©The Author(s) 2022.
World J Gastroenterol. Dec 21, 2022; 28(47): 6619-6631
Published online Dec 21, 2022. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v28.i47.6619
Published online Dec 21, 2022. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v28.i47.6619
Table 3 Objective parameters for assessing lesions, endoscopists, and units
| Complex polyp | Expert endoscopist | Reference endoscopy unit | |||||
| SMSA score ≥ 12 (Level 4)[41] | BSG criteria[42] | BSG criteria[42] | |||||
| BSG criteria[42] | 500 independent colonoscopies | Ensure that endoscopists undertake a sufficient number of procedures a year to maintain acceptable standards4 | |||||
| Increased risk of malignancy | 100-125 EMR to obtain competence | ||||||
| Kudo´s pit pattern V | A non-defined number1 of EMR procedures to maintain competence | ||||||
| Paris 0-IIc/0-IIa+IIc | Time from referral to definitive management: < 8 wk | ||||||
| LST-NG/LST-Gm (dominant nodule) | Fulfilling key performance indicators | ||||||
| NICE 3/Sano III | Presence of recurrence/residual polyp at 12 mo < 10% | Geraghty et al[40] | |||||
| Increased risk of incomplete resection/recurrence | Provided endoscopy list time for the additional workload with a dedicated list | ||||||
| Size ≥ 40 mm | EMR perforation rate: < 2% | ||||||
| Difficult location (ileocecal valve, appendix, diverticulum, dentate line) | Post-polypectomy bleeding rate: < 5% | Staff to include at least two endoscopists that can cover each other and endoscopy nurses with training in complex polypectomy | |||||
| DOPyS2 | |||||||
| Within an inflamed segment of the colon | ESGE3 curriculum for optical diagnosis[59] | ||||||
| Prior failed resection attempt | Assessing competence: ≥ 80 % accuracy for identifying submucosal invasion in large (≥ 20 mm lesions), Maintaining competence: in vivo audit and review of at least 10 large (≥ 20 mm) lesions within a year | Equipment: including necessary snares and hemostatic devices | |||||
| Non-lifting sign | |||||||
| Increased risk of adverse events | Surgeons for discussion in the MDT and case of operative treatment of adverse events | ||||||
| Cecum | |||||||
| Endoscopist´s expertise | Robust referral system including administrative staff support and tools for virtual MDT | ||||||
| ESGE criteria[21] | |||||||
| Difficult location or poor access (ileocecal valve, periapendicular, anorectal junction) | |||||||
| Prior failed resection attempts | |||||||
| Non-lifting sign | |||||||
| SMSA level 4 | |||||||
- Citation: Bustamante-Balén M. How to avoid overtreatment of benign colorectal lesions: Rationale for an evidence-based management. World J Gastroenterol 2022; 28(47): 6619-6631
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v28/i47/6619.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v28.i47.6619