Indications and outcomes of colorectal hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection: a large multicenter 10-year study

Clinical usefulness of hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection for T1b colorectal carcinomas ≤20 mm to ensure adequate vertical margins

Objective

To evaluate endoscopic resection strategies for cT1b colorectal carcinomas (CRCs) ≤20 mm to determine strategies that enable adequate vertical margins (VMs).

Methods

We enrolled 128 consecutive patients with cT1b colorectal carcinomas ≤20 mm resected by endoscopic mucosal resection or hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). Tumor lifting conditions after submucosal injection were classified into type A (lifting, soft dome-like), type B (lifting, hard trapezoid-like), and non-lifting (positive non-lifting sign). Predictors of positive VMs (VM 1) and adequate VMs were identified.

Results

All non-lifting tumors were resected by hybrid ESD and VMs were ≥500 µm. Vertical margin 1 tumors were only found in the endoscopic mucosal resection group, in which, the proportion of type B tumors with VM 1 was significantly higher than that of tumors with negative VMs (p < 0.01). Type A tumors showed no significant between-group differences. Among type B tumors, the proportion of VMs ≥500 µm was significantly higher (p < 0.01) and the VM distance was significantly longer (p < 0.01) in the hybrid ESD group than in the endoscopic mucosal resection group.

Conclusions

Hybrid ESD can be selected for type B tumors to ensure adequate VMs.

Outcomes of endoscopic sub-mucosal dissection in laterally spreading colorectal polyps: A tertiary care centre experience from India

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic sub-mucosal dissection (ESD) is an established endoscopic modality for the management of colorectal polyps. However, there are no studies regarding the outcomes of ESD from India. In this study, we aimed at evaluating the outcomes of ESD in patients with adenomatous polyps in the colon and rectum.

METHODS

Data of consecutive patients who underwent ESD for colorectal polyps from 2018 to 2021 were analyzed, retrospectively. The primary outcome of the study was the technical success of ESD. The secondary outcomes included the rate of histologically complete resection (R0), adverse events and recurrence.

RESULTS

Seventy patients (63.5 years, 60% males) underwent ESD for polyps in colon and rectum. A majority were located in rectum (80%) and sigmoid colon (15.7%). Narrow band classification of the polyps was Japanese Narrow Band Imaging Expert Team (JNET)-2a in 50 (71.4%) and JNET-2b in 13 (18.6%) patients. ESD was technically successful in 64 (91.4%) patients using conventional technique (72.8%) and pocket or tunnelling technique (18.6%). There were no major adverse events. Histologically RO was achieved in 58 (82.8%) patients and deep sub-mucosal invasion was noted in 12 patients. At a median follow-up of 19 (interquartile range [IQR] 15-27) months, recurrence was noticed in four (5.7%) patients all of which could be managed endoscopically.

CONCLUSION

ESD, performed at a tertiary care centre in India, yields high rates of technical success and histologically R0, with a relatively low incidence of adverse events and recurrences.

Safe and effective hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection with ALL IN ONE snare in porcine gastric model (with video)

This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficiency of hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection (H-ESD) using a newly developed ALL IN ONE (AIO) snare. This was a matched control study in a porcine model. Five paired simulated stomach lesions 2-2.5 cm in size were removed by H-ESD using an AIO snare or conventional ESD (C-ESD) using an endoscopic knife. The outcomes of the two procedures were compared, including en-bloc resection rates, procedure times, intraprocedural bleeding volumes, muscular injuries, perforations, thicknesses of the submucosal layer in resected specimens, and stomach defects. All simulated lesions were resected en-bloc. Specimens resected by H-ESD and C-ESD were similar in size (7.68 ± 2.92 vs. 8.42 ± 2.42 cm2; P = 0.676). H-ESD required a significantly shorter procedure time (13.39 ± 3.78 vs. 25.99 ± 4.52 min; P = 0.031) and submucosal dissection time (3.99 ± 1.73 vs. 13.1 ± 4.58 min; P = 0.003) versus C-ESD; H-ESD also yielded a faster dissection speed (241.37 ± 156.84 vs. 68.56 ± 28.53 mm2/min; P = 0.042) and caused fewer intraprocedural bleeding events (0.40 ± 0.55 vs. 3.40 ± 1.95 times/per lesion; P = 0.016) than C-ESD. The thicknesses of the submucosal layer of the resected specimen (1190.98 ± 134.07 vs. 1055.90 ± 151.76 μm; P = 0.174) and the residual submucosal layer of the stomach defect (1607.94 ± 1026.74 vs. 985.98 ± 445.58 μm; P = 0.249) were similar with both procedures. The AIO snare is a safe and effective device for H-ESD and improves the treatment outcomes of gastric lesions by shortening the procedure time.

Planned Hybrid Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection as Alternative for Colorectal Neoplasms: A Propensity Score-Matched Study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection (H-ESD), a modified ESD with a snare, has become increasingly utilized to overcome the limitations of conventional ESD (C-ESD). This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of Planned H-ESD and C-ESD for colorectal lesions.

METHODS

Propensity score matching was performed to control for confounding variables in this retrospective study. Outcomes included en bloc resection and complete resection (R0) rates, procedure time, adverse event rates, and local recurrence rate.

RESULTS

1286 lesions were enrolled in the study. After matching, 263 lesions were assigned to each group. The Planned H-ESD group has lower en bloc rate but similar R0 resection rate compared to the C-ESD group (90.9% vs 98.1%, P = 0.001; 77.2% vs 77.9%, P = 0.917). The median procedure time was shorter in the Planned H-ESD group (27.0 min vs 35.0 min, P = 0.001). There were no significant differences in adverse events rates or local recurrence rate. Subgroup analysis based on lesion size revealed that a significantly lower en bloc resection rate in the Planned H-ESD group compared to the C-ESD group for lesions ≥ 40 mm (71.0% vs 94.3%, P = 0.027), but there was no significant difference for lesions < 40 mm.

CONCLUSION

The Planned H-ESD has a lower en bloc resection rate but a similar R0 resection rate, adverse event rates, local recurrence rate, and shorter procedure duration. Compared to C-ESD, Planned H-ESD presents advantages for managing colorectal neoplasms below 40 mm.

Hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection as a salvage option for difficult colorectal conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection

BACKGROUND

When total submucosal dissection is difficult to achieve during conventional colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (C-ESD), the lesion can be resected by final snaring through salvage hybrid ESD (SH-ESD). This study aimed to examine the outcomes of SH-ESD and identify its indications that could achieve en bloc resection.

METHODS

We recruited 1039 consecutive patients with colorectal lesions that underwent ESD at Hiroshima University Hospital between January 2015 and December 2020. C-ESD was attempted thoroughly in 924 lesions (C-ESD group, including 9 lesions in which ESD was discontinued), and SH-ESD was performed owing to some difficulties in 115 lesions (SH-ESD group). Risk factors for incomplete resection by SH-ESD and ESD discontinuation were evaluated using multivariate analysis. The outcomes were compared between cases with remaining undissected submucosa of < 20 mm in diameter in the SH-ESD and C-ESD groups, using propensity score matching.

RESULTS

Multivariate analysis revealed that a procedure time > 80 min and remaining undissected submucosa ≥ 20 mm in diameter were significant risk factors for incomplete resection after SH-ESD and ESD discontinuation. By propensity score matching analysis, procedure time was significantly shorter in the SH-ESD group with remaining undissected submucosa < 20 mm in diameter than in the C-ESD group (71 min vs. 90 min, p = 0.0053), although no significant difference was found in the en bloc resection rate (94% vs. 87%, p = 0.0914).

CONCLUSION

SH-ESD can be an alternative surgical method when conventional ESD is difficult to continue in cases in which the remaining undissected submucosa is < 20 mm in diameter.

Significance of rescue hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection in difficult colorectal cases

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), in which an incision is made around a lesion and snaring is performed after submucosal dissection, has some advantages in colorectal surgery, including shorter procedure time and preventing perforation. However, its value for rescue resection in difficult colorectal ESD cases remains unclear. This study evaluated the utility of rescue hybrid ESD (RH-ESD).

METHODS

We divided 364 colorectal ESD procedures into the conventional ESD group (C-ESD, n=260), scheduled hybrid ESD group (SH-ESD, n=69), and RH-ESD group (n=35) and compared their clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

Resection time was significantly shorter in the following order: RH-ESD (149 [90-197] minutes) >C-ESD (90 [60-140] minutes) >SH-ESD (52 [29-80] minutes). The en bloc resection rate increased significantly in the following order: RH-ESD (48.6%), SH-ESD (78.3%), and C-ESD (97.7%). An analysis of factors related to piecemeal resection of RH-ESD revealed that the submucosal dissection rate was significantly lower in the piecemeal resection group (25% [20%-30%]) than in the en bloc resection group (40% [20%-60%]).

CONCLUSION

RH-ESD was ineffective in terms of curative resection because of the low en bloc resection rate, but was useful for avoiding surgery.

Current Status of Diagnosis and Treatment of Colorectal Cancer in Asian Countries: A Questionnaire Survey

INTRODUCTION

Diagnostic and therapeutic methods for colorectal cancer (CRC) have advanced; however, they may be inaccessible worldwide, and their widespread use is challenging. This questionnaire survey investigates the current status of diagnosis and treatment of early-stage CRC in Asian countries.

METHODS

Responses to the questionnaire were obtained from 213 doctors at different institutions in 8 countries and regions. The questionnaire consisted of 39 questions on the following four topics: noninvasive diagnosis other than endoscopy (6 questions), diagnosis by magnification and image-enhanced endoscopy (IEE) including artificial intelligence (AI) (10 questions), endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), proper use among other therapeutic methods (11 questions), and pathologic diagnosis and surveillance (12 questions).

RESULTS

Although 101 of 213 respondents were affiliated with academic hospitals, there were disparities among countries and regions in the dissemination of advanced technologies, such as IEE, AI, and ESD. The NICE classification is widely used for the diagnosis of colorectal tumors using IEE, while the JNET classification with magnification was used in countries such as Japan (65/70, 92.9%) and China (16/22, 72.7%). Of the 211 respondents, 208 (98.6%) assumed that en bloc resection should be achieved for carcinomas, and 180 of 212 (84.9%) believed that ESD was the most suitable in cases with a diameter larger than 2 cm. However, colorectal ESD is not widespread in countries such as Thailand, the Philippines, and Indonesia.

CONCLUSION

The promotion of advanced technologies and education should be continual to enable more people to benefit from them.

Management of complications related to colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection

Compared to endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), colonoscopic endoscopic submucosal dissection (C-ESD) has the advantages of higher en bloc resection rates and lower recurrence rates of colorectal neoplasms. Therefore, C-ESD is considered an effective treatment method for laterally spread tumors and early colorectal cancer. However, C-ESD is technically more difficult and requires a longer procedure time than EMR. In addition to therapeutic efficacy and procedural difficulty, safety concerns should always be considered when performing C-ESD in clinical practice. Bleeding and perforation are the main adverse events associated with C-ESD and can occur during C-ESD or after the completion of the procedure. Most bleeding associated with C-ESD can be managed endoscopically, even if it occurs during or after the procedure. More recently, most perforations identified during C-ESD can also be managed endoscopically, unless the mural defect is too large to be sutured with endoscopic devices or the patient is hemodynamically unstable. Delayed perforations are quite rare, but they require surgical treatment more frequently than endoscopically identified intraprocedural perforations or radiologically identified immediate postprocedural perforations. Post-ESD coagulation syndrome is a relatively underestimated adverse event, which can mimic localized peritonitis from perforation. Here, we classify and characterize the complications associated with C-ESD and recommend management options for them.