Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Role of new endoscopic techniques in Lynch syndrome

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Familial Cancer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Lynch syndrome, or hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC), is the most common hereditary condition predisposing for colorectal cancer. International guidelines recommend surveillance of the colorectum by colonoscopy every 1–2 years starting at the age of 20–25 years. This has been shown to reduce the incidence of, and mortality due to colorectal cancer. Aim of this review was to determine the current role of new endoscopic techniques, such as narrow-band imaging, autofluorescence endoscopy and chromoendoscopy in the surveillance of Lynch syndrome. So far, six studies have been published in which the new endoscopic techniques were investigated in Lynch syndrome: narrow-band imaging (n = 1), autofluorescence endoscopy (n = 1) and chromoendoscopy (n = 4). At this moment, none of the new endoscopic techniques have shown clear and convincing superiority over conventional white light colonoscopy in Lynch syndrome subjects. Of these three techniques, chromoendoscopy appears to be the most promising new endoscopic technique in aiding in the detection of neoplastic lesions in Lynch syndrome, although further prospective studies are needed.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lynch HT, Lynch PM, Lanspa SJ et al (2009) Review of the Lynch syndrome: history, molecular genetics, screening, differential diagnosis, and medicolegal ramifications. Clin Genet 76:1–18

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Koornstra JJ, Mourits MJ, Sijmons RH et al (2009) Management of extracolonic tumours in patients with Lynch syndrome. Lancet Oncol 10:400–408

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Rijcken FEM, Hollema H, Kleibeuker JH (2002) Proximal adenomas in hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer are prone to rapid malignant transformation. Gut 50:382–386

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. De Jong AE, Morreau H, van Puijnenbroek M et al (2004) The role of mismatch repair gene defects in the development of adenomas in patients with HNPCC. Gastroenterology 126:42–48

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Lindor NM, Petersen GM, Hadley DW et al (2006) Recommendations for the care of individuals with an inherited predisposition to Lynch syndrome: a systematic review. JAMA 296:1507–1517

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Vasen HF, Möslein G, Alonso A et al (2007) Guidelines for the clinical management of Lynch syndrome (hereditary non-polyposis cancer). J Med Genet 44:353–362

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Järvinen HJ, Aarnio M, Mustonen H et al (2000) Controlled 15-year trial on screening for colorectal cancer in families with hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. Gastroenterology 118:829–834

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Vasen HF, Abdirahman M, Brohet R et al (2010) One to 2-year surveillance intervals reduce risk of colorectal cancer in families with Lynch syndrome. Gastroenterology 138:2300–2306

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. de Jong AE, Hendriks YM, Kleibeuker JH et al (2006) Decrease in mortality in Lynch syndrome families because of surveillance. Gastroenterology 130:665–671

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Stoffel EM, Turgeon DK, Stockwell DH (2008) Missed adenomas during colonoscopic surveillance in individuals with Lynch syndrome (hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer). Cancer Prev Res 1:470–475

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. East JE, Suzuki N, Stavrinidis M et al (2008) Narrow band imaging for colonoscopic surveillance in hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer. Gut 57:65–70

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Ramsoekh D, Haringsma J, Poley JW et al (2010) A back-to-back comparison of white light video endoscopy with autofluorescence endoscopy for adenoma detection in high-risk subjects. Gut 59:785–793

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Lecomte T, Cellier C, Meatchi T et al (2005) Chromoendoscopic colonoscopy for detecting preneoplastic lesions in hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer syndrome. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 3:897–902

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hurlstone DP, Karajeh M, Cross SS et al (2005) The role of high-magnification-chromoscopic colonoscopy in hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer screening: a prospective “back-to-back” endoscopic study. Am J Gastroenterol 100:2167–2173

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Huneburg R, Lammert F, Rabe C et al (2009) Chromocolonoscopy detects more adenomas than white light colonoscopy or narrow band imaging colonoscopy in hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer screening. Endoscopy 41:316–322

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Hazewinkel Y, Dekker E (2011) Colonoscopy: basic principles and novel techniques. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 8:554–564

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Rex DK, Cutler CS, Lemmel GT et al (1997) Colonoscopic miss rates of adenomas determined by back-to-back colonoscopies. Gastroenterology 112:24–28

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Rex DK (2006) Maximizing detection of adenomas and cancers during colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 101:2866–2877

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Nagorni A, Bjelakovic G, Petrovic B (2012) Narrow band imaging versus conventional white light colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal polyps. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 1:CD008361

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Barclay RL, Vicari JJ, Doughty AS, Johanson JF, Greenlaw RL (2006) Colonoscopic withdrawal times and adenoma detection during screening colonoscopy. N Engl J Med 355:2533–2541

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. van den Broek FJ, Fockens P, van Eeden S (2009) Clinical evaluation of endoscopic trimodal imaging for the detection and differentiation of colonic polyps. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 7:288–295

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Brown SR, Baraza W (2010) Chromoscopy versus conventional endoscopy for the detection of polyps in the colon and rectum. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 10:CD006439

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Pohl J, Schneider A, Vogell H et al (2011) Pancolonic chromoendoscopy with indigo carmine versus standard colonoscopy for detection of neoplastic lesions: a randomised two-centre trial. Gut 60:485–490

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Stoffel EM, Turgeon DK, Stockwell DH et al (2008) Chromoendoscopy detects more adenomas than colonoscopy using intensive inspection without dye spraying. Cancer Prev Res 1:507–513

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Gheonea DI, Saftoiu A, Ciurea T et al (2010) Confocal laser endomicroscopy of the colon. J Gastrointestin Liver Dis 19:207–211

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Neumann H, Kiesslich R, Wallace MB et al (2010) Confocal laser endomicroscopy: technical advances and clinical applications. Gastroenterology 139:388–392

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Mascolo M, Staibano S, Ilardi G et al (2012) Probe-based confocal laser endomicroscopy evaluation of colon preneoplastic lesions, with particular attention to the aberrant crypt foci, and comparative assessment with histological features obtained by conventional endoscopy. Gastroenterol Res Pract (Epub 2012 Apr 8)

  28. Kuiper T, Kiesslich R, Ponsioen C et al (2012) The learning curve, accuracy, and interobserver agreement of endoscope-based confocal laser endomicroscopy for the differentiation of colorectal lesions. Gastrointest Endosc 75:1211–1217

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Kuiper T, van den Broek FJC, van Eeden S et al (2012) Feasibility and accuracy of confocal endomicroscopy in comparison with narrow-band imaging and chromoendoscopy for the differentiation of colorectal lesions. Am J Gastroenterol 107:543–550

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Neumann H, Fuchs FS, Vieth M et al (2011) Review article: in vivo imaging by endocytoscopy. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 33:1181–1193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Kwon YS, Cho YS, Yoon TJ et al (2012) Recent advances in targeted endoscopic imaging: early detection of gastrointestinal neoplasms. World J Gastrointest Endosc 4:57–64

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, P. O. box 30001, 9700 RB, Groningen, The Netherlands

    Jasmijn F. Haanstra, Jan H. Kleibeuker & Jan J. Koornstra

Authors
  1. Jasmijn F. Haanstra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jan H. Kleibeuker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jan J. Koornstra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jasmijn F. Haanstra.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Haanstra, J.F., Kleibeuker, J.H. & Koornstra, J.J. Role of new endoscopic techniques in Lynch syndrome. Familial Cancer 12, 267–272 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10689-013-9610-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10689-013-9610-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation