Retrospective Study Open Access
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2025. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.
World J Gastrointest Surg. Aug 27, 2025; 17(8): 109057
Published online Aug 27, 2025. doi: 10.4240/wjgs.v17.i8.109057
Risk factors and clinical prediction models for short-term recurrence after endoscopic surgery in patients with colorectal polyps
Meng Zhang, Rui Yin, Jie Ying, Guan-Qi Liu, Ping Wang, Jian-Xin Ge, Department of Gastroenterology, Nanjing Jiangbei Hospital, Nanjing 210048, Jiangsu Province, China
ORCID number: Meng Zhang (0009-0000-6148-887X); Rui Yin (0000-0001-6737-3870); Jie Ying (0000-0001-5194-7120); Guan-Qi Liu (0000-0003-2125-861X); Ping Wang (0000-0002-0142-4521); Jian-Xin Ge (0009-0002-5319-1341).
Author contributions: Zhang M conceived and designed the study and wrote the manuscript; Ge JX conceived and designed the study and oversaw the data collection process; Yin R and Ying J contributed to the data analysis; and Liu GQ and Wang P collected the data and literature. Each author has read and approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work, ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. All the authors made significant contributions to the research and preparation of this manuscript.
Institutional review board statement: This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Nanjing Jiangbei Hospital (Approval No. 2024040).
Informed consent statement: The need for patient consent was waived by the Ethics Committee due to the retrospective nature of the study.
Conflict-of-interest statement: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Data sharing statement: The data used in this study can be obtained from the corresponding author upon request.
Open Access: This article is an open-access article that was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: https://creativecommons.org/Licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Corresponding author: Jian-Xin Ge, Chief Physician, Department of Gastroenterology, Nanjing Jiangbei Hospital, No. 552 Geguan Road, Jiangbei New District, Nanjing 210048, Jiangsu Province, China. doc_gejianxin@163.com
Received: May 14, 2025
Revised: June 17, 2025
Accepted: July 8, 2025
Published online: August 27, 2025
Processing time: 103 Days and 4.2 Hours

Abstract
BACKGROUND

Colorectal polyps (CPs) are important precursor lesions of colorectal cancer, and endoscopic surgery remains the primary treatment option. However, the short-term recurrence rate post-surgery is high, and the risk factors for recurrence remain unknown.

AIM

To comprehensively explore risk factors for short-term recurrence of CPs after endoscopic surgery and develop a nomogram prediction model.

METHODS

Overall, 362 patients who underwent endoscopic polypectomy between January 2022 and January 2024 at Nanjing Jiangbei Hospital were included. We screened basic demographic data, clinical and polyp characteristics, surgery-related information, and independent risk factors for CPs recurrence using univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. The multivariate analysis results were used to construct a nomogram prediction model, internally validated using Bootstrapping, with performance evaluated using area under the curve (AUC), calibration curve, and decision curve analysis.

RESULTS

CP re-occurred in 166 (45.86%) of the 362 patients within 1 year post-surgery. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that age (OR = 1.04, P = 0.002), alcohol consumption (OR = 2.07, P = 0.012), Helicobacter pylori infection (OR = 2.34, P < 0.001), polyp number > 2 (OR = 1.98, P = 0.005), sessile polyps (OR = 2.10, P = 0.006), and adenomatous pathological type (OR = 3.02, P < 0.001) were independent risk factors for post-surgery recurrence. The nomogram prediction model showed good discriminatory (AUC = 0.73) and calibrating power, and decision curve analysis showed that the model had good clinical benefit at risk probabilities > 20%.

CONCLUSION

We identified multiple independent risk factors for short-term recurrence after endoscopic surgery. The nomogram prediction model showed a certain degree of differentiation, calibration, and potential clinical applicability.

Key Words: Colorectal polyps; Endoscopic surgery; Recurrence; Risk factors; Prediction models; Short-term

Core Tip: This retrospective study explored risk factors for short-term recurrence of colorectal polyps after endoscopic surgery and developed a nomogram prediction model. We identified key risk factors such as age, alcohol consumption, Helicobacter pylori infection, number of polyps, sessile polyps, and adenomatous pathology. A nomogram prediction model developed based on these factors showed good discriminatory and calibration abilities, offering clinicians a practical tool for individualized recurrence risk assessment to optimize treatment and follow-up strategies.



INTRODUCTION

Colorectal polyps (CPs) are abnormal tissue proliferations that protrude from the mucosal surface of the colon. They are considered important precursor lesions to colorectal cancer (CRC)[1]. The World Health Organization revealed that CRC is the third most prevalent malignant neoplasm worldwide, with over 1.9 million cases and approximately 930000 mortalities reported globally each year[2]. The incidence of CPs increases significantly with age, particularly prevalent in individuals aged > 50[3]. Epidemiological studies show that the prevalence of CPs varies significantly across regions, with a higher prevalence observed in developed countries. This difference may be associated with dietary structure, lifestyle, and screening prevalence[4,5]. Furthermore, genetic factors, obesity, smoking, and alcohol consumption have been recognized as significant risk factors for the development of CPs[6,7]. As the population ages and lifestyles continue to change, the incidence of CPs is expected to rise, further increasing the burden on healthcare systems. Despite advancements in endoscopic techniques that have improved the early detection and treatment of CPs, post-surgery recurrence remains a significant clinical concern.

At present, the primary treatment for CPs is endoscopic resection, which includes techniques such as high-frequency electrocoagulation resection, endoscopic submucosal dissection, and endoscopic mucosal resection[8]. The benefits of these endoscopic treatment techniques, including reduced trauma, expedited recovery, and a diminished incidence of complications, have led to their predominance in the management of CPs. Despite the continuous development and improvement in endoscopic therapeutic techniques, the recurrence of CPs after endoscopic surgery remains a significant clinical challenge. Reportedly, the short-term recurrence rate after colorectal polypectomy (usually defined as within 1-3 years) can be as high as 20%-50%, particularly in patients with multiple polyps, adenomatous polyps, or a family history of recurrence[9]. The recurrence of polyps significantly impacts the healthcare burden experienced by patients and potentially compromises adherence to treatment regimens. A major concern is that recurrent polyps may obscure the presence of new or incompletely resected precancerous lesions, increasing the risk of developing CRC[10]. Consequently, effective prevention and control of post-surgery recurrence of CP have become a crucial concern in contemporary clinical practice and research.

Despite findings from numerous studies addressing recurrence after endoscopic surgery for CPs, the risk factors for short-term recurrence have not been fully delineated, and uniform and validated clinical prediction models are lacking. In this study, we had two aims: First, to comprehensively and systematically investigate the risk factors for short-term recurrence after endoscopic surgery in patients with CPs using a retrospective analysis; and second, to construct a nomogram prediction model. The nomogram prediction model is an intuitive and practical risk assessment tool that integrates the results of multivariate analyses into a graphical scoring system[11]. We incorporated a wider range of clinicopathological indicators than those in previous studies. Comprehensive statistical methods were used for multivariate analysis, thereby enhancing the accuracy and comprehensiveness of the risk factor analysis. The constructed clinical prediction model will be more relevant for clinical applications, thus helping clinicians accurately assess patients’ recurrence risk pre-surgery. This finding will facilitate the formulation of a more personalized treatment and follow-up plan and improve the treatment effects and quality of life of patients, which is of great clinical significance.

MATERIALS AND METHODS
Study design and patients

In this retrospective study, we obtained data from patients with CPs treated at Nanjing Jiangbei Hospital between January 2022 and January 2024. We retrieved data from 378 patients and excluded 16 patients owing to incomplete clinical data. We analyzed data from the remaining 362 patients. They all met the following inclusion criteria: (1) Age ≥ 18 years; (2) CPs diagnosed by endoscopy and pathology; (3) Indication for surgery and having undergone endoscopic polypectomy; (4) Complete regular follow-up visits for at least 1 year post-surgery; and (5) Complete clinical data. The exclusion criteria were as follows: (1) Combined CRC or other malignant tumors; (2) Severe dysfunction of vital organs, including the heart, lungs, liver, and kidneys; (3) Previous history of colorectal surgery (other than the current endoscopic polypectomy); and (4) Inflammatory bowel disease or other chronic bowel diseases that may affect polyp recurrence. The Ethics Committee of the Nanjing Jiangbei Hospital (Approval No. 2024040) approved this study. The need for patient consent was waived by the Ethics Committee due to the retrospective nature of the study.

Data collection

We collected basic demographic data and detailed clinical information using the hospital's electronic medical record system. Basic demographic data included age, sex, height, weight, smoking history, and alcohol consumption history. Clinical information included presence of a family history of CPs, hypertension, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection, and presence of combined gastric polyps. Endoscopy and surgical intervention information included polyp diameter, number, location, color, morphology, resection method, and intraoperative bleeding. We also collected pathological results. During the data collection process, professionally trained data collectors were responsible for information extraction, and specialized personnel were responsible for conducting secondary checks to ensure data accuracy and completeness.

Relapse measurement

We followed up on all patients for at least 1 year and collected test results for regular review within one year. In the first year post-surgery, patients were advised to adhere to medical recommendations and undergo regular check-ups every 3 months. Relapse was defined as a new or recurrent polyp found in situ on colonoscopy within 1 year post-surgery. New polyps are found in the mucosa of the colon or rectum outside the site of the initial surgical resection. In contrast, recurrent polyps in situ are found at the site of the initial surgical resection. Recurrence was confirmed by pathological examination.

Statistical analysis

Continuous variables are expressed as mean ± SD, and categorical variables are expressed as frequency (percentage). Differences between relapse and non-relapse groups were analyzed using the χ2 test (categorical variables) and t-test (continuous variables). Risk factors were screened using univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses, and OR and 95%CI for each variable were calculated. Statistically significant factors (P < 0.05) in the univariate analysis were included in the multivariate logistic regression model, and the variables were screened using backwards stepwise regression. A nomogram prediction model was constructed based on the multifactor logistic regression analysis results. The model’s discriminatory power was assessed using the receiver operating characteristic curve and area under the curve (AUC); the closer the AUC was to 1, the stronger was the model’s ability to discriminate between patients who experienced relapses and those who did not. We assessed the calibration of the model using a calibration curve and compared the consistency between the predicted probability of the model and the actual observed probability. The model was considered well-calibrated if the calibration curve was close to the ideal curve and the Hosmer-Lemeshow test yielded P > 0.05. The Bootstrapping method was used to sample the original cohort 1000 times for internal validation to evaluate the model’s stability and reliability. Decision curve analysis was conducted to evaluate the clinical utility of the model across different risk thresholds, with probability thresholds as the horizontal coordinates and net clinical benefit as the vertical coordinates, to determine the clinical application value of the model under different risk probabilities. The accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of the nomogram prediction model were calculated using the optimal Jordon index. We conducted all statistical analyses using SPSS (version 26.0) and R software (version 4.0.3), and P < 0.05 (two-sided) was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS
General demographic characteristics

In this study, we included 362 patients, with 166 (45.86%) of them showing a recurrence of polyps within 1 year. The mean age of all patients was 53.32 ± 9.80 years (Table 1). The mean age was higher in the relapse group than in the non-relapse group (P = 0.002). The proportions of smokers and drinkers in the relapse group were higher than those in the non-relapse group (P < 0.05). No significant differences were observed in sex (P = 0.144), body mass index (P = 0.280), hypertension (P = 0.478), diabetes (P = 0.293), hyperlipidemia (P = 0.205), or family history of CPs (P = 0.725) between the two groups.

Table 1 Demographic characteristics of patients.
Variables
Total (n = 362)
Non-relapse group (n = 196)
Relapse group (n = 166)
Statistic
P value
Age, mean ± SD53.32 ± 9.8051.83 ± 9.3455.08 ± 10.07t = -3.180.002
BMI, mean ± SD24.29 ± 3.1724.12 ± 3.1524.49 ± 3.18t = -1.080.280
Sex, n (%)χ2 = 2.140.144
    Female139 (38.40)82 (41.84)57 (34.34)
    Male223 (61.60)114 (58.16)109 (65.66)
Hypertension, n (%)χ2 = 0.500.478
    No251 (69.34)139 (70.92)112 (67.47)
    Yes111 (30.66)57 (29.08)54 (32.53)
Diabetes, n (%)χ2 = 1.100.293
    No329 (90.88)181 (92.35)148 (89.16)
    Yes33 (9.12)15 (7.65)18 (10.84)
Hyperlipidemia, n (%)χ2 = 1.600.205
    No304 (83.98)169 (86.22)135 (81.33)
    Yes58 (16.02)27 (13.78)31 (18.67)
Family history, n (%)χ2 = 0.120.725
    No280 (77.35)153 (78.06)127 (76.51)
    Yes82 (22.65)43 (21.94)39 (23.49)
Smoking, n (%)χ2 = 5.950.015
    No308 (85.08)175 (89.29)133 (80.12)
    Yes54 (14.92)21 (10.71)33 (19.88)
Drinking, n (%)χ2 = 3.910.048
    No289 (79.83)164 (83.67)125 (75.30)
    Yes73 (20.17)32 (16.33)41 (24.70)
Clinical characteristics

The proportion of H. pylori infections and polyp number > 2 was higher in the relapse group than in the non-relapse group (P < 0.05) (Table 2). Furthermore, the proportion of patients diagnosed with stemless and adenomatous polyps was significantly higher in the relapse group than in the non-relapse group (P < 0.05). No significant differences were noted in other clinical characteristics between the two groups.

Table 2 Differences in clinical characteristics between the two groups, n (%).
Variables
Total (n = 362)
Non-relapse group (n = 196)
Relapse group (n = 166)
Statistic
P value
H. pylori infectionχ2 = 11.15< 0.001
    No252 (69.61)151 (77.04)101 (60.84)
    Yes110 (30.39)45 (22.96)65 (39.16)
Gastric polypχ2 = 0.190.663
    No317 (87.57)173 (88.27)144 (86.75)
    Yes45 (12.43)23 (11.73)22 (13.25)
Polyp diameterχ2 = 2.860.091
    ≤ 2 cm239 (66.02)137 (69.90)102 (61.45)
    > 2 cm123 (33.98)59 (30.10)64 (38.55)
Polyp numberχ2 = 5.750.016
    ≤ 2231 (63.81)136 (69.39)95 (57.23)
    > 2131 (36.19)60 (30.61)71 (42.77)
Polyp locationχ2 = 1.760.184
    Distal colon186 (51.38)107 (54.59)79 (47.59)
    Proximal colon176 (48.62)89 (45.41)87 (52.41)
Polyp colorχ2 = 0.710.400
    Rubedo303 (83.70)167 (85.20)136 (81.93)
    Non-redness59 (16.30)29 (14.80)30 (18.07)
Polyp morphologyχ2 = 5.260.022
    Pedunculated or subpedunculated95 (26.24)61 (31.12)34 (20.48)
    Sessile267 (73.76)135 (68.88)132 (79.52)
Excision modeχ2 = 0.220.638
    EMR281 (77.62)154 (78.57)127 (76.51)
    Others81 (22.38)42 (21.43)39 (23.49)
Intraoperative bleedingχ2 = 1.110.292
    No327 (90.33)180 (91.84)147 (88.55)
    Yes35 (9.67)16 (8.16)19 (11.45)
Pathological typeχ2 = 17.29< 0.001
    Others126 (34.81)87 (44.39)39 (23.49)
    Adenomatous236 (65.19)109 (55.61)127 (76.51)
Univariate logistic regression analysis

Relapse (yes, 1; no, 0) was used as the dependent variable in the logistic regression model. Univariate logistic regression analysis results showed that age (OR = 1.04, P = 0.002), smoking (OR = 2.07, P = 0.016), drinking (OR = 1.68, P = 0.049), H. pylori infection (OR = 2.16, P < 0.001), polyp number (OR = 1.69, P = 0.017), polyp morphology (OR = 1.75, P = 0.023), pathological type (OR = 2.60, P < 0.001) were significantly correlated with postoperative relapse in patients with CP (Table 3).

Table 3 Univariate logistic regression analysis.
Variables
β
SE
Z
P value
OR (95%CI)
Age0.030.013.110.0021.04 (1.01-1.06)
BMI0.040.031.080.2801.04 (0.97-1.11)
Sex
    Female1.00 (reference)
    Male0.320.221.460.1441.38 (0.90-2.11)
Hypertension
    No1.00 (reference)
    Yes0.160.230.710.4781.18 (0.75-1.84)
Diabetes
    No1.00 (reference)
    Yes0.380.371.050.2961.47 (0.72-3.01)
Hyperlipidemia
    No1.00 (reference)
    Yes0.360.291.260.2071.44 (0.82-2.52)
Family history
    No1.00 (reference)
    Yes0.090.250.350.7251.09 (0.67-1.79)
Smoking
    No1.00 (reference)
    Yes0.730.302.410.0162.07 (1.14-3.74)
Drinking
    No1.00 (reference)
    Yes0.520.261.970.0491.68 (1.01-2.82)
H. pylori infection
    No1.00 (reference)
    Yes0.770.233.31< 0.0012.16 (1.37-3.41)
Gastric polyp
    No1.00 (reference)
    Yes0.140.320.440.6631.15 (0.62-2.15)
Polyp diameter
    ≤ 2 cm1.00 (reference)
    > 2 cm0.380.221.690.0911.46 (0.94-2.26)
Polyp number
    ≤ 21.00 (reference)
    > 20.530.222.390.0171.69 (1.10-2.61)
Polyp location
    Distal colon1.00 (reference)
    Proximal colon0.280.211.330.1851.32 (0.87-2.00)
Polyp color
    Rubedo1.00 (reference)
    Non-redness0.240.280.840.4011.27 (0.73-2.22)
Polyp morphology
    Pedunculated or subpedunculated1.00 (reference)
    Sessile0.560.252.280.0231.75 (1.08-2.84)
Excision mode
    EMR1.00 (reference)
    Others0.120.250.470.6391.13 (0.69-1.85)
Intraoperative bleeding
    No1.00 (reference)
    Yes0.370.361.050.2941.45 (0.72-2.93)
Pathological type
    Others1.00 (reference)
    Adenomatous0.960.234.10< 0.0012.60 (1.65-4.10)
Multivariate logistic regression analysis

We screened the variables in the multivariate logistic regression models using the backwards stepwise regression method. The results showed that age, drinking (yes: 1, no: 0), H. pylori infection (yes: 1, no: 0), polyp number (> 2: 1, ≤ 2: 0), polyp morphology (sessile polyps: 1, pedunculated or subpedunculated polyps: 0) and pathological type (adenomatous polyps: 1, non-adenomatous polyps: 0) were independent influencing factors of relapse (P < 0.05) (Table 4).

Table 4 Multivariate logistic regression analysis.
Variables
β
SE
Z
P value
OR (95%CI)
Age0.040.013.090.0021.04 (1.01-1.06)
Drinking
    No1.00 (reference)
    Yes0.730.292.500.0122.07 (1.17-3.67)
H. pylori infection
    No1.00 (reference)
    Yes0.850.253.36< 0.0012.34 (1.43-3.85)
Polyp number
    ≤ 21.00 (reference)
    > 20.680.242.800.0051.98 (1.23-3.19)
Polyp morphology
    Pedunculated or subpedunculated1.00 (reference)
    Sessile0.740.272.750.0062.10 (1.24-3.57)
Pathological type
    Others1.00 (reference)
    Adenomatous1.100.254.40< 0.0013.02 (1.85-4.94)
Construction of the prediction model

A nomogram prediction model was created following the multivariate logistic regression results. The model formula was as follows: Logistic = -4.20 + 0.04 age + 0.73 drinking + 0.85 H. pylori infection + 0.68 polyp number + 0.74 polyp morphology + 1.10 pathological type. The prediction model is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1
Figure 1 Nomogram prediction model. H. pylori: Helicobacter pylori.
Confusion matrix analysis of prediction models

The accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of the nomogram prediction model were 0.69 (0.64-0.74), 0.80 (0.74-0.85), 0.56 (0.48-0.64), 0.68 (0.62-0.74) and 0.70 (0.62-0.78), respectively, with the best Jorden index as the cut-off value (Table 5).

Table 5 Confusion matrix analysis of prediction models.
Accuracy (95%CI)
Sensitivity (95%CI)
Specificity (95%CI)
PPV (95%CI)
NPV (95%CI)
Cut-off
0.69 (0.64-0.74)0.80 (0.74-0.85)0.56 (0.48-0.64)0.68 (0.62-0.74)0.70 (0.62-0.78)0.535
Evaluation and validation of prediction models

The original cohort was sampled 1000 times using the Bootstrap method for internal verification. The AUC for the modeling and validation cohorts were 0.73 (0.68-0.78) and 0.76 (0.71-0.80), respectively (Figure 2). The AUC results showed that the model had a certain degree of differentiation. The calibration curve results demonstrated good agreement (i.e., degree of fit) between the observed and predicted values in the modeling and (Hoser-Lemeshow, P = 0.557) and validation cohorts (Hoser-Lemeshow, P = 0.170), indicating that the model was well-calibrated (Figure 3). The decision curve was drawn with different probability thresholds as horizontal coordinates and clinical net benefit as vertical coordinates. The decision curve results of the modeling and validation cohorts show that the prediction model can yield net clinical benefits when the risk probability is > 20% (Figure 4).

Figure 2
Figure 2 Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. A: Modeling cohort; B: Validation cohort. AUC: Area under the curve.
Figure 3
Figure 3 Calibration curve analysis. A: Modeling cohort; B: Validation cohort.
Figure 4
Figure 4 Clinical decision curve analysis. A: Modeling cohort; B: Validation cohort.
DISCUSSION

As an important precancerous lesion in CRC, post-surgery recurrence of CP has been a significant clinical concern[12]. Advancements in endoscopic technology has significantly improved early diagnosis and treatment of CPs; however, post-surgery recurrence is still relatively common, which seriously affects patient prognosis and increases the medical burden[13,14]. In this study, we systematically investigated the risk factors for recurrence within 1 year post-surgery by retrospectively analyzing data from 362 patients who underwent endoscopic polypectomy. We developed a nomogram prediction model. The independent risk factors for short-term recurrence following CP surgery included age, smoking, alcohol consumption, H. pylori infection, polyp number, polyp morphology (sessile polyps), and pathological type (adenomatous polyps). Predictive models constructed based on these factors were well discriminated and calibrated and can provide clinicians with individualized recurrence risk assessment tools.

First, age was a significant risk factor for postoperative recurrence, consistent with the results of previous studies. With increasing age, the capacity for mucosal repair diminishes, and genetic damage may accumulate, thereby increasing the likelihood of polyp recurrence[15,16]. Furthermore, older patients often have various underlying diseases, and these metabolic abnormalities may promote polyp formation and recurrence via chronic inflammation and oxidative stress[17]. In this study, the mean age of patients in the relapse group was significantly higher than that of patients in the non-relapse group, further supporting this view. Alcohol consumption is also observed to be linked to an increased risk of relapse. Alcohol (ethanol) is metabolized mainly by ethanol dehydrogenase (ADH) and CYP2E1 to acetaldehyde, which is further metabolized to acetic acid by acetaldehyde dehydrogenase[18]. Acetaldehyde is a highly reactive compound that binds to DNA, proteins, and lipids, causing cellular damage and abnormal function[19,20]. Accumulation of acetaldehyde can directly damage colonic mucosal epithelial cells, disrupt mucosal barrier function, and increase the sensitivity of the mucosa to carcinogens, thereby promoting polyp formation and recurrence[21]. Additionally, alcohol contributes to a chronic inflammatory state of the colonic mucosa by activating intestinal immune cells (macrophages and T-cells) and by releasing pro-inflammatory cytokines (TNF-α, IL-6, and IL-8)[22]. This chronic inflammation is an important driver of CPs and colorectal carcinogenesis, creating a suitable microenvironment for polyp formation and recurrence through sustained cell proliferation, angiogenesis, and immunosuppression[23,24]. Nevertheless, the specific mechanism of action requires further experimental verification.

Second, H. pylori infection was identified independent risk factor in this study. H. pylori has a unique biology and can colonize the gastric and duodenal mucosa[25]. H. pylori activates the host immune system via virulence factors (CagA and VacA), releasing pro-inflammatory cytokines[26]. These cytokines promote a chronic inflammatory state in the colonic mucosa, leading to an imbalance between the abnormal proliferation and apoptosis of mucosal cells. The effects of H. pylori infection on the immune system may indirectly promote CP recurrence. H. pylori infection also induces the immune system to produce Th1 and Th17 cell-mediated immune responses[27]. These cytokines are involved in the inflammatory response in the stomach and may also act on the colorectal mucosa through blood circulation to induce a local immune response. Moreover, H. pylori infection may induce a state of immune tolerance, making the immune system less capable of clearing precancerous lesions[28]. This state of immune tolerance may create favorable conditions for the recurrence of CPs. Future studies should further the interrelationships between these mechanisms and provide new strategies for preventing and treating CPs by reducing the risk of CP recurrence through clinical interventions (eradicating H. pylori infection and regulating intestinal flora).

In this study, we also observed an association between polyp characteristics and risk of recurrence. We discovered that the risk of recurrence significantly increased in patients with a polyp number of > 2. The presence of multiple polyps implies a broader base of lesions in the colorectal mucosa, and the overall pathological state of the intestinal mucosa is more complex than that of a single polyp. Even with thorough endoscopic resection, there is a greater chance of retaining microscopic polyp tissue or diseased cells owing to the wide distribution of multiple polyps. These residual tissues may grow post-surgery, potentially leading to polyps[8]. Polyp morphology is an important predictor of post-surgery recurrence. Sessile polyps, which lack a distinct tip structure or a broader base, are particularly difficult to completely remove during endoscopic resection[29]. Furthermore, they may grow more aggressively, have higher cell proliferation activity, and have more complex biological behavior, increasing their likelihood of recurring after removal[30]. Previous research has suggested that the tissue microenvironment around barren polyps may be more conducive to polyp cell survival and growth. For instance, localized angiogenesis is more abundant, providing adequate nutritional support for polyp recurrence[31]. Moreover, in this study, adenomatous polyps were an important risk factor for recurrence. Adenomatous polyps have high cell proliferative activity and malignant potential, and their biological behavior differs significantly from that of normal tissue cells[32]. At the molecular level, adenomatous polyps often have multiple genetic alterations, including mutations in Adenomatous Polyposis Coli and activation of Kirsten Rat Sarcoma Viral Oncogene Homolog[33,34]. These genetic alterations disrupt the regulatory mechanisms underlying cell proliferation, differentiation, and apoptosis, resulting in continuous cell proliferation and increased viability. However, the cellular behavior of nonadenomatous polyps is relatively similar to that of normal tissues, with lower proliferative activity and a lower risk of recurrence. Taken together, there is a strong relationship between polyp number, morphology, pathological type, and the risk of recurrence after endoscopic surgery for CPs. Future studies should investigate the molecular mechanisms associated with these polyp characteristics and identify potential therapeutic targets for more effective prevention and control of polyp recurrence.

Nevertheless, this study has some limitations. First, this was a single-center, retrospective study, which may have been subject to selection and information biases. Second, the sample size was relatively small, which may have affected the extrapolation of the results. Moreover, the long-term predictive performance of the model could not be assessed because of the limited period of this study, which did not allow the long-term monitoring of recurrence. Future multicenter, large-sample prospective studies are warranted to improve the representativeness and reliability of the results. Simultaneously, the follow-up time should be extended to track the long-term recurrence of polyps to improve our understanding of the recurrence pattern of polyps and provide a more solid basis for developing more accurate and effective clinical intervention strategies.

CONCLUSION

The study findings indicate that CPs are important precancerous lesions of CRC, and their postoperative recurrence has been a focus of clinical concern. In this study, we retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 362 patients with CPs. We discovered that age, alcohol consumption, H. pylori infection, number of polyps, the morphology of sessile polyps, and adenomatous pathological type were independent risk factors for recurrence within 1 year post-surgery. We created a nomogram prediction model based on these factors. The model showed good discriminatory and calibration abilities and could provide clinicians with an individualized recurrence risk assessment tool. The study findings can help clinicians to accurately assess the patient’s recurrence risk pre-surgery to formulate a more personalized treatment and follow-up strategy, optimize the allocation of medical resources, reduce the recurrence rate, and ultimately improve the long-term prognosis of patients.

Footnotes

Provenance and peer review: Unsolicited article; Externally peer reviewed.

Peer-review model: Single blind

Specialty type: Gastroenterology and hepatology

Country of origin: China

Peer-review report’s classification

Scientific Quality: Grade B

Novelty: Grade C

Creativity or Innovation: Grade B

Scientific Significance: Grade C

P-Reviewer: Schizas D S-Editor: Qu XL L-Editor: A P-Editor: Wang CH

References
1.  Li X, Hu M, Wang Z, Liu M, Chen Y. Prevalence of diverse colorectal polyps and risk factors for colorectal carcinoma in situ and neoplastic polyps. J Transl Med. 2024;22:361.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in RCA: 3]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
2.  Morgan E, Arnold M, Gini A, Lorenzoni V, Cabasag CJ, Laversanne M, Vignat J, Ferlay J, Murphy N, Bray F. Global burden of colorectal cancer in 2020 and 2040: incidence and mortality estimates from GLOBOCAN. Gut. 2023;72:338-344.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 511]  [Cited by in RCA: 923]  [Article Influence: 461.5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (1)]
3.  Zammit AP, Panahi SE, Brown I, Hooper JD, Clark DA, Riddell AD. Management of high and low risk malignant polyps: a population-wide analysis. Colorectal Dis. 2023;25:66-74.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Full Text (PDF)]  [Cited by in Crossref: 1]  [Cited by in RCA: 4]  [Article Influence: 2.0]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
4.  Kaminski MF, Robertson DJ, Senore C, Rex DK. Optimizing the Quality of Colorectal Cancer Screening Worldwide. Gastroenterology. 2020;158:404-417.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 63]  [Cited by in RCA: 115]  [Article Influence: 23.0]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
5.  Kanth P, Inadomi JM. Screening and prevention of colorectal cancer. BMJ. 2021;374:n1855.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 65]  [Cited by in RCA: 167]  [Article Influence: 41.8]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
6.  Valle L, Monahan KJ. Genetic predisposition to gastrointestinal polyposis: syndromes, tumour features, genetic testing, and clinical management. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2024;9:68-82.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in RCA: 10]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
7.  Pan J, Cen L, Xu L, Miao M, Li Y, Yu C, Shen Z. Prevalence and risk factors for colorectal polyps in a Chinese population: a retrospective study. Sci Rep. 2020;10:6974.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Full Text (PDF)]  [Cited by in Crossref: 36]  [Cited by in RCA: 34]  [Article Influence: 6.8]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
8.  Dornblaser D, Young S, Shaukat A. Colon polyps: updates in classification and management. Curr Opin Gastroenterol. 2024;40:14-20.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 19]  [Cited by in RCA: 14]  [Article Influence: 14.0]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
9.  Rotermund C, Djinbachian R, Taghiakbari M, Enderle MD, Eickhoff A, von Renteln D. Recurrence rates after endoscopic resection of large colorectal polyps: A systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Gastroenterol. 2022;28:4007-4018.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Full Text (PDF)]  [Cited by in CrossRef: 28]  [Cited by in RCA: 30]  [Article Influence: 10.0]  [Reference Citation Analysis (2)]
10.  Polychronidis G, He MM, Vithayathil M, Knudsen MD, Wang K, Song M. Risk of colorectal neoplasia after removal of conventional adenomas and serrated polyps: a comprehensive evaluation of risk factors and surveillance use. Gut. 2024;73:1675-1683.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in RCA: 3]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
11.  Wang X, Lu J, Song Z, Zhou Y, Liu T, Zhang D. From past to future: Bibliometric analysis of global research productivity on nomogram (2000-2021). Front Public Health. 2022;10:997713.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Full Text (PDF)]  [Cited by in RCA: 58]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
12.  Baile-Maxía S, Mangas-Sanjuán C, Ladabaum U, Sánchez-Ardila C, Sala-Miquel N, Hassan C, Rutter MD, Bretthauer M, Zapater P, Jover R. Risk factors for metachronous colorectal cancer or advanced lesions after endoscopic resection of serrated polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2024;100:605-615.e14.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in RCA: 7]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
13.  Mann R, Gajendran M, Umapathy C, Perisetti A, Goyal H, Saligram S, Echavarria J. Endoscopic Management of Complex Colorectal Polyps: Current Insights and Future Trends. Front Med (Lausanne). 2021;8:728704.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Full Text (PDF)]  [Cited by in Crossref: 3]  [Cited by in RCA: 19]  [Article Influence: 6.3]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
14.  Iqbal U, Nawaz A, Ahmed Z, Kamal F, Lee-Smith W, Khan MA, Alastal Y, Confer BD, Khara HS. Safety of endoscopic mucosal resection of large colonic polyps in elderly patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Gastroenterol. 2022;35:420-426.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Full Text (PDF)]  [Cited by in RCA: 4]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
15.  Walrath T, Dyamenahalli KU, Hulsebus HJ, McCullough RL, Idrovo JP, Boe DM, McMahan RH, Kovacs EJ. Age-related changes in intestinal immunity and the microbiome. J Leukoc Biol. 2021;109:1045-1061.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 14]  [Cited by in RCA: 60]  [Article Influence: 12.0]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
16.  Singh S, Giron LB, Shaikh MW, Shankaran S, Engen PA, Bogin ZR, Bambi SA, Goldman AR, Azevedo JLLC, Orgaz L, de Pedro N, González P, Giera M, Verhoeven A, Sánchez-López E, Pandrea I, Kannan T, Tanes CE, Bittinger K, Landay AL, Corley MJ, Keshavarzian A, Abdel-Mohsen M. Distinct intestinal microbial signatures linked to accelerated systemic and intestinal biological aging. Microbiome. 2024;12:31.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 1]  [Cited by in RCA: 22]  [Article Influence: 22.0]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
17.  Feng Z, Lin H, Yang X, Cao S, Gu X, Zhang Z, Deng W. Diagnostic Value of Inflammation-Related Indicators in Distinguishing Early Colon Cancer and Adenomatous Polyps. Cancer Control. 2023;30:10732748231180745.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in RCA: 10]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
18.  Rumgay H, Murphy N, Ferrari P, Soerjomataram I. Alcohol and Cancer: Epidemiology and Biological Mechanisms. Nutrients. 2021;13:3173.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Full Text (PDF)]  [Cited by in Crossref: 109]  [Cited by in RCA: 204]  [Article Influence: 51.0]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
19.  Yan T, Zhao Y, Jiang Z, Chen J. Acetaldehyde Induces Cytotoxicity via Triggering Mitochondrial Dysfunction and Overactive Mitophagy. Mol Neurobiol. 2022;59:3933-3946.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 1]  [Cited by in RCA: 21]  [Article Influence: 7.0]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
20.  Sonohara Y, Takatsuka R, Masutani C, Iwai S, Kuraoka I. Acetaldehyde induces NER repairable mutagenic DNA lesions. Carcinogenesis. 2022;43:52-59.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in RCA: 9]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
21.  Elamin E, Masclee A, Troost F, Dekker J, Jonkers D. Cytotoxicity and metabolic stress induced by acetaldehyde in human intestinal LS174T goblet-like cells. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol. 2014;307:G286-G294.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 22]  [Cited by in RCA: 28]  [Article Influence: 2.5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
22.  Bishehsari F, Magno E, Swanson G, Desai V, Voigt RM, Forsyth CB, Keshavarzian A. Alcohol and Gut-Derived Inflammation. Alcohol Res. 2017;38:163-171.  [PubMed]  [DOI]
23.  Quaglio AEV, Grillo TG, De Oliveira ECS, Di Stasi LC, Sassaki LY. Gut microbiota, inflammatory bowel disease and colorectal cancer. World J Gastroenterol. 2022;28:4053-4060.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Full Text (PDF)]  [Cited by in CrossRef: 219]  [Cited by in RCA: 222]  [Article Influence: 74.0]  [Reference Citation Analysis (115)]
24.  Shah SC, Itzkowitz SH. Colorectal Cancer in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Mechanisms and Management. Gastroenterology. 2022;162:715-730.e3.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 280]  [Cited by in RCA: 445]  [Article Influence: 148.3]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
25.  Sousa C, Ferreira R, Santos SB, Azevedo NF, Melo LDR. Advances on diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infections. Crit Rev Microbiol. 2023;49:671-692.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 1]  [Cited by in RCA: 19]  [Article Influence: 9.5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
26.  Sharafutdinov I, Tegtmeyer N, Linz B, Rohde M, Vieth M, Tay AC, Lamichhane B, Tuan VP, Fauzia KA, Sticht H, Yamaoka Y, Marshall BJ, Backert S. A single-nucleotide polymorphism in Helicobacter pylori promotes gastric cancer development. Cell Host Microbe. 2023;31:1345-1358.e6.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 19]  [Cited by in RCA: 45]  [Article Influence: 22.5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
27.  Feilstrecker Balani G, Dos Santos Cortez M, Picasky da Silveira Freitas JE, Freire de Melo F, Zarpelon-Schutz AC, Teixeira KN. Immune response modulation in inflammatory bowel diseases by Helicobacter pylori infection. World J Gastroenterol. 2023;29:4604-4615.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Full Text (PDF)]  [Cited by in CrossRef: 3]  [Cited by in RCA: 9]  [Article Influence: 4.5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (1)]
28.  Zhang X, He Y, Zhang X, Fu B, Song Z, Wang L, Fu R, Lu X, Xing J, Lv J, Guo M, Huo X, Liu X, Lu J, Du X, Ge Z, Chen Z, Li C. Sustained exposure to Helicobacter pylori induces immune tolerance by desensitizing TLR6. Gastric Cancer. 2024;27:324-342.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Full Text (PDF)]  [Cited by in Crossref: 7]  [Cited by in RCA: 8]  [Article Influence: 8.0]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
29.  Kang DK, Park SB, Kim HW, Kang DH, Choi CW, Kim SJ, Nam HS, Ryu DG, Lee JS. Long-term outcomes and surveillance timing of patients with large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps with histologically incomplete resection in endoscopic resection. Surg Endosc. 2022;36:1369-1378.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in RCA: 2]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
30.  Murakami T, Sakamoto N, Nagahara A. Clinicopathological features, diagnosis, and treatment of sessile serrated adenoma/polyp with dysplasia/carcinoma. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019;34:1685-1695.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 32]  [Cited by in RCA: 27]  [Article Influence: 4.5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
31.  Amemori S, Yamano HO, Tanaka Y, Yoshikawa K, Matsushita HO, Takagi R, Harada E, Yoshida Y, Tsuda K, Kato B, Tamura E, Eizuka M, Sugai T, Adachi Y, Yamamoto E, Suzuki H, Nakase H. Sessile serrated adenoma/polyp showed rapid malignant transformation in the final 13 months. Dig Endosc. 2020;32:979-983.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 15]  [Cited by in RCA: 17]  [Article Influence: 3.4]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
32.  Li W, Zhang L, Jing Y, Yang Y, Wang Y. The Potential Value of Gastric Histopathology for Predicting Colorectal Adenomatous Polyps Among the Chinese Population: A Retrospective Cross-Sectional Study. Front Oncol. 2022;12:889417.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Full Text (PDF)]  [Cited by in RCA: 5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
33.  Tang J, Lam GT, Brooks RD, Miles M, Useckaite Z, Johnson IR, Ung BS, Martini C, Karageorgos L, Hickey SM, Selemidis S, Hopkins AM, Rowland A, Vather R, O'Leary JJ, Brooks DA, Caruso MC, Logan JM. Exploring the role of sporadic BRAF and KRAS mutations during colorectal cancer pathogenesis: A spotlight on the contribution of the endosome-lysosome system. Cancer Lett. 2024;585:216639.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 7]  [Cited by in RCA: 8]  [Article Influence: 8.0]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
34.  Palles C, West HD, Chew E, Galavotti S, Flensburg C, Grolleman JE, Jansen EAM, Curley H, Chegwidden L, Arbe-Barnes EH, Lander N, Truscott R, Pagan J, Bajel A, Sherwood K, Martin L, Thomas H, Georgiou D, Fostira F, Goldberg Y, Adams DJ, van der Biezen SAM, Christie M, Clendenning M, Thomas LE, Deltas C, Dimovski AJ, Dymerska D, Lubinski J, Mahmood K, van der Post RS, Sanders M, Weitz J, Taylor JC, Turnbull C, Vreede L, van Wezel T, Whalley C, Arnedo-Pac C, Caravagna G, Cross W, Chubb D, Frangou A, Gruber AJ, Kinnersley B, Noyvert B, Church D, Graham T, Houlston R, Lopez-Bigas N, Sottoriva A, Wedge D; Genomics England Research Consortium;  CORGI Consortium;  WGS500 Consortium, Jenkins MA, Kuiper RP, Roberts AW, Cheadle JP, Ligtenberg MJL, Hoogerbrugge N, Koelzer VH, Rivas AD, Winship IM, Ponte CR, Buchanan DD, Power DG, Green A, Tomlinson IPM, Sampson JR, Majewski IJ, de Voer RM. Germline MBD4 deficiency causes a multi-tumor predisposition syndrome. Am J Hum Genet. 2022;109:953-960.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Full Text (PDF)]  [Cited by in Crossref: 22]  [Cited by in RCA: 37]  [Article Influence: 12.3]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]