Real-world learning curve analysis of colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: a large multicenter study

Effectiveness of Strategy-Focused Training in Colorectal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection: A Retrospective Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Colorectal ESD, an advanced minimally invasive treatment, presents technical challenges, with globally varying training methods. We analyzed the learning curve of ESD training, emphasizing preoperative strategies, notably gravity traction, to guide ESD instructors and trainee programs.

METHOD

This retrospective study included 881 cases guided by an experienced supervisor. Six trainees received "strategy-focused" instruction. To evaluate the number of ESD experiences in steps, the following phases were classified based on ESD experiences of each trainees: Phase 0 (0-50 ESD), Phase 1 (51-100 ESD), Phase 2 (101-150 ESD), and Phase 3 (151-200 ESD). Lesion background, outcomes, and safety were compared across phases. Factors contributing to technical difficulty in early (Phase 0 and 1) and late phases (Phase 2 and 3) were identified, along with the utility of traction ESD with device assistance.

RESULT

Treatment outcomes were favorable, with 99.8% and 94.7% en bloc resection and curative resection rates, respectively. Approximately 90% self-completion rate could be achieved after experiencing about 50 cases (92.7% in Phase 1), signifying proficiency growth despite increased case difficulty. In early phases, factors such as left-sided colon, LST-NG morphology, and severe fibrosis pose challenges. In late phases, LST-NG morphology, mild and severe fibrosis remained significant. Traction-assisted ESD, utilized in 3% of cases, comprised planned (1.1%) and rescue (1.9%) methods. Planned traction aided specific lesions, while rescue traction was common in the right colon.

CONCLUSION

"Strategy-focused" ESD training consistently yields successful outcomes, effectively adapting to varying difficulty factors in different proficient stages.

Diagnostic and therapeutic strategies for colorectal tumor with positive muscle-retracting sign

Objectives

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for colorectal tumors with positive muscle-retracting (MR) sign often results in incomplete resection or discontinuation owing to the difficulty of submucosal dissection. The present study aimed to evaluate the usefulness of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) in diagnosing the MR sign and performing ESD using the pocket-creation method (PCM).

Methods

Thirty-six cases of colorectal tumors with positive MR sign during ESD between January 2015 and December 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Cases were divided into two groups: 1) the conventional method (CM) group, comprising 29 cases, and 2) the PCM group with seven cases, in which preoperative EUS and ESD using PCM were performed. Treatment outcomes were compared between the groups. The diagnostic yield of EUS for the MR sign was evaluated among large sessile tumors >20 mm in which preoperative EUS was performed.

Results

Histologic diagnosis was adenoma or Tis carcinoma in 12 cases (33%), T1 carcinoma in 18 cases (50%), T2 carcinoma in four cases (11%), and unevaluable in two cases (6%). The sensitivity and specificity of the EUS-MR sign for large sessile tumors were 87.5% and 83.3%, respectively. ESD was achieved in all cases in the PCM group, although it was discontinued in eight cases (28%) in the CM group. There were significant differences between the PCM and CM groups in en bloc resection (100% vs. 48%, p = 0.013) and R0 resection rates (71% vs. 31%, p = 0.049).

Conclusion

The MR sign can be predicted by preoperative EUS, and ESD using PCM allows en bloc resection.

Underwater versus conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for ≥10 mm sessile or flat colorectal polyps: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) has been an emerging substitute for conventional EMR (CEMR). This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed at comparing the efficiency and safety of the two techniques for removing ≥10 mm sessile or flat colorectal polyps.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane Library and Embase databases were searched up to February 2023 to identify eligible studies that compared the outcomes of UEMR and CEMR. This meta-analysis was conducted on the en bloc resection rate, R0 resection rate, complete resection rate, procedure time, adverse events rate and recurrence rate.

RESULTS

Nine studies involving 1,727 colorectal polyps were included: 881 were removed by UEMR, and 846 were removed by CEMR. UEMR was associated with a significant increase in en bloc resection rate [Odds ratio(OR) 1.69, 95% confidence interval(CI) 1.36-2.10, p<0.00001, I2 = 33%], R0 resection rate(OR 1.52, 95%CI 1.14-2.03, p = 0.004, I2 = 31%) and complete resection rate(OR 1.67, 95%CI 1.06-2.62, p = 0.03, I2 = 0%) as well as a significant reduction in procedure time(MD ‒4.27, 95%CI ‒7.41 to ‒1.13, p = 0.008, I2 = 90%) and recurrence rate(OR 0.52, 95%CI 0.33-0.83, p = 0.006, I2 = 6%). Both techniques were comparable in adverse events rate.

CONCLUSION

UEMR can be a safe and efficient substitute for CEMR in removing ≥10 mm sessile or flat colorectal polyps. More studies verifying the advantages of UEMR over CEMR are needed to promote its application.

The feasibility of endoscopic resection for colorectal laterally spreading tumors

The present study aimed to investigate the feasibility and safety of endoscopic resection for colorectal laterally spreading tumors (LSTs) in different size groups. This retrospective study included 2699 patients with LSTs who underwent endoscopic treatment at the Second Xiangya Hospital of Central South University from May 2012 to February 2022. The patient baseline and procedure outcomes were compared between the < 5 cm group, 5-10 cm group, and ≥ 10 cm group. Meanwhile, lesions larger than 5 cm in diameter were longitudinally compared for endoscopic safety using ESD with surgical operation outcomes. There were 2105 patients in the < 5 cm group, 547 patients in the 5-10 cm group, and 47 patients in the ≥ 10 cm group. En bloc resection and R0 resection rates, the incidence of adverse events, length of stay (LOS), and medical costs significantly differed between the groups (P < 0.01). Comorbidity of diabetes or hypertension, history of antithrombotic drug use, lesion size, location, gross type, endoscopic procedures selection, and circumferential extent of the mucosal defect were independent risk factors for delayed bleeding (P < 0.05). En bloc resection, R0 resection, and lesion canceration were associated with local recurrence. For lesions larger than 5 cm in diameter, ESD had similar R0 resection and local recurrence rates compared with a surgical operation but a lower en bloc rate, LOS, and medical costs. Expert endoscopists can significantly increase en bloc and R0 resection rates and reduce the incidence of adverse events. Endoscopic resection results distinguish in different size groups of colorectal LSTs, yet its safety and feasibility are not inferior to a surgical operation.

Predictive Factors for the Outcome of Unsupervised Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection During the Initial Learning Curve with Prevalence-Based Indication

BACKGROUND

For an adequate educational strategy of ESD in non-Asian settings with prevalence-based indication it is essential to define adequate lesions, suitable for the beginner without on-site expert-supervision.

AIMS

We analyzed possible predictors for outcome parameters of effectiveness and safety during the initial learning curve.

METHODS

The first 120 ESDs of four operators (n = 480), performed between 2007 and 2020 in four tertiary hospitals, were enrolled. Uni-/multivariable regression analysis was done with sex, age, pretreated lesion, lesion size, organ, and organ-based localization as possible independent predictors for en bloc resection (EBR), complication, and resection speed.

RESULTS

Rates of EBR, complication, and resection speed were 84.5%, 14.2%, and 6.20 (± 4.45) cm2/h. Independent predictors for EBR were pretreated lesion (OR 0.27 [0.13-0.57], p < 0.001) and non-colonic ESD (OR 2.29 [1.26-4.17] (rectum)/5.72 [2.36-13.89] (stomach)/7.80 [2.60-23.42] (esophagus), p < 0.001), for complication pretreated lesion (OR 3.04 [1.46-6.34], p < 0.001) and lesion size (OR 1.02 [1.004-1.04], p = 0.012) and for resection speed pretreated lesion (RC - 3.10 [- 4.39 to - 1.81], p < 0.001), lesion size (RC 0.13 [0.11-0.16], p < 0.001) and male patient (RC - 1.11 [- 1.85 to - 0.37], p < 0.001). We found no significant difference in the incidence of technically unsuccessful resections in esophageal (1/84), gastric (3/113), rectal (7/181), and colonic (3/101) ESDs (p = 0.76). Technical failure was mainly caused by complication and fibrosis/pretreatment.

CONCLUSION

During the initial learning curve of an unsupervised ESD program with prevalence-based indication, pretreated lesions and colonic ESDs should be avoided. In contrast, lesion size and organ-based localizations have less predictive value for the outcome.

Training in esophageal peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) on an ex vivo porcine model: learning curve study and training strategy

BACKGROUND

Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is a very effective treatment for achalasia. However, training remains non-standardized. We evaluated a training curriculum, including ex vivo cases, followed by patients' cases under expert supervision. The objective was to establish a learning curve of POEM.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Four operators having completed advanced endoscopy fellowship were involved. They had already observed > 30 cases performed by experts. They performed 30 POEMs standardized (tunnel and myotomy lengths) procedures on ex vivo porcine model. Procedural times, number/volume of injections, mucosal and serous perforations, and myotomy length were collected. The learning curve was assessed using dissection speed (DS) and a dedicated performance score (PS), including learning rate (LR) and learning plateau (LP).

RESULTS

The operators completed all cases within 4 months (median of 3.5 cases/week). The mean procedural time was 43.3 min ± 14.4. Mean myotomy length was 70.0 mm ± 15.6 mm. Dissection speed averaged 1.78 mm/min ± 0.78. Using DS and PS as parameter, the LR was reached after 12.2 cases (DS = 2.0 mm/min) and 10.4 cases, respectively. When comparing the LP and the plateau phase, the DS was slower (1.3 ± 0.5 mm/min versus 2.1 ± 0.54 mm/min, p < 0.005) and perforations were decreased: 0.35 ± 0.82 in LP vs. 0.16 ± 0.44 in PP. Following this training, all operators performed 10 supervised cases and are competent in POEM.

CONCLUSION

The association of observed cases and supervised ex vivo model training is effective for starting POEM on patients. The learning curve is 12 cases to reach a plateau.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection for tumors involving the ileocecal valve with extension into the terminal ileum: a multicenter study from the Hiroshima GI Endoscopy Research Group

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for tumors extending into the terminal ileum remain obscure. We aimed to evaluate the outcomes of ESD for tumors involving the ileocecal valve (ICV) with extension into the terminal ileum.

METHODS

Sixty-eight patients (40 men; mean age, 67 years) with 68 tumors involving the ICV that were resected by ESD between December 2013 and December 2018 were included and classified into Group A (21 tumors with extension into the terminal ileum) and Group B (47 tumors without extension). ESD outcomes were compared between groups.

RESULTS

The clinical features of the patients and tumors were not significantly different between the groups. There were no significant differences in en bloc resection rate (95% and 94%, respectively; p = 0.79), R0 resection rate (90% and 89%, respectively; p = 0.89), procedure time (95 ± 54 min and 94 ± 69 min, respectively; p = 0.64), postoperative bleeding rate (5% and 3%, respectively; p = 0.79), intraoperative perforation rate (0% and 4%, respectively; p = 0.34), delayed perforation rate (0% and 0%, respectively), or postoperative symptomatic stenosis rate (0% and 0%, respectively) between Groups A and B. No specific factors related to the outcomes of ESD were found by subgroup analysis according to the dominance and degree of circumference of the ICV. Local recurrence was observed in 1 patient in Group A who was retreated using ESD.

CONCLUSIONS

ESD for tumors involving the ICV with extension into the terminal ileum is safe and effective.

Randomized controlled trial comparing conventional and traction endoscopic submucosal dissection for early colon tumor (CONNECT-C trial)

OBJECTIVES

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a widely used treatment for early gastrointestinal cancer. However, colon ESD remains challenging. Previous studies on colon ESD using the traction method used a small sample, single-center design, providing insufficient evidence of this procedure's efficacy. We thus aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of the traction method in colon ESD in this multicenter randomized trial.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective, multicenter, randomized, two-arm controlled trial at 10 facilities in Japan. A 1:1 allocation was conducted for the conventional ESD (C-ESD) and traction ESD (T-ESD) groups. The primary end-point was ESD procedure time.

RESULTS

We included 128 C-ESD and 123 T-ESD cases from April 2020 to August 2021. The median procedure times for C-ESD and T-ESD were 61 (40-100) and 53 (40-76) min (P = 0.18), respectively, and no significant differences were observed between the groups. Subgroup analysis showed that the median procedure times for patients with a lesion diameter of ≥30 mm in the C-ESD and T-ESD groups were 89 (57-80) and 69 (50-104) min (P = 0.05), respectively, and for nonexpert operators were 81 (62-120) and 64 (52-109) min (P = 0.07), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The traction method did not contribute to a significantly shortened ESD procedure time. However, this method may be useful when the tumor diameter is large or if the procedure is conducted by nonexpert endoscopists.

Comparison of efficiency and safety between dual-clip and rubber band-assisted ESD and conventional ESD for colonic lateral spreading tumors (LSTs) with different levels of technical difficulty: a retrospective case–control study

Background

Dual-clip and rubber band-assisted endoscopic submucosal dissection (DCRB-ESD) is a useful technique in the management of lateral spreading tumors (LSTs) of the colon and is suggested by researchers compared with conventional ESD (C-ESD). The aim of this retrospective study is to further analyze the efficiency and safety of DCRB-ESD in a setting with varying technical difficulties.

Methods

Patients who underwent endoscopic treatment (DCRB-ESD or C-ESD) due to LSTs between Jan 1st, 2019 and Jan 1st, 2022, were retrospectively collected. Patients were classified into the following two groups: the DCRB-ESD group (n = 46) and the C-ESD group (n = 81). Baselines were compared and propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to manage the heterogeneity. The technical difficulty and outcomes of the two groups were evaluated based on a semiquantitative model (CS-CRESD) previously described.

Results

The baseline characteristics of the two groups were balanced except sex and LST classification before PSM and were corrected after PSM. The median ESD operation time of DCRB-ESD was shorter than that of C-ESD (32 vs 41 and 30 vs 44 before and after PSM respectively, P < 0.05). The operation durations of cases with different CS-CRESD scores were different (P < 0.05). In the subgroup with a score of 0, DCRB-ESD showed no advantage than C-ESD in terms of operation duration before and after PSM. In subgroups with a score of 1–3, DCRB-ESD was faster than C-ESD. In subgroups with a score of 4–5, the between-group operation duration was not significantly different due to the limited number of cases, although the median time of DCRB-ESD was shorter. The R0 resection rates, curative resection, complications, and additional surgery in both groups were not significantly different. No adverse events, such as a clip falling off or rubber band rupturing occurred during this study.

Conclusion

DCRB-ESD was an efficient and safe procedure in the management of colonic LSTs. With DCRB-ESD, the operation duration of difficult cases can be shortened without sacrificing complication risk. However, not all cases would benefit from DCRB-ESD. For easy cases (CS-CRESD score = 0), DCRB-ESD may not be prior to C-ESD by experienced endoscopists. A pre-ESD technical difficulty evaluation was recommended to decide whether to perform DCRB-ESD or not.

Learning curve of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) with prevalence-based indication in unsupervised Western settings: a retrospective multicenter analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

As there is still no consensus about the adequate training strategy for ESD in Western countries, we evaluated unsupervised prevalence-based learning curves including detailed organ-specific subgroup analysis.

METHODS

The first 120 ESDs of four operators (n = 480) were divided into three groups (1: ESD 1-40, 2: ESD 41-80, 3: ESD 81-120). Outcome parameters were rates of technical success, en bloc and R0 resection, the resection speed, rates of conversion to EMR, curative resection, adverse events, surgery due to adverse events, and recurrence. In addition, we analyzed the achievement of quality benchmarks indicating levels of expertise.

RESULTS

After exclusion of pretreated lesions, 438 procedures were enrolled in the final analysis. Technical success rates were > 96% with significant improvements regarding rate of en bloc resection (from 82.6 to 91.2%), resection speed (from 4.54 to 7.63 cm²/h), and rate of conversion to EMR (from 22.0 to 8.1%). No significant differences could be observed for rates of R0 resection (65.9 vs. 69.6%), curative resection (55.8 vs. 55.7%), adverse events (16.3 vs. 11.7%), surgery due to adverse events (1.5 vs. 1.3%), and recurrence (12.5 vs. 4.5%). Subgroup and benchmark analysis revealed an improvement in esophageal, gastric, and rectal ESD with achievement of competence levels for the esophagus and stomach within 80 and most of the benchmarks for proficiency level within 120 procedures. Some of the benchmarks could also be achieved in rectal ESD.

CONCLUSIONS

This trial confirms safety and feasibility of unsupervised ESD along the initial learning curve with prevalence-based indication and exclusion of colonic cases.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection or piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection for large superficial colorectal lesions: A cost effectiveness study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic management is preferred to surgical management for large superficial colorectal lesions. However, the optimal endoscopic resection strategy (piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection [pEMR] or endoscopic submucosal dissection [ESD]) is still debated from an economical point of view. To date, in France, there is no Health Insurance reimbursement rate for the hospital stays related to ESD. We searched to estimate the global cost of colorectal ESD and to define the most cost-effectiveness endoscopic strategy.

METHODS

A model was created to compare the cost-effectiveness of ESD and pEMR according to optical diagnosis (Japan NBI Expert Team [JNET], laterally spreading tumour [LST], CONECCT). We distinguished three groups from the same multicentre ESD cohort and compared the medical and economic outcomes: real-life ESD data (Universal-ESD or U-ESD) compared to modelled selective ESD (S-ESD JNET; S-ESD LST; S-ESD CONECCT) and exclusive pEMR strategies (Universal-EMR or U-EMR).

RESULTS

The en-bloc, R0, and curative resection rates were 97.5%, 86.5%, and 82.6%, respectively in the real life French ESD cohort of 833 colorectal lesions. U-ESD was the least-expensive strategy, with a global cost of 2,858,048.17 €, i.e. 3,431.03 €/patient and was also the most effective strategy because it avoided 774 surgeries, which was more than any other strategy. It outperformed S-ESD CONNECT (global cost = 2,951,411.44 €, and 3,543.11 €/patient, 765 surgeries avoided, S-ESD LST (global cost = 3,055,951.53 €, and 3,668.61 €/patient, 749 surgeries avoided), and S-ESD JNET (global cost = 3,547,426.97 € and 4,258.62 €/patient, 704 surgeries avoided) and U-EMR (global cost = 4,060,547.62 € and 4,874.61 €/patient, 620 surgeries avoided). Even though a model which optimized pEMR results (0% technical failure, 0% primary surgery), U-EMR strategy remained the most expansive strategy and the one that avoided the least surgeries.

CONCLUSION

ESD for all LSTs upper than 20 mm is more cost-effective than pEMR, and S-ESD.

Training program using a traction device improves trainees' learning curve of colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection

BACKGROUND

Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) requires advanced endoscopic skill. For safer and more reliable ESD implementation, various traction devices have been developed in recent years. The purpose of this research was to evaluate whether an ESD training program using a traction device (TD) would contribute to the improvement of trainees' skill acquisition.

METHODS

The differences in treatment outcomes and learning curves by the training program were compared before and after the introduction of TD (control group: January 2014 to March 2016; TD group: April 2016 to June 2018).

RESULTS

A total of 316 patients were included in the analysis (TD group: 202 cases; control group: 114 cases). The number of cases required to achieve proficiency in ESD techniques was 10 in the TD group and 21 in the control group. Compared to the control group, the TD group had a significant advantage in ESD self-completion rate (73.8% vs. 58.8%), dissection speed (19.5 mm²/min vs. 15.9 mm²/min), en bloc resection rate (100% vs. 90%), and R0 resection rate (96% vs. 83%).

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of colorectal ESD self-completion by trainees improved immediately after the start of the training program using a traction device compared to the conventional method, and the dissection speed tended to increase linearly with ESD experience. We believe that ESD training using a traction device will help ESD techniques to be performed safely and reliably among trainees.

Factors for conversion risk of colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: a multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has become a widely accepted treatment method for colorectal tumors; however, there are some persistent problems. This multi-center study aimed to characterize the risk factors for incomplete resection and perforation in standardized colorectal ESD procedures.

METHODS

This study included 2423 consecutive patients who underwent ESD for 2592 colorectal tumors between August 2013 and December 2018 at 11 institutions (1 academic hospital and 10 affiliated hospitals) from the Hiroshima GI Endoscopy Research Group. We evaluated the risk factors for interruption, piecemeal resection, and perforation of standardized colorectal ESD in relation to clinicopathologic and endoscopic characteristics.

RESULTS

The incidences of interruption, piecemeal resection, and perforation were 0.7%, 2.9%, and 3.0%, respectively. Multivariate analysis identified the following risk factors for interruption: perforation during the procedure, deep submucosal invasion (> 1000 μm), poor scope operability, and severe submucosal fibrosis. The risk factors for piecemeal resection included poor scope operability, severe submucosal fibrosis, and procedure time (≥ 85 min). The risk factors for perforation during the procedure were severe submucosal fibrosis, poor scope operability, procedure time (≥ 85 min), and tumor size (≥ 40 mm). Independent risk factors for severe submucosal fibrosis included a history of biopsy and lesions located on the fold or flexure.

CONCLUSIONS

Severe submucosal fibrosis and poor scope operability are the common risk factors for interruption, piecemeal resection, and perforation in standardized colorectal ESD.

Efficacy of single-balloon overtube for endoscopic submucosal dissection in the proximal colon: A propensity score-matched analysis

OBJECTIVES

A single-balloon overtube (SBO) can improve poor scope operability during colonic endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). We aimed to evaluate the clinical usefulness of SBO for ESD in the proximal colon and the predictive factors for cases in which SBO is useful.

METHODS

A total of 88 tumors located in the proximal colon resected by balloon-assisted ESD (BA-ESD) using SBO and 461 tumors resected by conventional ESD (C-ESD) between June 2015 and November 2020 were considered. Seventy-eight tumors each in the BA-ESD and C-ESD groups were matched by propensity score matching. ESD outcomes were compared between the groups, and a decision tree analysis was performed to explore the predictive factors for cases in which SBO is useful.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between the groups in the major outcomes such as en bloc resection rate (95% vs. 99%, p = 0.17), R0 resection rate (92% vs. 96%, p = 0.30), mean dissection speed (16 mm²/min vs. 16 mm²/min, p = 0.53), and intraoperative perforation rate (5% vs. 6%, p = 0.73). Even when considering cases with poor preoperative scope operability, there were no significant differences between the groups. Comparison of tumors ≥40 mm in diameter between the groups confirmed that the intraoperative perforation rate was significantly lower in the BA-ESD group than in the C-ESD group (0% vs. 24%, p = 0.0188).

CONCLUSION

SBO is useful for ESD of tumors ≥40 mm in diameter in the proximal colon to prevent intraoperative perforation, which usually has a long procedure time.

Vertical tumor margin of endoscopic resection for T1 colorectal carcinoma affects the prognosis of patients undergoing additional surgery

BACKGROUND

Vertical tumor margin-negative T1 colorectal carcinoma (CRC) is an absolute curative condition following complete endoscopic resection (ER). However, the influence on prognosis in relation to vertical tumor margin is unclear. Therefore, we evaluated the influence of the distance from vertical tumor margin to resected specimen edge (vertical margin distance) of ER for T1b (submucosal invasion depth > 1000 μm) CRC on the prognosis of patients undergoing additional surgery after ER.

METHODS

In total, 215 consecutive patients with T1b CRC who underwent additional surgery after ER at Hiroshima University Hospital between February 1992 and June 2019 were enrolled. We assessed 191 patients without lymph node metastases at the additional surgery. The specimens resected by ER were classified into three groups based on the vertical margin distance: patients with a vertical margin distance of ≥ 500 μm (Group A); patients with a vertical margin distance of < 500 μm (Group B); and patients with a positive vertical tumor margin (Group C). Subsequently, we evaluated the prognosis of the patients in relation to the clinicopathological characteristics among the three groups.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in clinicopathological characteristics among the three groups. Group A had a significantly higher recurrence-free 5-year survival rate than Groups B and C (100%, 84.5%, and 81.8%, respectively). Similarly, Group A had a significantly higher disease-specific 5-year survival rate than Group C (100% vs. 95.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

Complete en bloc resection with sufficient submucosal layer from the invasive front (vertical margin distance > 500 μm) by ER for T1 CRC reduces the risk of metastatic recurrence after additional surgery.

The learning experience for endoscopic submucosal dissection in a non-academic western hospital: a single operator's untutored, prevalence-based approach

Background

Studies of learning experience in endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) commonly originate from the East. Little is known about the performance of ESD in low-volume western centers. Furthermore, it is unclear whether ESD can be self-taught without a tutored approach.

Methods

We performed a retrospective analysis of consecutive ESDs, performed in an untutored prevalence-based fashion by a single operator at a private Greek hospital from 2016-2020. Out of 60 lesions, standard ESD was applied for 54 and enucleation for 6; 41 were mucosal and 19 submucosal; 3 esophageal, 24 gastric, one duodenal, 12 colonic, and 20 rectal.

Results

Pathology revealed carcinoma (n=14), neuroendocrine tumor (n=7), precancerous lesion (n=27), or other submucosal tumors (n=12). The rates of en bloc and R0 resection were 98% and 91%, respectively. The median resection speed was <3 cm²/h for the first 20 cases, but improved progressively to ≥9 cm²/h after 40 cases. Two patients underwent laparoscopic surgery for colonic perforation, and one received a blood transfusion because of delayed bleeding (serious adverse event rate: 5%). No deaths occurred. The median hospital stay was 1.3 days. Variables associated with improvement in ESD speed during the second period of the study were the application of countertraction and the experience acquired through other endosurgical techniques.

Conclusions

ESD was safe and effective in a low-volume center, with an acceptable adverse events rate. At least 40 mixed cases were needed to achieve a high resection speed. Additive experience gained through other endosurgical procedures probably contributed to the improvement in performance.

Salvage endoscopic submucosal dissection for local residual/recurrent colorectal tumor after endoscopic resection: Large multicenter 10-year study

OBJECTIVES

For local residual/recurrent and endoscopic resection (ER) interrupted colorectal tumors, endoscopic retreatment is often difficult due to severe submucosal fibrosis. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) can achieve en bloc resection, even for tumors with severe submucosal fibrosis, although it is a risk factor for incomplete resection and perforation. We aimed to determine the safety and efficacy of colorectal ESD for local residual/recurrent tumors including ER interrupted tumors from a large multicenter study.

METHODS

From January 2008 until December 2018, 3,937 colorectal tumors were resected by ESD at the Hiroshima GI Endoscopy Research Group. From this group, 81 local residual/recurrent tumors and 21 ER interrupted tumors were included. We analyzed ESD outcomes, particularly the difference between the early and late phases and re-recurrence after ESD for local residual/recurrent tumors.

RESULTS

For local residual/recurrent tumors, en bloc and R0 resection rates were 95% (77/81) and 90% (73/81), respectively. The intraoperative perforation rate was 6% (5/81), and one patient required surgery. The delayed perforation rate was 2% (2/81), and one patient required surgery. For ER interrupted tumors, both the en bloc and R0 resection rates were 86% (18/21), with no major adverse events. For local residual/recurrent and ER interrupted tumors, the intraoperative perforation rate was significantly lower in the late phase compared with the early phase. Following curative resection for local residual/recurrent tumors, no local re-recurrences occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

Colorectal ESD is an effective treatment for local residual/recurrent and ER interrupted tumors.

Systematic literature review of learning curves for colorectal polyp resection techniques in lower gastrointestinal endoscopy

AIM

The performance of therapeutic procedures in lower gastrointestinal endoscopy (LGI) can be challenging and carries an increased risk of adverse events. There is increasing demand for the training of endoscopists in these procedures, but limited guidelines exist concerning procedural competency. The aim of this study was to assess the learning curves for LGI polypectomy, colorectal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD).

METHOD

A systematic review of electronic databases between 1946 and September 2019 was performed. Citations were included if they reported learning curve data. Outcome measures that defined the success of procedural competency were also recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 34 out of 598 studies met the inclusion criteria of which 28 were related to ESD, three to polypectomy and three to EMR. Outcome measures for polypectomy competency (en bloc resection, delayed bleeding and independent polypectomy rate) were achieved after completion of between 250 and 400 polypectomies and after 300 colonoscopies. EMR outcome measures, including complete resection and recurrence, were achieved variably between 50 and 300 procedures. Outcome measures for ESD included efficiency (resection rates and procedural speed) and safety (adverse events). En bloc resection rates of over 80% and R0 resection rates of over 70% were achieved at 20-40 cases and procedural speed increased after 30 ESD cases. Competency in safety metrics was variably achieved at 20-200 cases.

CONCLUSION

There is a paucity of data on learning curves in LGI polypectomy, EMR and ESD. Despite limited evidence, we have identified relevant outcome measures and threshold numbers for the most common LGI polyp resection techniques for potential inclusion in training programmes/credentialing guidelines.

Review on colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection focusing on the technical aspect

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) enables removal of broad-based colorectal polyps or lateral spreading tumors with a higher rate of en bloc resection and a lower risk of local recurrence. However, it is technically demanding. Over the past 20 years, various equipment and innovative techniques have been developed to reduce the difficulty of ESD. The information in the literature is scattered. Our aim is to provide a comprehensive review on the setup and technical aspects of colorectal ESD.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed database and systemically reviewed all original and review articles related to colorectal ESD. Further manual search according to reference lists of identified articles were done. The selected articles were categorized and reviewed. Original figures were created to help readers understand some of the ESD techniques.

RESULTS

A total of 216 articles were identified, in which 25 of them were review articles and 191 of them were original articles. They were categorized and reviewed. An in-depth appraisal of the setting, equipment, and technical aspects of colorectal ESD was performed.

CONCLUSIONS

Although ESD is a technically demanding procedure that requires expert endoscopic skills, it can be mastered. With good peri-procedural preparation, sufficient knowledge of the equipment, and thorough understanding of the useful endoscopic tricks and maneuvers, colorectal ESD can be performed smoothly and safely.