Outcomes of surgical resections for benign colon polyps: A systematic review
Research output: Contribution to journal › Review article › Academic › peer-review
Background Not all benign colonic polyps are suitable for endoscopic resection, although criteria for endoscopic non-resectability vary worldwide. Clinical decision-making largely depends on endoscopic treatment options, as well as postoperative risks after surgical resection. This systematic review aimed to determine postoperative outcomes and the characteristics of surgically resected benign colonic polyps. Methods MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched for studies investigating the outcomes of surgical resection for benign colonic polyps since 1980. Studies were considered eligible when at least one postoperative outcome (morbidity and/or mortality) was reported. Meta-analyses were conducted for the primary outcome measures (morbidity and mortality) for studies that included patients only after the year 2000. Results Of the 4210 studies retrieved, 26 studies describing 139 897 patients were included. The most common indications for surgical resection were polyp location in the right-sided colon, non-pedunculated morphology, and large polyp size. The pooled 1-month complication and mortality rates of studies that included patients after the year 2000 were 24 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 15 % - 36 %) and 0.7 % (95 %CI 0.6 % - 0.8 %), respectively. Conclusion The postoperative morbidity and mortality after colonic resection for benign polyps are substantial. Referral to an advanced interventional endoscopist should be considered before referral for surgery to evaluate the possibilities for endoscopic treatment of large, non-pedunculated, and/or colonic polyps in difficult locations without suspicion of submucosal malignant invasion.
de Neree tot Babberich, M. P. M., Bronzwaer, M. E. S., Andriessen, J. O., Bastiaansen, B. A. J., Mostafavi, N., Bemelman, W. A., ... Dekker, E. (2019). Outcomes of surgical resections for benign colon polyps: A systematic review. Endoscopy, 51(10), 961-972. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-0962-9780