that would trigger a subsequent colonoscopy. Two trials

39,40 suggested that

approximately 50% of individuals with advanced proximal neoplasms (adenoma >1 cm; adenoma with

villous features or dysplasia; cancer) have no distal neoplasms. Fewer than 2% of those who did not

have distal neoplasms, however, had an advanced proximal lesion. A decision analysis commissioned by

the USPSTF supports colonoscopy every 10 years as a screening option measured in life-years gained,

and the joint guidelines authored by the ACS, USMTF, and ACR recommend colonoscopy as a means of

preventing colorectal cancer through adenoma detection and removal.

High-contrast endoscopy using dye or stain solutions combined with colonoscopy (chromoendoscopy)

or high-resolution optical methods (e.g., narrow-band imaging and laser confocal endoscopy) have been

suggested as a means of identifying lesions in high-risk groups, or as an adjunct to colonoscopy where

flat lesions (so-called “flat adenomas”) are suspected. Recent evidence suggests that flat or depressed

neoplasms are more common than previously appreciated and carry a high relative risk of containing in

situ or invasive carcinoma.41

Air-contrast barium enema (ACBE) has been included as an option in a variety of screening guidelines,

but has for the most part been supplanted by other methods due to its poor sensitivity for detecting

small polyps. CT colonography, or “virtual” colonoscopy, involves the use of helical CT to generate

high-resolution images of the abdomen and pelvis. CT colonography has the potential advantage of

being a rapid and safe method of providing full structural evaluation of the entire colon. Two trials

provide evidence that CT colonography may be a valid alternative for primary colon cancer screening.

The National CT Colonography Trial42 directed by the American College of Radiology Imaging Network

(ACRIN) was a multicenter study that employed CT colonography and same-day colonoscopy using a

standard matching protocol in 2,600 asymptomatic individuals. Per patient sensitivity of CT

colonography for adenomas greater than 10 mm was 90% with a negative predictive value of 99%. A

1737

second trial43 compared CT colonography and optical colonoscopy in parallel screening cohorts and

demonstrated similar rates of detection of advanced neoplasia in both groups. Several key issues need to

be addressed as the use of CT colonography becomes more widespread, principal among which is

determination of the acceptable size cut-off of a lesion detected by CT colonography that will

necessitate a follow-up colonoscopy.

A great deal of knowledge has been accumulated recently about genetic alterations that occur during

colon carcinogenesis, as discussed earlier. A molecular approach to colorectal cancer screening is

therefore attractive since it targets biologic changes that are fundamental to the neoplastic process.

Fecal DNA testing relies on the detection of genetic alterations in DNA shed into the stool from

neoplastic lesions. Recent prospective data using a multimarker panel which includes both stool DNA

testing and FIT showed >90% sensitivity for detecting colorectal cancer, but suboptimal performance

for detecting high-risk adenomas. The sensitivity for detection of advanced adenoma with the combined

stool DNA marker/FIT panel was 42.4%. FIT alone detected only 23.8% of advanced adenomas.29 Based

on these data, the FDA has approved the combined panel for screening for colorectal neoplasia.

Management of Adenomas

Index Polypectomy

Once detected, adenomas should be completely removed, preferably by endoscopic snare polypectomy

(Fig. 67-8). Polypectomy is relatively safe and easily performed when adenomas are small or

pedunculated. Newer techniques such as EMR and ESD have made it possible to remove even large

sessile lesions (Fig. 67-9). Large sessile villous adenomas (>2 cm), especially those with high-grade

dysplasia have a great potential for malignant degeneration. If such lesions cannot be completely

removed by snare polypectomy or EMR, and when there is uncertainty about the polypectomy margin

in the case of pathologically advanced lesions, segmental surgical resection may be necessary.

Diminutive polyps, on the other hand, carry little malignant potential. If they are too small for snare

polypectomy, ablation with a hot biopsy forceps is a reasonable approach. Because 30% to 50% of

patients with one adenoma have a synchronous adenoma elsewhere in the colon, the entire colon should

be “cleared” by colonoscopy in polyp-bearing patients.

Figure 67-8. Endoscopic snare polypectomy. A: A small colonic polyp. B: The polypectomy snare is placed around the polyp. C:

The snare is closed around the base of the polyp, and the head of the polyp is gently pulled away from the wall and into the

lumen. Current is applied to cut the stalk and cauterize the site. D: The site after completion of polypectomy.

Quality Measures

As the number of colonoscopies (and colonoscopists) increases, quality assurance measures will need to

be adopted. One measure of quality assurance relates to adequate visualization of the colonic mucosa.

ADR is defined by the percentage of screening or surveillance colonoscopies of average risk with at least

one adenoma and is the most commonly used quality measure in practice. Benchmarks for adequate

ADRs have been suggested as at least 15% for women and 25% for men (20% overall). The ADR is

1738

considered by the ASGE/ACG Task Force on Quality in Endoscopy to be the best neoplasia-related

indicator of quality performance for screening colonoscopy. The ADR has been demonstrated to be an

independent predictor of the risk of interval colorectal cancer after screening colonoscopy.44–46

Endoscopist characteristics derived from administrative data are associated with the development of

postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer, and have potential use as quality indicators. Other quality measures

include the quality of bowel preparation and completeness of polyp resection. The incomplete resection

rate in the Complete Adenoma Resection (CARE) study was 10.1% overall, and varied broadly among

endoscopists.

Figure 67-9. Endomucosal resection (EMR) of a large sessile polyp. A: Large sessile adenoma seen at colonoscopy. B: Salinecontaining indigo carmine dye is injected into the mucosa to lift the polyp. C: The polyp is resected piecemeal using a

polypectomy snare. D: Completed EMR.

Follow-Up

Much of our current practice has come from information gained through the NPS, first organized in

1978. Additional metachronous adenomas are likely to develop in patients who have had adenomas

removed. Colonoscopic surveillance studies have provided estimates of the frequency and time course of

recurrence in these patients. Data from the NPS suggested a recurrence rate of 32% to 42% by 3 years

after index polypectomy. A prospective colonoscopic analysis also demonstrated a cumulative

recurrence rate at 3 years of 42%. Most adenomas detected at this 3-year interval were small tubular

adenomas. Age above 60 years, multiple adenomas at index polypectomy and large size of the index

adenoma predicted polyp recurrence in the NPS, but only multiplicity predicted recurrence of polyps

with advanced pathologic features (i.e., >1 cm, high-grade dysplasia, or invasive cancer) at follow-up.

The 3-year recurrence rate in patients with a known history of adenoma (42%) was higher than the

incidence rate of adenoma appearance de novo during this period in patients who had no adenomas

detected on index colonoscopy (16%).22

The high recurrence rate of adenomas after index polypectomy supports the use of postpolypectomy

surveillance in patients with known histories of adenoma. Colonoscopy is the preferred means of followup in these patients. ACBEs are inadequate for surveillance examinations; they miss a substantial

1739

number of large lesions and most small polyps. Barium enema has been supplanted by the use of CT

colonography, as discussed earlier. Colonoscopy is the most accurate means of evaluating the colonic

mucosa, and most importantly, allows biopsy and removal of polyps.

Several studies, including data from the NPS, indicate that surveillance intervals for colonoscopy

should be tailored to risk of recurrence. One recent study examined the relative risk for advanced

neoplasia within 5.5 years of a baseline colonoscopy.47 There was a strong association between the

results of baseline-screening colonoscopy and the rate of serious incident lesions during surveillance.

This study confirmed that patients with one or two small tubular adenomas represent a low-risk group

compared with other patients with colorectal neoplasia.

Table 67-3 lists the 2012 updated Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer guidelines for

screening, surveillance, and early detection of colorectal adenomas and cancer for individuals at

increased risk or at high risk of disease. This group represents the American Gastroenterological

Association Institute, the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, and the American College of

Gastroenterology. A clinical decision tool based on these guidelines was also published in 2014.48 These

guidelines suggest that those whose index lesion consists of one or two small tubular adenomas with

low-grade dysplasia should have a follow-up colonoscopy no sooner than 5 to 10 years after the initial

polypectomy. The precise timing within this interval should be based on clinical factors (prior findings,

family history, patient and physician preferences). In those with a large (>1 cm) adenoma, multiple (3

to 10) adenomas, or adenomas with high-grade dysplasia or villous change, colonoscopy should be

repeated within 3 years after the initial polypectomy. Although the risk for recurrence of advanced

adenomas at this follow-up interval is greater in patients with high-risk adenomas than those with lowrisk adenomas, the incremental risk is small.49 If the examination is normal or shows only one or two

small tubular adenomas with low-grade dysplasia, then the interval for the subsequent examination

should be 5 years. Patients with more than 10 adenomas on a single examination should have a followup colonoscopy less than 3 years after the initial polypectomy and the presence of an underlying

familial polyposis syndrome should be considered. Patients with sessile adenomas that are removed

piecemeal should have follow-up colonoscopy in 2 to 6 months to verify complete removal. Guidelines

for follow-up of serrated polyps are currently similar to those of conventional adenomas (3 years for

lesions ≥10 mm, or with dysplasia for TSAs; 5 years for lesions in the proximal colon and without

dysplasia; and 1 year for serrated polyposis syndrome).

Table 67-3 Guidelines for the Surveillance of Adenomas in People at Increased or

High Risk for Colorectal Cancer

1740

Management of Malignant Polyps

Endoscopic polypectomy is adequate treatment for an adenomatous polyp–containing cancer if it can be

demonstrated that the cancer is confined to the head of the polyp (i.e., carcinoma in situ or

intramucosal carcinoma; Fig. 67-10). The adequacy of simple polypectomy has been controversial in

cases in which malignant cells have invaded the polyp stalk (Fig. 67-11), but most studies indicate that

polypectomy is adequate treatment provided that a margin of more than 2 mm is present, the cancer is

not poorly differentiated, and no vascular or lymphatic invasion is noted. The presence of cancer at or

near the margin is significantly associated with an adverse outcome, even in the absence of other

unfavorable parameters. On the other hand, in the absence of unfavorable histology and with a negative

margin, the incidence of residual cancer is low (<1%). These criteria are more difficult to assess in

sessile polyps. If an adequate margin cannot be demonstrated or negative histologic parameters are

present, surgery is recommended to treat the possibility of residual neoplasia or regional lymph node

metastases.

1741

 


bleeding manifesting as hematochezia may occur with larger polyps, which may be evident when the

polyps are located distally in the rectum. Adenomas typically lose less than 1 mL of blood daily unless

they are 2 cm or larger in size. Although colorectal polyps are the most common lesions detected in

patients without symptoms undergoing colonoscopy because of the presence of fecal occult blood, the

polyps are probably not responsible for the bleeding. Very large colonic polyps may be associated with

obstructive symptoms, such as lower abdominal cramping or alterations in bowel habits, but this is

unusual. Secretory diarrhea with accompanying hypokalemia and hypochlorhydria has been associated

with very large villous adenomas of the distal colon and rectum. This is a rare syndrome, and the search

for secretagogues such as vasoactive intestinal polypeptide or prostaglandins in patients with polyps and

diarrhea, is infrequently productive.

Adenomas Associated with Lynch Syndrome and Its Variants

Lynch syndrome is a disease of autosomal dominant inheritance in which cancers arise in discrete

adenomas, but polyposis (i.e., dozens or hundreds of polyps) does not occur. Lynch syndrome patients

can get adenomas, HPs, and sessile serrated polyps (SSPs), but adenoma is the lesion that leads to

cancer. The loss of DNA MMR activity usually occurs after the appearance of a small adenoma, and

typically occurs after the adenoma is 8 mm or greater in diameter.16 The mean cumulative number (plus

2 standard deviations) of adenomas in mutation carriers undergoing annual screening colonoscopy is 3

by age 30 and 6 by age 50.17 However, there are outliers with larger numbers. Currently, the diagnosis

of Lynch syndrome is made by finding a germline mutation in the DNA MMR gene, not by clinical

criteria.18 The frequency of Lynch syndrome in the general population is difficult to determine, but

Lynch syndrome accounts for about 3% to 4% of all colorectal cancer cases; this suggests that Lynch

syndrome may occur in about 2 to 5 per 1,000 of the population.

Turcot syndrome is a term of historical significance, in which there is a concurrence of primary brain

tumors and multiple colorectal adenomas or cancer in young people. With the advent of accurate

genetic characterization, these families may be categorized as either FAP or Lynch syndrome, as brain

tumors are an occasional complication of both diseases, more often a medulloblastoma in FAP, and

glioblastomas in Lynch syndrome.19

Diagnosis

Most colorectal adenomas are asymptomatic and often are detected in the setting of an evaluation for

unrelated colonic symptoms or occult blood in the stool. Similarly, adenomatous polyps frequently are

detected when patients without symptoms are screened for colorectal neoplasia. Nevertheless, data

strongly suggest that the detection and removal of adenomatous polyps are important in reducing

colorectal cancer–related mortality.

In 2008, a joint guideline on screening and surveillance for early detection of colorectal cancer and

adenomatous polyps was issued by the American Cancer Society (ACS), the U.S. Multi-Society Task

Force on Colorectal Cancer (USMTF), and the American College of Radiology (ACR).20 This update of

previous guidelines is notable in that it grouped screening tests into those that primarily detect cancer

(annual fecal occult blood tests [FOBTs] including those that are guaiac-based or immunochemical, and

stool DNA tests, interval not specified) and those that can detect early cancer and adenomatous polyps

(flexible sigmoidoscopy every 5 years, colonoscopy every 10 years, double-contrast barium enema

every 5 years, or computed tomography [CT] colonography every 5 years). In November 2008, the U.S.

Preventative Services Task Force (USPSTF) also issued updated guidelines (Table 67-2).21 Based on a

targeted evidence-based review and a decision-analytic modeling analysis, the USPSTF recommended

screening of average-risk individuals age 50 to 75 years with high-sensitivity FOBTs annually,

sigmoidoscopy every 5 years plus FOBTs every 3 years, or colonoscopy every 10 years. Notably, the

USPSTF indicated that while the benefits of screening outweigh the potential harms for 50 to 75 year

olds, the likelihood that detection and early intervention will yield a mortality benefit declines after age

75 because of the long average time between adenoma development and cancer diagnosis. Routine

screening was therefore not recommended for adults aged 76 to 85 years, and screening was not

recommended at all in adults older than 85. These guidelines also indicated that for all populations

there is insufficient evidence to assess the benefits and harms of screening with CT colonography or

fecal DNA testing.

The American College of Gastroenterology (ACG) Guidelines for Colorectal Cancer Screening also

grouped options into cancer prevention tests (colonoscopy every 10 years, flexible sigmoidoscopy every

5 to 10 years, and CT colonography every 5 years) and cancer detection tests (annual FOBT with fecal

1734

immunochemical tests [FITs], fecal DNA testing every 3 years).22 Colonoscopy is considered the

preferred choice overall. The ACG also recommends that screening in African Americans should begin at

age 45 instead of age 50 for average-risk individuals, and that CT colonography replace double-contrast

barium enema as a radiologic option. The “European guidelines for quality assurance in colorectal

cancer screening and diagnosis” is a 386-page document authored by 90 authors from 32 countries

which provides an evidence-based review of existing data on CRC screening which stresses quality

measures and cost effectiveness.23 Numerous international CRC screening programs have been initiated

as evidence grows for an impact of CRC screening on mortality.24

Fecal Occult Blood Tests

Screening studies from both Europe and the United States indicate that a polyp is detected in about 30%

of patients without symptoms who are 50 years of age or older and undergo colonoscopy for follow-up

of a positive fecal occult blood test result. Blood loss from polyps is related to polyp size, and positive

fecal occult blood test results are related to polyp size and proximity to the rectum. In one study where

rehydrated Hemoccult slides were used (rehydration results in greater sensitivity but also increases the

number of false-positive findings), only 15% of polyps smaller than 1 cm were associated with a

positive Hemoccult test result, whereas 80% of polyps larger than 2 cm were associated with a positive

result. In another study, standard testing with Hemoccult cards detected 17% of adenomas smaller than

1 cm and 42% of adenomas larger than 1 cm. A prospective randomized study of fecal occult blood tests

in which rehydrated Hemoccult cards were used indicated that annual testing reduces colorectal cancer–

related deaths by 33% through 18 years of follow-up.25 This study, in addition to two European trials,

has also demonstrated a 15% to 21% reduction in colon cancer–related death from biennial fecal occult

blood testing.26 Thus, unless one rigorously performs the fecal occult blood test on an annual basis, the

reduction in colorectal cancer mortality will be disappointing.

Methods that may decrease the false-positive FOBT rates while maintaining or increasing sensitivity

currently are being refined and compared for efficiency with Hemoccult-type slide tests. FITs are

designed to detect human globin and are not affected by diet or drugs. A variety of FITs are now

available worldwide and FIT is likely to replace guaiac-based FOBTs. FITs have good performance

characteristics compared with standard heme-based FOBT tests, and may have superior sensitivity and

specificity for detecting colonic neoplasms.27–29 Issues which remain to be resolved regarding FIT

include the optimal number of samples to be tested, requirements for storage and shipping (effect of

temperature), and the relative benefit of quantitative (specific amount of hemoglobin per gram of stool)

versus qualitative (i.e., positive or negative) reporting, and the optimal “cut-off” for a positive test. The

quantitative immunochemical FOBT has been shown to have very good sensitivity and specificity for

detection of clinically significant neoplasia in studies of asymptomatic and symptomatic patients, but

test performance in prospective screening programs has been less well studied. Recent studies suggest

the effectiveness of FIT for programmatic screening for colorectal cancer, but adenoma detection

remains much lower than that of carcinoma.29 FITs have now been included as the preferred form of

FOBT in screening guidelines.

CLASSIFICATION

Table 67-2 Guidelines for Screening Average-Risk Individuals for Colorectal

Cancer

1735

Figure 67-7. CRC mortality in the National Polyp Study for adenoma and nonadenoma patients with comparison with the US

incidence-based mortality rates over up to 20 years The number of subjects at risk per years followed is given for the adenoma

(blue line) and nonadenoma (red line) cohorts. The cumulative incidence-based mortality for the average risk US Population is taken

from SEER data (black line). Among patients who had adenomas removed during participation in the study, after a median of 15.8

years, there was a 53% reduction in colorectal cancer mortality compared to expected deaths from colorectal cancer in the general

population. (Modified from 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.)

Results from the NPS strongly indicate that the removal of index polyps detected by fecal occult blood

testing and other methods, together with subsequent colonoscopic surveillance, results in a very

substantial reduction in colorectal cancer mortality. A recent update of this trial with median follow-up

of 15.8 years indicated that colonoscopic polypectomy is associated with a 53% reduction in mortality

from CRC compared with the expected incidence-based mortality from CRC in the general population

(Fig. 67-7).15

Sigmoidoscopy

The benefit of sigmoidoscopy in interrupting the adenoma-to-carcinoma sequence is suggested by a

number of studies. Three prospective randomized trials have now shown that programmatic screening

with flexible sigmoidoscopy can have an impact on CRC-related incidence and mortality, mostly related

to the detection and removal of adenomas.30–32 The UK Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Screening Trial is a

randomized trial which tested the hypothesis that a single flexible sigmoidoscopy screening offered at

approximately age 60 years can lower the incidence and mortality of CRC.30 In per protocol analyses,

the incidence of CRC was reduced by 33% and mortality by 43% (23% and 31%, respectively, based on

intention to treat analysis), and the incidence of cancer of the rectum and sigmoid was reduced by 50%.

The Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial (PLCO) enrolled 154,900 subjects

aged 55 to 74 in a prospective randomized trial that compared flexible sigmoidoscopy with repeat

1736

 


different signature pattern of somatic mutations.6

Figure 67-1. Proposed sequence of molecular genetic events in the evolution of colon cancer. Carcinomas arise from an

accumulation of events whose sequence has been defined for two of the carcinogenesis pathways. As illustrated here, tumors

progress through the adenoma-to-carcinoma sequence along pathways marked by chromosomal instability (CIN) or microsatellite

instability (MSI). At least one more pathway, characterized by promoter methylation of tumor-suppressor genes, serrated polyps,

and cancers with variable degrees of microsatellite instability, is incompletely understood, and not shown here. ACF, aberrant

crypt focus; TGF, transforming growth factor. (After Grady WM. Genomic instability and colon cancer. Cancer Metastasis Rev

2004;23:11; Grady WM, Carethers JM. Genomic and epigenetic instabilility in colorectal cancer progression. Gastroenterology

2008;135:1079–1099.)

The major form of hypermutation occurs when the DNA mismatch repair (MMR) system is

inactivated. Germline mutations in the DNA MMR genes MSH2, MLH1, MSH6, and PMS2 cause Lynch

syndrome, which historically was called HNPCC.7 In the hereditary CRC syndromes, germline mutations

inactivate one copy of the gene, and the other allele is inactivated by a “somatic” genetic event that

occurs locally in an individual colonic epithelial cell. Loss of DNA MMR results in a diffuse mutational

signature in the tumor called microsatellite instability, or MSI. This defect leads to the mutational

inactivation of several key genes important for maintaining normal cellular behavior. The transforming

growth factor-β receptor II (TGF-βRII) gene, for example, is mutated in 85% of MSI colorectal cancers.

This inactivates the receptor, renders the cell unresponsive to TGF-β, and permits it to escape normal

growth regulation. The MSI multistep carcinogenesis pathway to tumor development is seen in about

15% of all colorectal cancers,8 and progression from adenoma to carcinoma occurs in a shorter time

period than occurs in the chromosomal instability pathway seen in most colorectal cancers, which is

thought to require 10 to 20 years. MSI colorectal neoplasms appear to account for two clinical

observations. First, the MSI pathway may account for the occurrence of cancers 1 or 2 years after a

negative colonoscopy (“interval cancers”). Second, it may account for the relatively small number of

adenomatous polyps found with MSI, since they may evolve into cancer in a shorter timeframe than

usually occurs.

Histopathology and Malignant Potential

Adenomatous polyps are characterized according to their physical features, size, glandular structure, and

degree of dysplasia, which all have important implications for clinical management. Polyps may be

sessile, with a broad-based attachment to the colonic wall, or pedunculated, attached to the colonic wall

by way of a fibrovascular stalk (Fig. 67-2). Whether a polyp is sessile or pedunculated previously

determines whether the endoscopist can remove the polyp completely by snare polypectomy. Newer

endoscopic techniques such as endomucosal resection (EMR) and endomucosal dissection (ESD) have

1728

now allowed for resection of most sessile polyps. Diminutive polyps that measure 5 mm or less in

diameter are not likely to contain high-grade dysplasia or invasive carcinoma. Malignant potential

increases with polyp size in all histologic groups of adenoma.

Adenomas are classified histologically according to their glandular structure. Aberrant (dysplastic)

crypts and microadenomas may be the earliest lesions detected in the flat mucosa of patients at risk.

These enlarge and progress to macroscopic adenomatous polyps. Tubular adenomas are characterized by

a complex network of branching adenomatous glands, whereas villous adenomas contain fronds or folds

of mucosa that have overgrown their underlying stroma and project toward the colonic lumen (Fig. 67-

3). Often, both histologic types coexist in a mixed tubulovillous adenoma.

All conventional adenomas, by definition, consist of dysplastic mucosa. The term dysplasia refers to

abnormalities in crypt architecture (such as irregular branching or crowded “back-to-back” glands) and

cytologic detail (enlarged, pleomorphic, and hyperchromatic nuclei with multiple mitoses and

pseudostratification; Fig. 67-4). Dysplasia may be mild, moderate, or severe, depending on the degree

to which these characteristics are present. Severe, or high-grade, dysplasia represents carcinoma in situ

when the basement membrane has not been invaded. Extension into the lamina propria denotes

intramucosal carcinoma. Invasion into the muscularis mucosae defines invasive carcinoma and the

malignant polyp. The degree of dysplasia usually correlates with polyp size and the extent of villous

architecture. Occasionally, nonmalignant adenomatous mucosa can be displaced below the muscularis

mucosae, probably due to trauma associated with colonic motility. This must be distinguished from

malignant invasion and is termed pseudoinvasion.

Figure 67-2. Mucosal polyps of the colon may be sessile, protruding directly from the colonic wall, or pedunculated, extending

from the mucosa through a fibrovascular stalk. A: Large sessile polyp seen at colonoscopy. The polyp has a broad-based attachment

to the mucosa. B: Pedunculated polyp seen at colonoscopy. The polyp is attached to the mucosa through a distinct stalk. C: Lowpower photomicrograph of a pedunculated polyp (a tubular adenoma) cut in cross section to demonstrate its fibrovascular stalk

1729

(S).

It is now recognized that some serrated polyps (characterized by a “saw-tooth” pattern of colonic

crypts) may be precursors to carcinoma.9 HPs are typically small (diminutive polyps <5 mm) and are

usually located in the distal colon and rectum. These are the most common type of serrated polyps (30%

to 40% of all polyps and 80% to 90% of serrated polyps), and do not appear to have direct malignant

potential. SSAs are distinct from conventional adenomas with respect to histology and molecular

biology, and are typically nondysplastic. SSAs are characterized by distorted crypt bases and crypt

dilation (Fig. 67-5) and by migration of the proliferative zone to the side of the crypt. SSAs are

associated with BRAF mutations and CIMP, which can lead to epigenetic silencing of MMR genes such as

MLH1, resulting in MSI. SSAs are typically right-sided, often flat (Fig. 67-5A), and may be covered by a

so-called “mucous cap” (Fig. 67-5B). TSAs are the least common form of serrated lesion. They have

villiform features and are typically protuberant or pedunculated left-sided lesions which contain areas of

dysplasia. TSAs commonly have KRAS mutations and may give rise to microsatellite stable cancers.

Serrated polyposis syndrome is a syndrome characterized by multiple serrated polyps (Fig. 67-5D).9–11

These polyps are most often SSAs, but HPs and TSAs may also occur in this setting. The exact genetic

defect and actual risk of malignancy associated with this syndrome are unknown.

Even though nearly all adenocarcinomas of the colon and rectum arise in adenomatous polyps, not all

polyps evolve into carcinoma; in fact, most do not. The malignant potential of adenomatous polyps is

related to polyp size and the histologic characteristics. Large polyps and those with predominantly

villous architecture are more likely to contain coincident carcinoma (Fig. 67-6). These features are

interdependent, however, because large polyps are more likely to be villous and dysplastic. Adenomas

that measure 0.5 cm or less are most often tubular adenomas and rarely contain severe dysplasia or

carcinoma (<0.5% in autopsy series). Likewise, only 1% to 2% of adenomatous polyps smaller than 1

cm contain carcinoma, but autopsy studies suggest that as many as 40% of adenomas greater than 2 cm

contain cancer. Data derived from the examination of colonoscopic polypectomy specimens indicate

similar trends but suggest a lower incidence of cancer-containing polyps.

Figure 67-3. Histology of adenomatous polyps. A: Tubular adenomas are characterized by a complex network of branching

adenomatous glands (see also C). B: Villous adenomas consist of glands that extend straight down from the surface to the base as

fingerlike projections; this pattern may be suggested by the gross appearance of these polyps. C: Tubulovillous adenoma.

1730

Figure 67-4. Moderate dysplasia. Dysplastic mucosa is characterized by crowded, irregular glands and cells with enlarged,

hyperchromatic nuclei of varied size and shape that do not line up uniformly on the basement membrane (pseudopalisading).

Adenomas are composed of dysplastic mucosa in which the degree of atypia may vary. These changes precede the development of

invasive carcinoma.

Epidemiology

Prevalence

The descriptive epidemiology of adenomatous polyps of the colon and rectum parallels that of colorectal

carcinoma with relation to geographic distribution, age, prevalence, and genetic susceptibility. Like

colorectal cancer, adenomas are common in Western countries such as the United States, but their

prevalence traditionally has been low in parts of Asia (notably India), South America, and sub-Saharan

Africa. Epidemiologic patterns for both adenomas and carcinomas are shifting with the acquisition of a

“Western” lifestyle in many areas, particularly in Korea, Japan, and parts of Southeast Asia. Estimates of

adenoma prevalence in the United States vary depending on the mode of data collection. Data from

older studies were collected from autopsies and sometimes grouped all polyps together, whereas more

recent studies have examined adenoma prevalence in the context of endoscopic screening. Studies using

colonoscopy previously suggested an adenoma prevalence in patients without symptoms who are older

than 50 years that ranges between 20% and 40%. More recent data from colonoscopies, where quality

measures such as optimized cleansing preparations and withdrawal times have been employed, suggest

adenoma detection rates (ADRs) which may exceed 50%.12 Based on autopsy studies, one-half to twothirds of people older than 65 years have colonic adenomas. Adenoma prevalence increases with age in

all populations. Age-associated prevalence rates suggest that adenomas precede carcinomas in a given

population by at least 5 to 10 years; it may be much longer, as polyps do not produce symptoms and,

unlike cancers, dating the onset can only be estimated. Advancing age also correlates with multiplicity

of polyps, polyp size, and higher degrees of dysplasia. In addition, 30% to 50% of patients with one

adenoma have a synchronous adenoma elsewhere in the colon.13

1731

Figure 67-5. Sessile serrated adenomas are often flat lesions located in the right colon (A). They may be obscured by “mucous

caps” (B). Histologically they are characterized by a serrated surface epithelium, distorted crypt bases (C) and crypt dilation.

Serrated polyposis syndrome presents with multiple serrated polyps (D).

Heredity

2 Heredity plays a role not only in FAP and Lynch syndrome but also in the development of sporadic

adenomas. Sporadic (nonsyndromic) adenomatous polyps and colon cancers represent more than 95% of

colorectal neoplasms. Clinical studies, including case-control and prospective analyses, indicate a two- to

threefold increased risk for colon cancer among first-degree relatives of patients with a history of

colonic adenoma or carcinoma. The relative risk increases when there are more affected relatives and

when adenomas and carcinomas occur in young relatives. The impact of family history becomes

prognostically insignificant in patients whose polyps are discovered after age 60. In most families, it is

not possible to separate the impact of commonly shared genes from the impact of shared environmental

exposures.

Anatomic Distribution

Autopsy series and colonoscopic examination of patients who do not have symptoms previously

suggested that although adenomas are uniformly distributed throughout the colon, the distribution of

clinically important larger adenomas is more similar to that of carcinomas, with a left-sided

predominance. There appears to have been a “migration” over the past few decades, toward right-sided

lesions in Western countries; 75% to 90% of SSAs are right sided, as are about 90% of sporadic CRCs

with MSI.

Natural History

3 Adenomas are common in people older than 50 years, and although most carcinomas arise in

1732

adenomatous polyps, relatively few adenomas progress to carcinoma. Little precise information is

available on what proportion of adenomas evolves to carcinomas. In Norway, an example of a high-risk

Western population, it has been estimated that colorectal adenomas are present in 29% of the

population older than 35 years. The conversion rate from adenoma to carcinoma in this group (based on

cancer incidence from multiple tumor registries) has been calculated to be 0.25% per year. In other

words, the risk that a colorectal cancer will develop in a polyp-bearing person within 10 years is 2.5%.

The annual conversion rates to invasive cancer for people with adenomas larger than 1 cm, villous

components, and severe dysplasia have been estimated to be 3%, 17%, and 37%, respectively, based on

these inferences. Data from a national colonoscopy database in Germany suggested that the annual

transition rates from advanced adenoma (adenomas ≥1 cm, tubulovillous or villous adenomas,

adenomas with high-grade dysplasia) to cancer is comparable among women and men, but strongly

increases with age.14 Projected annual transition rates from advanced adenoma to cancer increased from

2.6% in age group 55 to 59 years to 5.1% in age group 80 and older among men, for example. These

estimated rates in older age groups are in line with previous estimates derived from small case series

but are considerably lower for younger age groups.

Figure 67-6. The relation of adenoma size and histology to malignant potential based on an analysis of 7,000 endoscopically

removed polyps. The incidence of polyp-associated carcinoma determined from examination of polypectomy specimens is lower

than that derived from early autopsy studies. (Data derived from Shinya H, Wolff WI. Morphology, anatomic distribution, and

cancer potential of colonic polyps. Ann Surg 1979;1990:675.)

Both longitudinal follow-up of a small number of people with unresected adenomas and studies of age

distribution provide indirect evidence that the evolution from adenoma to carcinoma takes at least 5 to

10 years. Age prevalence data from the National Polyp Study (NPS), for example, suggest that it may

take as long as 5 to 10 years for normal-appearing mucosa to develop into a macroscopically visible

adenomatous polyp, and an additional 3 to 5 years for invasive carcinoma to develop, in most instances.

Case-control studies also support that the development of adenomas in the colon and the evolution to

carcinoma occur slowly. Several studies, including the NPS, have estimated that the significant

protective effect of screening endoscopy may last at least 10 years.15 The risk and rate of progression of

SSAs is not as well documented. It has been postulated that the evolution of SSAs to invasive carcinoma

may take place in a shorter period of time than the conventional adenoma to carcinoma sequence, but

this remains to be firmly established.

Associated Disease States

A number of clinical situations have been associated with a greater than average risk for adenoma

development, but the evidence in most cases is tenuous. Although adenomas and carcinomas develop

frequently in patients who have undergone urinary diversion by way of ureterosigmoidoscopy, this is

largely of historical interest. Nonetheless, patients who have undergone this procedure require periodic

colonoscopic surveillance for adenoma and carcinoma development. An increased prevalence of colonic

adenomas and carcinomas has been reported in patients with acromegaly, and patients with elevated

gastrin levels have been reported to be at increased risk for colorectal neoplasia. Alleged associations

between colorectal adenomas and a history of prior cholecystectomy, atherosclerosis, acrochordons

(skin tags), and HPs remain unproven.

Clinical Features

Adenomatous polyps of the colon and rectum are highly prevalent in Western societies, but most

patients with colonic adenomas do not have symptoms directly referable to these lesions. Overt

1733

 


93. Hahnloser D, Pemberton JH, Wolff BG, et al. Results at up to 20 years after ileal pouch–anal

anastomosis for chronic ulcerative colitis. Br J Surg 2007;94:333–340.

94. Holubar SD, Cima RR, Sandborn WJ, et al. Treatment and prevention of pouchitis after ileal pouch–

anal anastomosis for chronic ulcerative colitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010:CD001176.

95. Lake JP, Firoozmand E, Kang JC, et al. Effect of high-dose steroids on anastomotic complications

after proctocolectomy with ileal pouch–anal anastomosis. J Gastrointest Surg 2004;8:547–551.

96. Branco BC, Sachar DB, Heimann TM, et al. Adenocarcinoma following ileal pouch–anal anastomosis

for ulcerative colitis: review of 26 cases. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2009;15:295–299.

1724

Chapter 67

Colonic Polyps and Polyposis Syndromes

Robert S. Bresalier and C. Richard Boland

Key Points

1 Colorectal neoplasia develops through multistep carcinogenesis that involves the gradual

accumulation of genetic and epigenetic alterations in the genome. This process usually requires the

presence of some forms of genomic or epigenetic instability, and neoplasms may require several

decades to evolve from their earliest stages to fully advanced disease.

2 Genetic and familial factors play an important role in the genesis of both the sporadic (common) and

syndromic forms of colorectal neoplasia, such as familial adenomatous polyposis and Lynch

syndrome.

3 Colorectal carcinoma usually evolves gradually from colorectal adenomas in clinically identifiable

stages; removal of adenomas reduces the incidence of colorectal carcinoma.

4 The genetic bases of familial adenomatous polyposis and Lynch syndrome (previously called

hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer) have been identified, which facilitate the early

identification and diagnosis of affected individuals.

5 A wide range of clinical heterogeneity is present in the familial colorectal cancer syndromes, and

attenuated forms of familial adenomatous polyposis and Lynch syndrome can be subtle and a

challenge to the clinician.

COLORECTAL POLYPS

The gastrointestinal tract accounts for more neoplastic disease than any other organ system in the body.

In North America, neoplasms of the colon and rectum have attracted the greatest interest because of

their relatively high incidence, and because appropriate intervention can dramatically modify the

morbidity and mortality associated with them. The adenoma is the most common precursor of colorectal

cancer, and early removal of adenomatous polyps can interrupt the natural history of the disease and

prevent death.

Colorectal cancers can develop through one of at least three molecular pathways, and each variety

appears to have some unique clinical and pathologic features.1–3 The adenoma–carcinoma sequence is

virtually canonical at this time and describes the common pathway taken by neoplasms that have

“chromosomal instability.” It has subsequently been proposed that “serrated” polyps, especially those in

the right colon, may be precursors of colon cancers with the microsatellite instability (MSI) phenotype.

It is becoming increasingly important to understand the clinical behavior of colorectal neoplasms in the

context of the genetic and molecular bases of these lesions.

Classification of Colorectal Polyps

The term polyp (from the Greek polypous, “morbid excrescence”) refers to a macroscopic protrusion of

the colonic mucosa into the bowel lumen. This can result from abnormal growth of the mucosa or from

a submucosal process that causes the mucosa to protrude into the lumen. Mucosal polyps can be sessile,

protruding directly from the colonic wall, or pedunculated, extending from the mucosa through a

fibrovascular stalk.

Mucosal polyps in the colon can be categorized as neoplastic, with malignant potential, and

nonneoplastic, with no malignant potential (Table 67-1). Neoplastic polyps include benign adenomatous

polyps that may evolve to carcinoma, adenomatous polyps that contain foci of intramucosal carcinoma

(carcinoma in situ), and adenomatous polyps in which carcinoma has penetrated the muscularis mucosae

(invasive carcinoma). A serrated polyp (sessile serrated adenoma [SSA] and traditional serrated

adenoma [TSA]) appears to originate in a manner unique from typical adenomas, but is also a

premalignant lesion. Instead of evolving through the traditional multistep pathway, SSAs in the

1725

proximal colon appear to evolve through a pathway that involves both BRAF mutation and progressive

methylation of DNA that result in the silencing of multiple genes. The fine details of this pathway

remain to be elucidated. Sometimes a polyp is found in which carcinoma has completely obliterated the

adenomatous tissue from which it arose (polypoid carcinoma).

Nonneoplastic mucosal polyps include hyperplastic polyps (HPs) (a form of serrated polyp which does

not directly progress to cancer), juvenile polyps, Peutz–Jeghers hamartomas, and a variety of

inflammatory polyps, including those associated with inflammatory bowel disease. Any submucosal

lesion can expand to push the mucosa into the bowel lumen and thus appear as a polypoid lesion.

Examples include lipomas, leiomyomas, colitis cystica profunda, pneumatosis cystoides intestinalis,

lymphoid aggregates, primary or secondary lymphomas, carcinoid tumors, and other metastatic

neoplasms.

Neoplastic Mucosal Polyps

Most colorectal cancers arise in pre-existing adenomatous polyps. Neoplastic mucosal epithelium

evolves through a series of progressive, cumulative molecular and cellular steps that lead to altered

proliferation, cellular accumulation, and glandular disarray. In some instances, the polyp also achieves

the ability to invade and metastasize through the adenoma-to-carcinoma sequence.

Several lines of evidence support the assumption that colorectal adenocarcinomas arise from

adenomatous polyps. The descriptive epidemiology of colonic adenomas parallels that of carcinomas,

but the benign lesions occur earlier. Adenomas are rare in geographic regions with a low prevalence of

colon cancer, and the distribution of adenomas in the colon parallels that of carcinomas. Adenomas

often occur in anatomic proximity to colon cancers, and cancer risk is proportional to the number of

adenomas present synchronously or metachronously in a patient. Cancer is often present in polyps

removed endoscopically or surgically, and the risk for cancer is proportional to the degree of dysplasia

or atypia in the polyp. Conversely, histologically evident residual adenomatous tissue may be found

surrounding carcinomas. Most important, results from several studies indicate that the systematic

removal of adenomatous polyps during screening sigmoidoscopy or surveillance colonoscopy decreases

the risk for the development of colorectal cancers and death from this disease.

CLASSIFICATION

Table 67-1 Classification of Colorectal Polyps

1726

Pathogenesis

Molecular Biology

1 Genetic changes that lead to the development of adenomas (and carcinomas) can be loosely organized

into three broad categories: alterations in proto-oncogenes, loss of tumor-suppressor gene activity, and

abnormalities of genes involved in DNA repair (Fig. 67-1).1–3 Several different mechanisms are involved

in altering these genes. Typically, oncogenes become overactive by mutation, rearrangement, or

amplification. Tumor-suppressor genes become inactivated by mutation or deletion, or silenced through

promoter methylation. Tumor-suppressor genes require inactivation of both copies of alleles, making

this process more complex. It is now clear, however, that the development of adenoma and carcinoma is

always associated with the progressive accumulation of genetic changes, and this process is termed

multistep carcinogenesis.1–4

In familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), Lynch syndrome (previously called hereditary nonpolyposis

colorectal cancer [HNPCC]), and other familial syndromes, the first genetic alteration is inherited in the

germline, and therefore present in every cell. Environmental factors or “accidents” occurring in the DNA

from faulty replication or DNA damage are then required for the additional genetic mutations, termed

somatic mutations, as the process moves toward cancer. The clinical phenotype for the inherited

predispositions to gastrointestinal cancer is initially normal. The germline mutation provides the first

alteration or “hit,” which greatly increases the likelihood of neoplasia and that the disease will occur at

a younger age. FAP and Lynch syndrome account for about 3% to 4% of all colorectal cancers, but it is

estimated that as many as 30% of colorectal cancers occur in the context of a positive family history,

which is probably mediated by numerous subtle differences in DNA sequence (called single nucleotide

polymorphisms, or SNPs) that exert small changes in risk.

“Sporadic” polyps and cancers are associated with multiple somatic mutations, all of which are caused

by spontaneous decay of DNA, exogenous insults, or are accidents that occur during the replication of

DNA. The occurrence of most cases of colorectal cancer has been attributed to the high frequency of

cancer in the colon and rectum compared to other organs is a consequence of the number of stem cell

divisions that occurs in human colon. To some degree, the occurrence of colorectal cancer is often a

matter of “bad luck.”5

Destabilization of the genome is a prerequisite to carcinogenesis. This most commonly involves

chromosomal instability, which is manifested as widespread chromosomal deletions, duplications, and

rearrangements that produce aneuploidy. Alternatively, increased rates of mutations, often in tandemly

repeated DNA sequences known as microsatellites (i.e., microsatellite instability or MSI) or a form of

epigenetic instability called the CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP), in which genes are

inappropriately silenced by promoter methylation1–3 are mechanisms that can lead to progressive

multistep carcinogenesis. Genomic (or epigenetic) instability generates a large number of random

alterations, which are often silent or lead to the extinction of the cell. However, occasional genetic

alterations enhance growth and survival, and the successive accumulation of those changes will

eventually facilitate the evolution of a neoplastic cell.

Cellular proto-oncogenes are a group of evolutionarily conserved genes that play a role in signal

transduction and the normal regulation of cell growth. They function by being turned on when growth

is stimulated and then turned off when sufficient growth has been achieved. Inappropriate activation of

these genes, usually through mutation that activates the protein or rearrangement of the promoter

sequences, leads to unregulated growth-regulatory signaling and excessive cellular proliferation. The

prototypical oncogene in CRC is in KRAS, and mutations in this gene are progressively more frequent in

larger, more advanced adenomatous polyps. The tumor-suppressor gene APC on chromosome 5q is

critical to the evolution of the colorectal adenoma. Allelic losses of chromosome 5q occur early during

carcinogenesis in the colon, and this is frequently the initial step in the evolution of colorectal

neoplasia. APC acts as the “gatekeeper” of colonic epithelial proliferation, and inactivation of this gene

will lead to net cellular proliferation and initiation of neoplasia in the colon. The protein produced by

the APC gene plays a central role in regulating the intracellular concentrations of the transcription

factor, β-catenin. β-catenin is highly expressed in cells at the base of the colonic crypt, where it

stimulates proliferation. As the cell commits to terminal differentiation, the APC gene is expressed,

which downregulates β-catenin by phosphorylation of the protein, targeting it for degradation.

Inactivating alterations in the p53 tumor-suppressor gene are a critical step in the transition from

adenoma to carcinoma, as the p53 protein normally prevents cells with damaged DNA from progressing

from the G1 to the S phase in the cell cycle. Alterations in APC, p53, and KRAS are the most common

alterations in most CRCs. However, a subset of about 15% of CRCs are “hypermutated” and have a

1727

 


11. Calkins BM, Lilienfeld AM, Garland CF, et al. Trends in incidence rates of ulcerative colitis and

Crohn’s disease. Dig Dis Sci 1984;29:913–920.

12. Mayberry JF, Judd D, Smart H, et al. Crohn’s disease in Jewish people–an epidemiological study in

south-east Wales. Digestion 1986;35:237–240.

13. Orholm M, Binder V, Sorensen TI, et al. Concordance of inflammatory bowel disease among Danish

twins. Results of a nationwide study. Scand J Gastroenterol 2000;35:1075–1081.

14. Halfvarson J, Bodin L, Tysk C, et al. Inflammatory bowel disease in a Swedish twin cohort: a longterm follow-up of concordance and clinical characteristics. Gastroenterology 2003;124:1767–1773.

15. Watts DA, Satsangi J. The genetic jigsaw of inflammatory bowel disease. Gut 2002;50(suppl

3):III31–36.

16. Laharie D, Debeugny S, Peeters M, et al. Inflammatory bowel disease in spouses and their

offspring. Gastroenterology 2001;120:816–839.

17. Cuthbert AP, Fisher SA, Mirza MM, et al. The contribution of NOD2 gene mutations to the risk and

1720

site of disease in inflammatory bowel disease. Gastroenterology 2002;122:867–874.

18. Fisher SA, Tremelling M, Anderson CA, et al. Genetic determinants of ulcerative colitis include the

ECM1 locus and five loci implicated in Crohn’s disease. Nat Genet 2008;40:710–712.

19. Franke A, Balschun T, Sina C, et al. Genome-wide association study for ulcerative colitis identifies

risk loci at 7q22 and 22q13 (IL17REL). Nat Genet 2010;42:292–294.

20. Rioux JD, Silverberg MS, Daly MJ, et al. Genomewide search in Canadian families with

inflammatory bowel disease reveals two novel susceptibility loci. Am J Hum Genet 2000;66:1863–

1870.

21. Glocker EO, Kotlarz D, Boztug K, et al. Inflammatory bowel disease and mutations affecting the

interleukin-10 receptor. N Engl J Med 2009;361:2033–2045.

22. Toyoda H, Wang SJ, Yang HY, et al. Distinct associations of HLA class II genes with inflammatory

bowel disease. Gastroenterology 1993;104:741–748.

23. Okada Y, Yamazaki K, Umeno J, et al. HLA-Cw*1202-B*5201-DRB1*1502 haplotype increases risk

for ulcerative colitis but reduces risk for Crohn’s disease. Gastroenterology 2011;141:864–871.e1–5.

24. Duerr RH, Taylor KD, Brant SR, et al. A genome-wide association study identifies IL23R as an

inflammatory bowel disease gene. Science 2006;314:1461–1463.

25. Silverberg MS, Cho JH, Rioux JD, et al. Ulcerative colitis-risk loci on chromosomes 1p36 and 12q15

found by genome-wide association study. Nat Genet 2009;41:216–220.

26. Loftus CG, Loftus EV Jr, Harmsen WS, et al. Update on the incidence and prevalence of Crohn’s

disease and ulcerative colitis in Olmsted County, Minnesota, 1940–2000. Inflamm Bowel Dis

2007;13:254–261.

27. Ekbom A, Helmick C, Zack M, et al. The epidemiology of inflammatory bowel disease: a large,

population-based study in Sweden. Gastroenterology 1991;100:350–358.

28. Loftus EV Jr, Silverstein MD, Sandborn WJ, et al. Ulcerative colitis in Olmsted County, Minnesota,

1940–1993: incidence, prevalence, and survival. Gut 2000;46:336–343.

29. Geerling BJ, Dagnelie PC, Badart-Smook A, et al. Diet as a risk factor for the development of

ulcerative colitis. Am J Gastroenterol 2000;95:1008–1013.

30. Jowett SL, Seal CJ, Pearce MS, et al. Influence of dietary factors on the clinical course of ulcerative

colitis: a prospective cohort study. Gut 2004;53:1479–1484.

31. Khalili H, Ananthakrishnan AN, Konijeti GG, et al. Physical activity and risk of inflammatory bowel

disease: prospective study from the Nurses’ Health Study cohorts. BMJ 2013;347:f6633.

32. Boyko EJ, Koepsell TD, Perera DR, et al. Risk of ulcerative colitis among former and current

cigarette smokers. N Engl J Med 1987;316:707–710.

33. Mahid SS, Minor KS, Soto RE, et al. Smoking and inflammatory bowel disease: a meta-analysis.

Mayo Clin Proc 2006;81:1462–1471.

34. Calkins BM. A meta-analysis of the role of smoking in inflammatory bowel disease. Dig Dis Sci

1989;34:1841–1854.

35. Loftus EV Jr, Sandborn WJ, Tremaine WJ, et al. Primary sclerosing cholangitis is associated with

nonsmoking: a case-control study. Gastroenterology 1996;110:1496–1502.

36. van Erpecum KJ, Smits SJ, van de Meeberg PC, et al. Risk of primary sclerosing cholangitis is

associated with nonsmoking behavior. Gastroenterology 1996;110:1503–1506.

37. Frisch M, Biggar RJ: Appendectomy and protection against ulcerative colitis. N Engl J Med

2001;345:222–223; author reply 223–224.

38. Frisch M, Johansen C, Mellemkjaer L, et al. Appendectomy and subsequent risk of inflammatory

bowel diseases. Surgery 2001;130:36–43.

39. Andersson RE, Olaison G, Tysk C, et al. Appendectomy and protection against ulcerative colitis. N

Engl J Med 2001;344:808–814.

40. Rutgeerts P, D’Haens G, Hiele M, et al. Appendectomy protects against ulcerative colitis.

Gastroenterology 1994;106:1251–1253.

41. Sandler RS. Appendicectomy and ulcerative colitis. Lancet 1998;352:1797–1798.

42. Holtmann MH, Galle PR. Current concept of pathophysiological understanding and natural course

of ulcerative colitis. Langenbecks Arch Surg 2004;389:341–349.

43. Silverberg MS, Satsangi J, Ahmad T, et al. Toward an integrated clinical, molecular and serological

1721

classification of inflammatory bowel disease: report of a Working Party of the 2005 Montreal

World Congress of Gastroenterology. Can J Gastroenterol 2005;19(suppl A):5A–36A.

44. Sands BE. From symptom to diagnosis: clinical distinctions among various forms of intestinal

inflammation. Gastroenterology 2004;126:1518–1532.

45. Schroeder KW, Tremaine WJ, Ilstrup DM. Coated oral 5-aminosalicylic acid therapy for mildly to

moderately active ulcerative colitis. a randomized study. N Engl J Med 1987;317:1625–1629.

46. Shetty K, Rybicki L, Brzezinski A, et al. The risk for cancer or dysplasia in ulcerative colitis patients

with primary sclerosing cholangitis. Am J Gastroenterol 1999;94:1643–1649.

47. Suhler EB, Smith JR, Wertheim MS, et al. A prospective trial of infliximab therapy for refractory

uveitis: preliminary safety and efficacy outcomes. Arch Ophthalmol 2005;123:903–912.

48. Farhi D, Cosnes J, Zizi N, et al. Significance of erythema nodosum and pyoderma gangrenosum in

inflammatory bowel diseases: a cohort study of 2402 patients. Med (Baltimore) 2008;87:281–293.

49. Agarwal A, Andrews JM. Systematic review: IBD-associated pyoderma gangrenosum in the biologic

era, the response to therapy. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2013;38:563–572.

50. Generini S, Giacomelli R, Fedi R, et al. Infliximab in spondyloarthropathy associated with Crohn’s

disease: an open study on the efficacy of inducing and maintaining remission of musculoskeletal

and gut manifestations. Ann Rheum Dis 2004;63:1664–1669.

51. Gee MS, Harisinghani MG. MRI in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. J Magn Reson Imaging

2011;33:527–534.

52. Geboes K, De Hertogh G. Indeterminate colitis. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2003;9:324–331.

53. Faubion WA Jr, Loftus EV Jr, Harmsen WS, et al. The natural history of corticosteroid therapy for

inflammatory bowel disease: a population-based study. Gastroenterology 2001;121:255–260.

54. Rutgeerts P, Lofberg R, Malchow H, et al. A comparison of budesonide with prednisolone for active

Crohn’s disease. N Engl J Med 1994;331:842–845.

55. Travis SP: Predicting outcome in severe ulcerative colitis. Dig Liver Dis 2004;36:448–449.

56. Lichtenstein GR, Feagan BG, Cohen RD, et al. Serious infections and mortality in association with

therapies for Crohn’s disease: TREAT registry. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2006;4:621–630.

57. d’Albasio G, Pacini F, Camarri E, et al. Combined therapy with 5-aminosalicylic acid tablets and

enemas for maintaining remission in ulcerative colitis: a randomized double-blind study. Am J

Gastroenterol 1997;92:1143–1147.

58. Higgins PD, Rubin DT, Kaulback K, et al. Systematic review: impact of non-adherence to 5-

aminosalicylic acid products on the frequency and cost of ulcerative colitis flares. Aliment Pharmacol

Ther 2009;29:247–257.

59. Kane S, Huo D, Aikens J, et al. Medication nonadherence and the outcomes of patients with

quiescent ulcerative colitis. Am J Med 2003;114:39–43.

60. Lichtiger S. Cyclosporine therapy in inflammatory bowel disease: open-label experience. Mt Sinai J

Med 1990;57:315–319.

61. Rayner CK, McCormack G, Emmanuel AV, et al. Long-term results of low-dose intravenous

ciclosporin for acute severe ulcerative colitis. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2003;18:303–308.

62. D’Haens G, Baert F, van Assche G, et al. Early combined immunosuppression or conventional

management in patients with newly diagnosed Crohn’s disease: an open randomised trial. Lancet

2008;371:660–667.

63. Mason M, Siegel CA. Do inflammatory bowel disease therapies cause cancer? Inflamm Bowel Dis

2013;19:1306–1321.

64. George J, Present DH, Pou R, et al. The long-term outcome of ulcerative colitis treated with 6-

mercaptopurine. Am J Gastroenterol 1996;91:1711–1714.

65. Laharie D, Seneschal J, Schaeverbeke T, et al. Assessment of liver fibrosis with transient

elastography and FibroTest in patients treated with methotrexate for chronic inflammatory

diseases: a case-control study. J Hepatol 2010;53:1035–1040.

66. Rutgeerts P, Sandborn WJ, Feagan BG, et al. Infliximab for induction and maintenance therapy for

ulcerative colitis. N Engl J Med 2005;353:2462–2476.

67. Reinisch W, Sandborn WJ, Rutgeerts P, et al. Long-term infliximab maintenance therapy for

ulcerative colitis: the ACT-1 and -2 extension studies. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2012;18:201–211.

1722

68. Sokol H, Seksik P, Carrat F, et al. Usefulness of co-treatment with immunomodulators in patients

with inflammatory bowel disease treated with scheduled infliximab maintenance therapy. Gut

2010;59:1363–1368.

69. Ford AC, Sandborn WJ, Khan KJ, et al. Efficacy of biological therapies in inflammatory bowel

disease: systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Gastroenterol 2011;106:644–659, quiz 660.

70. Crum NF, Lederman ER, Wallace MR. Infections associated with tumor necrosis factor-alpha

antagonists. Med (Baltimore) 2005;84:291–302.

71. Wallis RS, Broder MS, Wong JY, et al. Granulomatous infectious diseases associated with tumor

necrosis factor antagonists. Clin Infect Dis 2004;38:1261–1265.

72. Mariette X, Tubach F, Bagheri H, et al. Lymphoma in patients treated with anti-TNF: results of the

3-year prospective French RATIO registry. Ann Rheum Dis 2010;69:400–408.

73. Langholz E, Munkholm P, Davidsen M, et al. Colorectal cancer risk and mortality in patients with

ulcerative colitis. Gastroenterology 1992;103:1444–1451.

74. Allison J, Herrinton LJ, Liu L, et al. Natural history of severe ulcerative colitis in a communitybased health plan. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2008;6:999–1003.

75. Grant CS, Dozois RR. Toxic megacolon: ultimate fate of patients after successful medical

management. Am J Surg 1984;147:106–110.

76. Jarnerot G, Hertervig E, Friis-Liby I, et al. Infliximab as rescue therapy in severe to moderately

severe ulcerative colitis: a randomized, placebo-controlled study. Gastroenterology 2005;128:1805–

1811.

77. Albrechtsen D, Bergan A, Nygaard K, et al. Urgent surgery for ulcerative colitis: early colectomy in

132 patients. World J Surg 1981;5:607–615.

78. Hawley PR. Emergency surgery for ulcerative colitis. World J Surg 1988; 12:169–173.

79. Robert JH, Sachar DB, Aufses AH Jr, et al. Management of severe hemorrhage in ulcerative colitis.

Am J Surg 1990;159:550–555.

80. van Heerden JA, Beart RW Jr. Carcinoma of the colon and rectum complicating chronic ulcerative

colitis. Dis Colon Rectum 1980;23:155–159.

81. Lavery IC, Chiulli RA, Jagelman DG, et al. Survival with carcinoma arising in mucosal ulcerative

colitis. Ann Surg 1982;195:508–512.

82. Rutter MD, Saunders BP, Wilkinson KH, et al. Thirty-year analysis of a colonoscopic surveillance

program for neoplasia in ulcerative colitis. Gastroenterology 2006;130:1030–1038.

83. Itzkowitz SH, Present DH, Crohn’s and Colitis Foundation of America Colon Cancer in IBD Study

Group. Consensus conference: colorectal cancer screening and surveillance in inflammatory bowel

disease. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2005;11:314–321.

84. Murphy J, Kalkbrenner KA, Pemberton JH, et al. Dysplasia in ulcerative colitis as a predictor of

unsuspected synchronous colorectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 2014;57:993–998.

85. Goudet P, Dozois RR, Kelly KA, et al. Characteristics and evolution of extraintestinal manifestations

associated with ulcerative colitis after proctocolectomy. Dig Surg 2001;18:51–55.

86. Holubar SD, Larson DW, Dozois EJ, et al. Minimally invasive subtotal colectomy and ileal pouchanal anastomosis for fulminant ulcerative colitis: a reasonable approach? Dis Colon Rectum

2009;52:187–192.

87. Holubar SD, Privitera A, Cima RR, et al. Minimally invasive total proctocolectomy with Brooke

ileostomy for ulcerative colitis. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2009;15:1337–1342.

88. Boller AM, Larson DW. Laparoscopic restorative proctocolectomy for ulcerative colitis. J

Gastrointest Surg 2007;11:3–7.

89. Rosenstein DI, Alsikafi NF. Diagnosis and classification of urethral injuries. Urol Clin North Am

2006;33:73–85, vi-vii.

90. MacLean AR, Cohen Z, MacRae HM, et al. Risk of small bowel obstruction after the ileal pouch–

anal anastomosis. Ann Surg 2002;235:200–206.

91. Scott NA, Dozois RR, Beart RW Jr, et al. Postoperative intra-abdominal and pelvic sepsis

complicating ileal pouch–anal anastomosis. Int J Colorectal Dis 1988;3:149–152.

92. Heuschen UA, Allemeyer EH, Hinz U, et al. Outcome after septic complications in J-pouch

procedures. Br J Surg 2002;89:194–200.

1723

 


Extracolonic Manifestations

3 Proctocolectomy can help with some of the extracolonic manifestations, though PSC, pyoderma

gangrenosum, and ankylosing spondylitis specifically do not respond to surgery. Proctocolectomy has

shown to help with erythema nodosum, and small/large joints arthralgia, though the role of colectomy

is not completely defined in the treatment of extraintestinal manifestations of UC.85

Figure 66-6. Brooking ileostomy.

Surgical Management

Unlike CD, proctocolectomy is curative for gastrointestinal UC. As the disease begins in the rectum and

involves the colon proximally for a variable distance, ultimately proctectomy should be performed for

definitive treatment of UC.

Multiple surgical options are available, with treatment dependent on the urgency of presentation, and

general condition of the patient. Currently, in emergency conditions, the operation of choice is a

subtotal colectomy with preservation of the rectum, and a Brooke ileostomy (Fig. 66-6). Resection of

the rectum in the emergent setting should be avoided if possible, to both to allow continent

reconstruction at a later time and to avoid a perineal dissection in suboptimal conditions. Mobilizing the

rectum unnecessarily in emergent conditions disrupts the presacral planes, and will make later

reconstruction more difficult. In addition, the ureters and pelvic nerves are put at risk. Additional

consideration should be given to the level of ileal transection proximally, keeping in mind that a later

ileal pouch reconstruction is dependent on the ileocolic arterial arcade, and thus all efforts should be

made to keep this vascular network intact.

Abdominal Colectomy with a Brooke Ileostomy

The location of stoma should be marked preoperatively with the help of an enterostomal therapist if at

all possible. Managing a poorly placed stoma is a major source of frustration for the patient

postoperatively. Additionally, appropriately training and educating the patient preoperatively with

regard to the care of their stoma is critical to their postoperative progress.

4 A minimally invasive approach should be attempted if the patient is stable and the surgeon is

sufficiently comfortable with the operation.86,87 A systematic technique should be employed, and with

sufficient training and experience excellent outcomes can be achieved.88

The operation is started in the lithotomy position. If there is a concern regarding visualization of the

ureters, it is recommended that ureteral stents be placed. Though they do not reduce the rate of ureter

injury, they do help identify an injury immediately, and facilitate prompt repair.89 The colon is

mobilized in a lateral to medial fashion most commonly (Figs. 66-7 and 66-8), and unless there is

concern of dysplasia/neoplasia, the vessels (ileocolic, middle colic, and inferior mesenteric artery

branches) can be transected distally, facilitating safer mobilization. Particular attention should be paid

to the splenic flexure, as a splenic tear will unnecessarily complicate the operation.

Once the colon has been completely mobilized and the vessels have been divided, the distal ileum can

be transected. Particular attention must be paid to the integrity of the ileocolic vessel arcade, as the

subsequent ileal pouch construction is largely dependent on these vessels. The colon can then be

extracted through the ileostomy site, or through either a low vertical midline or a Pfannenstiel incision.

The terminal ileum can then be extracorporialized and a Brooke ileostomy can be constructed (Fig. 66-

6). It is critical to make sure that the small bowel mesentery is not twisted before “brooking” the

ileostomy.

1716

Figure 66-7. Colon mobilization. A: right colon. B: transverse colon. C: left colon.

Figure 66-8. Mobilized colon with vessels divided, and stapled at the rectum. This specimen is ready for extraction; the ileum can

be transected intracorporeally, or after specimen is extracorporealized.

Proctocolectomy with Brooke Ileostomy

Abdominal colectomy is performed as above. In cases of rectal dysplasia or cancer, a total mesorectal

excision is necessary. Patient is placed in Trendelenburg position and all bowel is displaced in the upper

abdomen. The sigmoid and rectum are placed on tension, and any adhesions are freed. If the uterus and

ovaries prevent visualization or adequate dissection, they are affixed in place by passing a 0-Prolene

stitch through the abdominal wall, through the uterus, and back through the abdominal wall. Retracting

the uterus anteriorly will help with visualization and dissection in the plane posterior to the vagina. The

rectal mobilization is commenced by placing the rectum on cephalad and anterior traction. The

peritoneum on the right of the rectum, medial to the ureters and the pelvic nerves is incised. This

embryologic plane is followed cephalad just posterior to superior rectal artery along its course, tracing

it proximally to the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA). Careful dissection just posterior to the IMA

pedicle toward the left pelvic sidewall will reveal the left ureter; its location is almost always higher

than expected. Lateral (on the left) to the ureter, the gonadal vessels are found. The ureter is

retroperitoneal, and as such all efforts should be made to avoid incising the retroperitoneum, and

1717

instead, it is safer if this embryologic layer is left undisturbed. Following this shiny layer superiorly,

one can easily carry the dissection cephalad until the IMA is identified and skeletonized. In the absence

of neoplasia, it is unnecessary to perform a high (proximal) ligation of the IMA, though by doing so,

one simplifies the dissection. Once the IMA (or the left colic artery) is identified and skeletonized, it can

be divided with the appropriate instrument, after making sure that both ureters are well out of the field.

Carrying the pelvic dissection distally, the pelvic nerves and the ureters should be clearly identified

and protected. Meticulous dissection can be done relatively bloodlessly. During anterior dissection of

the rectum, all effort should be made to continue the dissection posterior (on the rectum side) of the

Denovilliers fascia, specifically in men, to avoid sexual dysfunction. Similarly, during posterior

mobilization of the rectum particular attention should be given to identifying the presacral fascia, as

dissection posterior to this layer puts at risk the presacral vessels which can result in troublesome and

sometimes life-threatening bleeding. Once the dissection is carried out to the pelvic floor

circumferentially, a clamp can be placed on the proposed transection site, and the distance from the anal

verge can be assessed by a simple digital rectal examination. If the distance is appropriate then the

perineal dissection can follow. The patient is placed in Trendelenburg position, with both feet raised to

afford exposure to the perineum. The dissection plane starts in the intersphincteric plane. This dissection

leaves the external sphincter in situ, and can be incorporated in closing the perineal incision, which

decreases the complication rate. This intersphincteric plane is followed proximally and circumferentially

with particular attention anteriorly, to avoid injury to the vagina in women and urethra in men. Once

the intra-abdominal plane is reached, this part of the dissection is done.

Figure 66-9. Distal rectal transection, (A) stapled above the dentate line, or (B) a mucosectomy in preparation for a hand-sewn

anastomosis.

Proctocolectomy with Ileal Pouch-Anal Anastomosis (IPAA)

5 The colectomy and rectal mobilization are performed as above, however, once one reaches the pelvic

floor the rectum is transected approximately 1 cm above the anorectal ring with the stapler (Fig. 66-

9A). This rectal cuff will allow for better function, but will require surveillance as it is at risk for

cuffitis, and neoplasia. Alternatively, a mucosectomy can be done (Fig. 66-9B) with a subsequent handsewn IPAA anastomosis, though this is mostly done in cases of distal neoplasia, and poorer function is

observed.

Once the proctectomy is finished, a pouch is fashioned from the terminal ileum. Multiple

configurations are possible; the J-pouch configuration is the most popular in the United States (Fig. 66-

10). This is constructed by first aligning the terminal ileum into a J-configuration. It is necessary for the

apex of the pouch (the end connection of the pouch to the anus) to reach the rectal cuff or anus.

Usually, if the apex can be stretched without tension beyond the symphysis pubis, the pouch should

reach the anastomosis site without undue tension. Multiple maneuvers can be done to “lengthen” the

reach of the pouch, and are beyond the scope of this discussion. The pouch is usually between 10 and 20

cm in length, and ultimately optimizing reach has some effect on how long the pouch is. Once the apex

location is decided on, the two limbs of the ileum are aligned with interrupted suture. An enterotomy is

made at the apex of the pouch, and a stapler is used to fashion a common channel between the two

limbs of ileum. The pouch can then be attached by using an EEA stapler device (placing the anvil in the

J-pouch, and firing pin through the rectal pouch), or by performing a hand-sewn anastomosis (Fig. 66-

11).

1718

Figure 66-10. IPAA construction and anastomosis. (A) terminal ileum alignment for (B) common channel creation. C: EEA anvil

attachment at the apex of the pouch.

Figure 66-11. Anastomosis of the J-Pouch with (A) stapled anastomosis and (B) hand-sewn anastomosis.

IPAA-Postoperative Complications

6 The majority of patients who have an IPAA report high quality of life. Small bowel obstruction occur

in up to 20% of patients, most commonly managed nonoperatively.90 The J-pouch is at risk for

postoperative abscess, fistula, and pelvic sepsis, which can occur anytime after the pouch formation.

Immediate intervention with drainage and antibiotic treatment to control the infection is key, as

prolonged infection puts the pouch at risk.91,92

Pouchitis is a nonspecific inflammation of the pouch that occurs in up to 40% of the patients.93 This is

the most common complication after IPAA. Pouchitis is treated initially with oral antibiotics. If

pouchitis does not resolve, pouch evaluation using endoscopy is undertaken, with pouch mucosa biopsy,

and further evaluations can include testing for infections, such as C. difficile. Other medications that

have shown to help treat pouchitis are corticosteroids, budesonide, 5-aminosalicylic acid, and

allopurinol.94

Corticosteroid use does not preclude IPAA construction, though a slightly higher rate of anastomotic

1719

leaks is observed, thus, usage of a diverting ileostomy should be considered in this patient population.95

The effect of preoperative use of anti-TNF agents is not clear and limited to nonrandomized studies.

Routine surveillance of the pouch for dysplasia is not essential, however, surveillance of the rectal

cuff or transitional zone is necessary (both stapled and hand-sewn anastomoses). The incidence of

carcinoma in the rectal remnant/anal transition zone is rare but reported.96

Proctocolectomy with Koch Pouch

This is the second continent option (in addition to IPAA). Only a few centers worldwide perform this

procedure, and the technique is beyond the scope of this chapter.

In summary, UC is an inflammatory bowel condition influenced by both genetic and environmental

factors. Its treatment includes increasingly sophisticated medical and surgical treatment regimens. An

individualized, multidisciplinary treatment approach should be employed for each patient, at an

institution that has the experience and volume to provide the most current and appropriate treatment.

References

1. Loftus EV Jr. Clinical epidemiology of inflammatory bowel disease: incidence, prevalence, and

environmental influences. Gastroenterology 2004;126:1504–1517.

2. Stonnington CM, Phillips SF, Zinsmeister AR, et al. Prognosis of chronic ulcerative colitis in a

community. Gut 1987;28:1261–1266.

3. Stowe SP, Redmond SR, Stormont JM, et al. An epidemiologic study of inflammatory bowel disease

in Rochester, New York. Hospital incidence. Gastroenterology 1990;98:104–110.

4. Bernstein CN, Blanchard JF, Rawsthorne P, et al. Epidemiology of Crohn’s disease and ulcerative

colitis in a central Canadian province: a population-based study. Am J Epidemiol 1999;149:916–924.

5. Molodecky NA, Soon IS, Rabi DM, et al. Increasing incidence and prevalence of the inflammatory

bowel diseases with time, based on systematic review. Gastroenterology 2012;142:46–54.e42; quiz

e30.

6. Shivananda S, Lennard-Jones J, Logan R, et al. Incidence of inflammatory bowel disease across

Europe: is there a difference between north and south? Results of the European Collaborative Study

on Inflammatory Bowel Disease (EC-IBD). Gut 1996;39:690–697.

7. Sood A, Midha V. Epidemiology of inflammatory bowel disease in Asia. Indian J Gastroenterol

2007;26:285–289.

8. Kappelman MD, Rifas-Shiman SL, Kleinman K, et al. The prevalence and geographic distribution of

Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis in the United States. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2007;5:1424–

1429.

9. Loftus EV Jr, Schoenfeld P, Sandborn WJ. The epidemiology and natural history of Crohn’s disease

in population-based patient cohorts from North America: a systematic review. Aliment Pharmacol

Ther 2002;16:51–60.

10. Munkholm P, Langholz E, Nielsen OH, et al. Incidence and prevalence of Crohn’s disease in the

county of Copenhagen, 1962–87: a sixfold increase in incidence. Scand J Gastroenterol 1992;27:609–

614.

Popular Posts

Popular Posts

Popular Posts

Popular Posts

Translate

Blog Archive

Blog Archive

Featured Post

  ABSTRACT Doxorubicin (Dox) is a highly potent chemotherapy drug. Despite its efficacy, Dox's clinical application is limited due to it...