Endoscopic mucosal resection in high- and low-volume centers: a prospective multicentric study

Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection, Endoscopic Mucosal Resection, and Transanal Minimally Invasive Surgery for the Management of Rectal and Anorectal Lesions: A Narrative Review

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), and transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) are modern techniques that now play a crucial role in the treatment of colorectal lesions. ESD is a minimally invasive endoscopic procedure that allows for the resection of lesions of any size in a single piece, with clear advantages regarding oncological outcomes and recurrences. However, it is a complex technique, requiring high endoscopic skills, expertise, and specialized training, with higher rates of adverse events expected compared with EMR. EMR is another endoscopic technique used to remove superficial gastrointestinal tumors, particularly those that are limited to the mucosal layer. It is a faster and more accessible procedure, with fewer adverse events, although it only allows for an en-bloc resection of lesions measuring 15-20 mm. TAMIS is a minimally invasive surgical technique used to remove rectal tumors, involving the insertion of a single-port device through the anus, allowing for a better visualization and removal of the tumor with minimal disruption. This article reviews the current applications and evidence regarding these techniques, in search for the most adequate treatment for the removal of lesions in the rectum and anorectal junction, as these locations possess distinct characteristics that demand a more specific approach.

EMR combined with hybrid argon plasma coagulation to prevent recurrence of large nonpedunculated colorectal polyps (with videos)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EMR is the mainstay of therapy for large colorectal polyps. Local recurrence after EMR is common and can be reduced using margin ablation. Our aim was to evaluate recurrence rates when using hybrid argon plasma coagulation (h-APC) ablation after EMR.

METHODS

Adult patients (aged 18-89 years) undergoing EMR of nonpedunculated colorectal polyps ≥20 mm were enrolled in a prospective multicenter study. h-APC was used to ablate all defect margins and also the resection surface in selected cases. The primary study outcome was recurrence rates found during the first follow-up colonoscopy. Secondary outcomes were technical success and adverse event rates.

RESULTS

EMR with h-APC ablation was used in 101 polyps (84 patients, 46.4% women). EMR with h-APC ablation was technically successful in all cases (median EMR time, 15 minutes; median h-APC ablation time, 4 minutes). Median polyp size was 30 mm (range, 20-60). Resected polyps were either adenomas (68/101 [67.3%]), sessile serrated lesions (27/101 [27%]), or adenocarcinomas (6/101 [6%]). The post-EMR recurrence rate was 2.2% (2/91) (95% confidence interval, .27-7.71). All 6 patients with cancer (intramucosal cancer, 4; T1sm cancer, 2) were found to have complete eradication of the primary tumor after EMR with h-APC, and none had lymph node metastasis. Four serious adverse events occurred in 3 patients (2 delayed bleeding [2.4%], 1 abdominal pain [1.2%], and 1 microperforation [1.2%]. All serious adverse events resolved with either endoscopic or antibiotic treatment only.

CONCLUSIONS

EMR with h-APC showed a high technical success rate, low adverse event rate, and very low post-EMR recurrence rates. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT04015765.).

Indications and outcomes of endoscopic resection for non-pedunculated colorectal lesions: A narrative review

In the last years, endoscopic techniques gained a crucial role in the treatment of colorectal flat lesions. At the same time, the importance of a reliable assessment of such lesions to predict the malignancy and the depth of invasion of the colonic wall emerged. The current unsolved dilemma about the endoscopic excision techniques concerns the necessity of a reliable submucosal invasive cancer assessment system that can stratify the risk of the post-procedural need for surgery. Accordingly, this narrative literature review aims to compare the available diagnostic strategies in predicting malignancy and to give a guide about the best techniques to employ. We performed a literature search using electronic databases (MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library). We collected all articles about endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) registering the outcomes. Moreover, we analyzed all meta-analyses comparing EMR vs ESD outcomes for colorectal sessile or non-polypoid lesions of any size, preoperatively estimated as non-invasive. Seven meta-analysis studies, mainly Eastern, were included in the analysis comparing 124 studies and overall 22954 patients who underwent EMR and ESD procedures. Of these, eighty-two were retrospective, twenty-four perspective, nine case-control, and six cohorts, while three were randomized clinical trials. A total of 18118 EMR and 10379 ESD were completed for a whole of 28497 colorectal sessile or non-polypoid lesions > 5-10 mm in size. In conclusion, it is crucial to enhance the preoperative diagnostic workup, especially in deciding the most suitable endoscopic method for radical resection of flat colorectal lesions at risk of underlying malignancy. Additionally, the ESD necessitates further improvement because of the excessively time-consuming as well as the intraprocedural technical hindrances and related complications. We found a higher rate of en bloc resections and R0 for ESD than EMR for non-pedunculated colorectal lesions. Nevertheless, despite the lower local recurrence rates, ESD had greater perforation rates and needed lengthier procedural times. The prevailing risk for additional surgery in ESD rather than EMR for complications or oncologic reasons is still uncertain.

Effects of preceding endoscopic treatment on laparoscopic surgery for early rectal cancer

AIM

Endoscopic treatment for rectal cancer, such as endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection, causes inflammation, oedema and fibrosis in the surrounding tissue. However, little is known about the effect of these endoscopic therapies on salvage laparoscopic rectal surgery. The objective of this retrospective cohort study was to analyse the effect of preceding endoscopic treatment on the outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer.

METHOD

We analysed 53 patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer with clinical Tis or T1 at our department between May 2011 and June 2019. Data from 30 patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery after preceding endoscopic treatment (Group E + S) were compared with those of 23 patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery alone (Group S).

RESULTS

There was no significant difference between the groups with respect to preoperative details. The mean operative time tended to be longer in Group E + S, and the volume of intra-operative blood loss was greater in Group E + S than in Group S (median 63 ml vs 10 ml, P = 0.049). There were no significant differences between the groups in other surgical parameters or oncological outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic surgery after endoscopic treatment for rectal cancer may be difficult due to an increased risk of intra-operative bleeding. Long-term prognosis after surgery was not affected by preceding endoscopic treatment in rectal cancer.

Clinical and financial impacts of introducing an endoscopic mucosal resection service for treatment of patients with large colonic polyps into a regional tertiary hospital

Background and study aims  Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of large sessile or laterally spreading colonic lesions is a safe alternative to surgery. We assessed reductions in Surgical Resection (SR) rates and associated clinical and financial benefits following the introduction of an EMR service to a large regional center. Patients and methods  Ongoing prospective intention-to-treat analysis of EMR was undertaken from time of service inception in 2009 to 2017. Retrospective data for SR of large sessile/laterally spreading colonic lesions were collected for the period 4 years before commencement of the EMR service (2005 - 2008) and 9 years after its introduction (2009 - 2017). Results  From 2005 to 2008, 32 surgical procedures were performed for non-malignant colonic neoplasia (50 % male, median age 68 years, median Length of Stay (LoS) 10 days). Following the introduction of the EMR service, there was a 56 % reduction in the number of patients referred for surgery (32 surgical procedures, 47 % male, median age 70 years, median LoS 8.5 days). During this period, EMR was successfully performed in 183 patients with 216 lesions resected (60 % male, median age 68 years, median LoS 1 day). Compared to the SR group, the EMR cohort had a lower peri-procedural complication rate (7.7 % vs 54.7 %, P  < 0.0001), and shorter average LoS (1 vs 9 days, P  < 0.0001). A cost saving of AUD $ 19 543.5 was seen per lesion removed with EMR compared to SR. Conclusions  The introduction of a dedicated EMR service into a large regional center as an alternative to SR can lead to a substantial decrease in unnecessary surgery with subsequent clinical and financial benefits.

Clinical guidelines for endoscopic mucosal resection of non-pedunculated colorectal lesions

This document summarizes the contents of the Clinical Guidelines for the Endoscopic Mucosal Resection of Non-Pedunculated Colorectal Lesions that was developed by the working group of the Spanish Society of Digestive Endoscopy (GSEED of Endoscopic Resection). This document presents recommendations for the endoscopic management of superficial colorectal neoplastic lesions.

Endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal lesions: A systematic review

AIM

To assess the efficacy and safety of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for the treatment of colorectal lesions.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted from January 2000 to May 2015. The main outcomes were: recurrence after "en bloc" and "piecemeal" resection; procedure related adverse events; the EMR endoscopic success rate and the completely eradicated resection rate (R0) after ESD.

RESULTS

A total of 66 studies were included in the analysis. The total number of lesions was 17950 (EMR: 11.873; ESD: 6077). Recurrence rate was higher in the EMR than ESD group (765/7303l vs. 50/3910 OR 8.19, 95% CI 6.2-10.9 p<0.0001). EMR-en bloc resection was achieved in 6793/10803 lesions (62.8%) while ESD-en bloc resection was obtained in 5500/6077 lesions (90.5%) (OR 0.18, p<0.0001, 95% CI 0.16-0.2). Perforation occurred more frequently in ESD than in EMR group (p<0.0001, OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.15-0.24).

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic resection of large colorectal lesions is safe and effective. Compared with EMR, ESD results in higher "en bloc" resection rate and lower local recurrence rate, however ESD has high procedure-related complication rates.

Complication and local recurrence rate after endoscopic resection of large high-risk colorectal adenomas of ≥3 cm in size

PURPOSE

Endoscopic resection is a widely used technique for treatment of large colorectal adenomas, but few data are available including only lesions larger than ≥2 cm. The aim of this study is to evaluate the complication and recurrence rate after endoscopic resection of high-risk colorectal adenomas ≥3 cm in size.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database of patients undergoing polypectomy of large colorectal polyps of ≥3 cm.

RESULTS

In 341 patients, 360 colorectal adenomas with a mean size of 3.9 cm were resected endoscopically. In 25 patients, a complication including 22 delayed bleedings (6.5%) and three perforations (0.9%) occurred. Single-variate analysis showed an increasing risk of complications for larger adenomas (3.9 vs. 4.6 cm; p ≤ 0.05). Two hundred twelve patients with 224 adenomas had undergone at least one documented follow-up endoscopy with a medium follow-up period of 16 months. In 95 resected lesions (42.4%), a residual adenoma occurred in the first follow-up colonoscopy (n = 88, 92.6%) or a recurrent adenoma occurred after at least one negative follow-up colonoscopy (n = 7, 7.4%). In multivariate analysis, risk factors were lesion size, sessile growth pattern, and the performing endoscopist. The complication and recurrence rate correlated inversely between endoscopists.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study is the largest study showing complication and recurrence rates after colorectal polypectomy of advanced colorectal adenomas of ≥3 cm in size. Polyp size was identified as the most important risk factor for complications. For the first time, this study shows that the complication rate after colorectal polypectomy of large adenomas is correlated inversely with the residual and/or recurrence rate.

Multiband mucosectomy for advanced dysplastic lesions in the upper digestive tract

Endoscopic resection (ER) is at present an accepted treatment for superficial gastrointestinal neoplasia. ER provides similar efficacy to surgery; however, it is minimally invasive and less expensive. Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is superior to biopsy for diagnosing advanced dysplasia and can change the diagnostic grade and the management. Several EMR techniques have been described that are alternatively used dependent upon the endoscopist personal experience, the anatomic conditions and the endoscopic appearance of the lesion to be resected. The literature suggests that EMR offers comparable outcomes to surgery for selected indications. EMR techniques using a cap fitted endoscope and EMR using a ligation device [multiband mucosectomy (MBM)] are the most frequently use. MBM technique does not require submucosal injection as with the endoscopic resection-cap technique, multiple resections can be performed with the same snare, pre-looping the endoscopic resection-snare in the ridge of the cap is not necessary, MBM does not require withdrawal of the endoscope between resections and up to six consecutive resections can be performed. This reduces the time and cost required for the procedure, while also reducing patient discomfort. Despite the increasing popularity of MBM, data on the safety and efficacy of this technique in upper gastrointestinal lesions with advanced dysplasia, defined as those lesions that have high-grade dysplasia or early cancer, is limited.