Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Surgical Management of Hereditary Colorectal Cancer Syndromes

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Hereditary Colorectal Cancer

  • 1028 Accesses

Abstract

Due to the advances in molecular genetic diagnostics of adenomatous polyposis variants as well as nonpolyposis syndromes, identification of patients with a genetic predisposition and their at-risk relatives is becoming increasingly important in clinical practice. Knowledge of the specific risk profile is gaining significance and requires a clinically differentiated approach to correctly identify the indications for prophylactic and extended therapeutic surgery. In this chapter, decision-making and the technical details of the operation for different colorectal cancer (CRC) syndromes are outlined. Besides the more commonly known polyposis syndromes, such as familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), surgeons should be able to clinically distinguish between attenuated and classical variants of FAP and be aware of MUTYH-associated polyposis (MAP) and the newly described polyposis polymerase proofreading-associated polyposis (PPAP), among others. Surgeons should be familiar with the specific indications and extent of surgery for prophylactic organ removal in the lower gastrointestinal tract to knowledgeably advise patients and enable them to make informed decisions. Moreover, reconstructive options after proctocolectomy and novel innovative techniques in proctectomy, such as the transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME), are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Kobayashi H, Ishida H, Ueno H, et al. Association between the age and the development of colorectal cancer in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis: a multi-institutional study. Surg Today. 2017;47:690–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Rajaratnam SG, Eglinton TW, Hider P, et al. Impact of ileal pouch-anal anastomosis on female fertility: meta-analysis and systematic review. Int J Color Dis. 2011;26:1365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Warrier SK, Kalady MF. Familial adenomatous polyposis: challenges and pitfalls of surgical treatment. Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2012;25:083–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Gordon PH, Nivatvongs S. Principles and practice of surgery for the colon, rectum, and anus: CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Debinski HS, Love S, Spigelman AD, et al. Colorectal polyp counts and cancer risk in familial adenomatous polyposis. Gastroenterology. 1996;110:1028–30.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Spigelman AD, Williams CB, Talbot IC, et al. Upper gastrointestinal cancer in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis. Lancet. 1989;2:783–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Lynch PM, Morris JS, Wen S, et al. A proposed staging system and stage-specific interventions for familial adenomatous polyposis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2016;84:115–125.e114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Ishikawa H, Mutoh M, Iwama T, et al. Endoscopic management of familial adenomatous polyposis in patients refusing colectomy. Endoscopy. 2016;48:51–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Nieuwenhuis MH, LM M–V, Slors FJ, et al. Genotype-phenotype correlations as a guide in the management of familial adenomatous polyposis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2007;5:374–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Soravia C, Klein L, Berk T, et al. Comparison of ileal pouch-anal anastomosis and ileorectal anastomosis in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis. Dis Colon Rectum. 1999;42:1028–33.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Van Duijvendijk P, Slors J, Taat C, et al. Quality of life after total colectomy with ileorectal anastomosis or proctocolectomy and ileal pouch—anal anastomosis for familial adenomatous polyposis. Br J Surg. 2000;87:590–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Bülow C, Vasen H, Järvinen H, et al. Ileorectal anastomosis is appropriate for a subset of patients with familial adenomatous polyposis. Gastroenterology. 2000;119:1454–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Stelzner F. Homingareale bei erblichen, synchronen und metachronen Rektokolonkrebsen. Chirurg. 2006;77:1056–60.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Koskenvuo L, Renkonen-Sinisalo L, Järvinen H, et al. Risk of cancer and secondary proctectomy after colectomy and ileorectal anastomosis in familial adenomatous polyposis. Int J Color Dis. 2014;29:225–30.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Bertario L, Russo A, Radice P, et al. Genotype and phenotype factors as determinants for rectal stump cancer in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis. Ann Surg. 2000;231:538–43.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Björk JA, Åkerbrant HI, Iselius LE, et al. Risk factors for rectal cancer morbidity and mortality in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis after colectomy and ileorectal anastomosis. Dis Colon Rectum. 2000;43:1719–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Bülow S, Bülow C, Vasen H, et al. Colectomy and ileorectal anastomosis is still an option for selected patients with familial adenomatous polyposis. Dis Colon Rectum. 2008;51:1318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Durno C, Monga N, Bapat B, et al. Does early colectomy increase Desmoid risk in familial adenomatous polyposis? Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2007;5:1190–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Sturt NJH, Clark SK. Current ideas in desmoid tumours. Familial Cancer. 2006;5:275–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Church JM, Xhaja X, Warrier SK, et al. Desmoid tumors do not prevent proctectomy following abdominal colectomy and ileorectal anastomosis in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis. Dis Colon Rectum. 2014;57:343–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Larson DW, Davies MM, Dozois EJ, et al. Sexual function, body image, and quality of life after laparoscopic and open ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Dis Colon Rectum. 2008;51:392–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kock NG. Intra-abdominal “reservoir” in patients with permanent ileostomy. Preliminary observations on a procedure resulting in fecal “continence” in five ileostomy patients. Arch Surg (Chicago, Ill 1960). 1969;99:223–31.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Gerber A, Apt MK, Craig PH. The improved quality of life with the Kock continent ileostomy. J Clin Gastroenterol. 1984;6:513–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Bonjer HJ, Deijen CL, Abis GA, et al. A randomized trial of laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;372:1324–32.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Indar AA, Efron JE, Young-Fadok TM. Laparoscopic ileal pouch–anal anastomosis reduces abdominal and pelvic adhesions. Surg Endosc. 2009;23:174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Bartels SA, D'hoore A, Cuesta MA, et al. Significantly increased pregnancy rates after laparoscopic restorative proctocolectomy: a cross-sectional study. Ann Surg. 2012;256:1045–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Fajardo AD, Dharmarajan S, George V, et al. Laparoscopic versus open 2-stage ileal pouch: laparoscopic approach allows for faster restoration of intestinal continuity. J Am Coll Surg. 2010;211:377–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Schiessling S, Leowardi C, Kienle P, et al. Laparoscopic versus conventional ileoanal pouch procedure in patients undergoing elective restorative proctocolectomy (LapConPouch Trial)—a randomized controlled trial. Langenbeck's Arch Surg. 2013;398:807–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Maartense S, Dunker MS, Slors JF, et al. Hand-assisted laparoscopic versus open restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch anal anastomosis: a randomized trial. Ann Surg. 2004;240:984–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Ueno H, Kobayashi H, Konishi T, et al. Prevalence of laparoscopic surgical treatment and its clinical outcomes in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis in Japan. Int J Clin Oncol. 2016;21:713–22.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Lindsey I, Guy R, Warren B, et al. Anatomy of Denonvilliers’ fascia and pelvic nerves, impotence, and implications for the colorectal surgeon. Br J Surg. 2000;87:1288–99.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. De Zeeuw S, Ahmed Ali U, Van Der Kolk MB, et al. Ileal pouch anal anastomosis with close rectal dissection using automated vessel sealers for ulcerative colitis: a promising alternative. Dig Surg. 2011;28:345–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Lindsey I, George BD, Kettlewell MGW, et al. Impotence after mesorectal and close rectal dissection for inflammatory bowel disease. Dis Colon Rectum. 2001;44:831–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Bartels S, Gardenbroek T, Aarts M, et al. Short-term morbidity and quality of life from a randomized clinical trial of close rectal dissection and total mesorectal excision in ileal pouch–anal anastomosis. Br J Surg. 2015;102:281–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Sylla P, Rattner DW, Delgado S, et al. NOTES transanal rectal cancer resection using transanal endoscopic microsurgery and laparoscopic assistance. Surg Endosc. 2010;24:1205–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Leo CA, Samaranayake S, Perry-Woodford ZL, et al. Initial experience of restorative proctocolectomy for ulcerative colitis by transanal total mesorectal rectal excision and single-incision abdominal laparoscopic surgery. Color Dis. 2016;18:1162–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Koedam T, Van Ramshorst G, Deijen C, et al. Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) for rectal cancer: effects on patient-reported quality of life and functional outcome. Tech Coloproctol. 2017;21:25–33.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Kirat HT, Remzi FH. Technical aspects of ileoanal pouch surgery in patients with ulcerative colitis. Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2010;23:239–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Möslein G. Surgical considerations in FAP-related pouch surgery: could we do better? Fam Cancer. 2016;15:457–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Parks A, Nicholls R. Proctocolectomy without ileostomy for ulcerative colitis. Br Med J. 1978;2:85–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Heald R, Allen D. Stapled ileo-anal anastomosis: a technique to avoid mucosal proctectomy in the ileal pouch operation. Br J Surg. 1986;73:571–2.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Slors J, Ponson A, Taat C, et al. Risk of residual rectal mucosa after proctocolectomy and ileal pouch-anal reconstruction with the double-stapling technique. Dis Colon Rectum. 1995;38:207–10.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Von Roon AC, Will OC, Man RF, et al. Mucosectomy with handsewn anastomosis reduces the risk of adenoma formation in the anorectal segment after restorative proctocolectomy for familial adenomatous polyposis. Ann Surg. 2011;253:314–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Ganschow P, Treiber I, Hinz U, et al. Residual rectal mucosa after stapled vs. handsewn ileal J-pouch-anal anastomosis in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis coli (FAP)—a critical issue. Langenbeck's Arch Surg. 2015;400:213–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Silva-Velazco J, Stocchi L, Wu X-R, et al. Twenty-year-old stapled pouches for ulcerative colitis without evidence of rectal cancer: implications for surveillance strategy? Dis Colon Rectum. 2014;57:1275–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Utsunomiya J, Iwama T, Imajo M, et al. Total colectomy, mucosal proctectomy, and ileoanal anastomosis. Dis Colon Rectum. 1980;23:459–66.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Hughes JP, Bauer AR, Bauer CM. Stapling techniques for easy construction of an ileal J-pouch. Am J Surg. 1988;155:783–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Schneider R, Schneider C, Dalchow A, et al. Prophylactic surgery in familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP)—a single surgeon’s short-and long-term experience with hand-assisted proctocolectomy and smaller J-pouches. Int J Color Dis. 2015;30:1109–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Block M, Börjesson L, Lindholm E, et al. Pouch design and long-term functional outcome after ileal pouch–anal anastomosis. Br J Surg. 2009;96:527–32.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Campos FG. Surgical treatment of familial adenomatous polyposis: dilemmas and current recommendations. World Journal of Gastroenterology : WJG. 2014;20:16620–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Carne PWG, Pemberton JH. Technical aspects of ileoanal pouch surgery. Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2004;17:35–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Sagar PM, Lewis W, Holdsworth PJ, et al. One-stage restorative proctocolectomy without temporary defunctioning ileostomy. Dis Colon Rectum. 1992;35:582–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Heuschen UA, Hinz U, Allemeyer EH, et al. Risk factors for ileoanal J pouch-related septic complications in ulcerative colitis and familial adenomatous polyposis. Ann Surg. 2002;235:207–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Miccini M, Bonapasta SA, Gregori M, et al. Ghost ileostomy: real and potential advantages. Am J Surg. 2010;200:e55–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Mari FS, Di Cesare T, Novi L, et al. Does ghost ileostomy have a role in the laparoscopic rectal surgery era? A randomized controlled trial. Surg Endosc. 2015;29:2590–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Hartley J, Church J, Gupta S, et al. Significance of incidental desmoids identified during surgery for familial adenomatous polyposis. Dis Colon Rectum. 2004;47:334–40.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Quast DR, Schneider R, Burdzik E, et al. Long-term outcome of sporadic and FAP-associated desmoid tumors treated with high-dose selective estrogen receptor modulators and sulindac: a single-center long-term observational study in 134 patients. Familial Cancer. 2016;15:31–40.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Brosens LA, Keller JJ, Offerhaus GJA, et al. Prevention and management of duodenal polyps in familial adenomatous polyposis. Gut. 2005;54:1034–43.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Galle TS, Juel K, Bülow S. Causes of death in familial adenomatous polyposis. Scand J Gastroenterol. 1999;34:808–12.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Groves C, Saunders B, Spigelman A, et al. Duodenal cancer in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP): results of a 10 year prospective study. Gut. 2002;50:636–41.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Kalady MF, Clary BM, Tyler DS, et al. Pancreas-preserving duodenectomy in the management of duodenal familial adenomatous polyposis. J Gastrointest Surg. 2002;6:82–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Watanabe Y, Ishida H, Baba H, et al. Pancreas-sparing total duodenectomy for Spigelman stage IV duodenal polyposis associated with familial adenomatous polyposis: experience of 10 cases at a single institution. Fam Cancer. 2017;16:91–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Samadder NJ, Neklason DW, Boucher KM, et al. Effect of sulindac and erlotinib vs placebo on duodenal neoplasia in familial adenomatous polyposis: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2016;315:1266–75.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Møller P, Seppälä T, Bernstein I et al. Incidence of and survival after subsequent cancers in carriers of pathogenic MMR variants with previous cancer: a report from the prospective lynch syndrome database. Gut. 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  65. (Nice) TNIOCE. Molecular testing strategies for Lynch syndrome in people with colorectal cancer (DG27): NICE guidance; 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Hampel H, Frankel WL, Martin E, et al. Screening for the Lynch syndrome (hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer). N Engl J Med. 2005;66:1657–64.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Kastrinos F, Syngal S. Screening patients with colorectal cancer for Lynch syndrome: what are we waiting for? J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:1024–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Pearlman R, Frankel WL, Swanson B et al. Prevalence and Spectrum of Germline cancer susceptibility gene mutations among patients with early-onset colorectal cancer. JAMA Oncol. 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Yurgelun MB, Kulke MH, Fuchs CS et al. (2017) Cancer susceptibility gene mutations in individuals with colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 0:JCO.2016.2071.0012.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Kumarasinghe AP, De Boer B, Bateman AC, et al. DNA mismatch repair enzyme immunohistochemistry in colorectal cancer: a comparison of biopsy and resection material. Pathology. 2010;42:414–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Vilkin A, Leibovici-Weissman YA, Halpern M, et al. Immunohistochemistry staining for mismatch repair proteins: the endoscopic biopsy material provides useful and coherent results. Hum Pathol. 2015;46:1705–11.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  72. Kim TJ, Kim ER, Hong SN, et al. Survival outcome and risk of metachronous colorectal cancer after surgery in Lynch syndrome. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017;66:1657–64.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Fitzgibbons R Jr, Lynch HT, Stanislav GV, et al. Recognition and treatment of patients with hereditary nonpolyposis colon cancer (Lynch syndromes I and II). Ann Surg. 1987;206:289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Stupart DA, Goldberg PA, Baigrie RJ, et al. Surgery for colonic cancer in HNPCC: total vs segmental colectomy. Color Dis. 2011;13:1395–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  75. Parry S, Win AK, Parry B, et al. Metachronous colorectal cancer risk for mismatch repair gene mutation carriers: the advantage of more extensive colon surgery. Gut. 2010;2010:228056.

    Google Scholar 

  76. De Vos Tot Nederveen Cappel WH, Buskens E, Van Duijvendijk P, et al. Decision analysis in the surgical treatment of colorectal cancer due to a mismatch repair gene defect. Gut. 2003;52:1752–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Syngal S, Weeks JC, Schrag D, et al. Benefits of colonoscopic surveillance and prophylactic colectomy in patients with hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer mutations. Ann Intern Med. 1998;129:787–96.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. Maeda T, Cannom RR, Beart RW Jr, et al. Decision model of segmental compared with total abdominal colectomy for colon cancer in hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:1175–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Elton C, Makin G, Hitos K, et al. Mortality, morbidity and functional outcome after ileorectal anastomosis. Br J Surg. 2003;90:59–65.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  80. Haanstra JF, Tot Nederveen WHDV, Gopie JP, et al. Quality of life after surgery for colon cancer in patients with Lynch syndrome: partial versus subtotal colectomy. Dis Colon Rectum. 2012;55:653–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Cirillo L, Urso ED, Parrinello G, et al. High risk of rectal cancer and of metachronous colorectal cancer in probands of families fulfilling the Amsterdam criteria. Ann Surg. 2013;257:900–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Kalady MF, Mcgannon E, Vogel JD, et al. Risk of colorectal adenoma and carcinoma after colectomy for colorectal cancer in patients meeting Amsterdam criteria. Ann Surg. 2010;252:507–13.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Rodríguez-Bigas MA, Vasen H, Pekka-Mecklin J, et al. Rectal cancer risk in hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer after abdominal colectomy. International Collaborative Group on HNPCC. Ann Surg. 1997;225:202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Habr-Gama A, Perez RO, Nadalin W, et al. Operative versus nonoperative treatment for stage 0 distal rectal cancer following chemoradiation therapy: long-term results. Ann Surg. 2004;240:711–8.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  85. Lee JS, Petrelli NJ, Rodriguez-Bigas MA. Rectal cancer in hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. Am J Surg. 2001;181:207–10.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  86. Kalady MF, Lipman J, Mcgannon E, et al. Risk of colonic neoplasia after proctectomy for rectal cancer in hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. Ann Surg. 2012;255:1121–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Meagher A, Farouk R, Dozois R, et al. J ileal pouch–anal anastomosis for chronic ulcerative colitis: complications and long-term outcome in 1310 patients. Br J Surg. 1998;85:800–3.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  88. HFA V, Blanco I, Aktan-Collan K, et al. Revised guidelines for the clinical management of Lynch syndrome (HNPCC): recommendations by a group of European experts. Gut. 2013;62:812–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Burn J, Gerdes A-M, Macrae F, et al. Long-term effect of aspirin on cancer risk in carriers of hereditary colorectal cancer: an analysis from the CAPP2 randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2012;378:2081–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. Burn J, Sheth H. The role of aspirin in preventing colorectal cancer. Br Med Bull. 2016;119:17–24.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  91. Jass J, Smyrk TC, Stewart S, et al. Pathology of hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer. Anticancer Res. 1993;14:1631–4.

    Google Scholar 

  92. Vasen HF, Abdirahman M, Brohet R, et al. One to 2-year surveillance intervals reduce risk of colorectal cancer in families with Lynch syndrome. Gastroenterology. 2010;138:2300–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  93. Møller P, Seppälä T, Bernstein I, et al. Cancer incidence and survival in Lynch syndrome patients receiving colonoscopic and gynaecological surveillance: first report from the prospective Lynch syndrome database. Gut:gutjnl-2015-309675; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  94. Aarnio M, Mecklin JP, Aaltonen LA, et al. Life-time risk of different cancers in hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer (hnpcc) syndrome. Int J Cancer. 1995;64:430–3.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  95. Dunlop MG, Farrington SM, Carothers AD, et al. Cancer risk associated with germline DNA mismatch repair gene mutations. Hum Mol Genet. 1997;6:105–10.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  96. Quehenberger F, Vasen H, Van Houwelingen H. Risk of colorectal and endometrial cancer for carriers of mutations of the hMLH1 and hMSH2 gene: correction for ascertainment. J Med Genet. 2005;42:491–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  97. Obermair A, Youlden DR, Young JP, et al. Risk of endometrial cancer for women diagnosed with HNPCC-related colorectal carcinoma. Int J Cancer. 2010;127:2678–84.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  98. Faubion S, Kuhle CL, Shuster LT, et al. Long-term health consequences of premature or early menopause and considerations for management. Climacteric. 2015;18:483–91.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  99. Schmeler KM, Lynch HT, Chen L-M, et al. Prophylactic surgery to reduce the risk of gynecologic cancers in the Lynch syndrome. N Engl J Med. 2006;354:261–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  100. Boks DE, Trujillo AP, Voogd AC, et al. Survival analysis of endometrial carcinoma associated with hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. Int J Cancer. 2002;102:198–200.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Klinik für Allgemein- und Viszeralchirurgie, HELIOS University Hospital Witten/Herdecke, Wuppertal, Germany

    Johannes Dörner

  2. Private University Witten/Herdecke, Witten, Germany

    Mahmoud Taghavi Fallahpour

  3. Center for Hereditary Tumours, HELIOS University Hospital Witten/Herdecke, Wuppertal, Germany

    Gabriela Möslein

Authors
  1. Johannes Dörner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mahmoud Taghavi Fallahpour
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Gabriela Möslein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gabriela Möslein .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Hereditary Cancer Program, Catalan Institute of Oncology, IDIBELL and CIBERONC, Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain

    Laura Valle

  2. University of Southern California, Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles, California, USA

    Stephen B. Gruber

  3. Hereditary Cancer Program, Catalan Institute of Oncology, IDIBELL and CIBERONC, Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain

    Gabriel Capellá

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Dörner, J., Fallahpour, M.T., Möslein, G. (2018). Surgical Management of Hereditary Colorectal Cancer Syndromes. In: Valle, L., Gruber, S., Capellá, G. (eds) Hereditary Colorectal Cancer. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74259-5_21

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation