1
|
Tate DJ, Desomer L, Argenziano ME, Mahajan N, Sidhu M, Vosko S, Shahidi N, Lee E, Williams SJ, Burgess NG, Bourke MJ. Treatment of adenoma recurrence after endoscopic mucosal resection. Gut 2023; 72:1875-1886. [PMID: 37414440 DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2023-330300] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/22/2023] [Accepted: 05/29/2023] [Indexed: 07/08/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Residual or recurrent adenoma (RRA) after endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs) of ≥20 mm is a major limitation. Data on outcomes of the endoscopic treatment of recurrence are scarce, and no evidence-based standard exists. We investigated the efficacy of endoscopic retreatment over time in a large prospective cohort. DESIGN Over 139 months, detailed morphological and histological data on consecutive RRA detected after EMR for single LNPCPs at one tertiary endoscopy centre were prospectively recorded during structured surveillance colonoscopy. Endoscopic retreatment was performed on cases with evidence of RRA and was performed predominantly using hot snare resection, cold avulsion forceps with adjuvant snare tip soft coagulation or a combination of the two. RESULTS 213 (14.6%) patients had RRA (168 (78.9%) at first surveillance and 45 (21.1%) thereafter). RRA was commonly 2.5-5.0 mm (48.0%) and unifocal (78.7%). Of 202 (94.8%) cases which had macroscopic evidence of RRA, 194 (96.0%) underwent successful endoscopic therapy and 161 (83.4%) had a subsequent follow-up colonoscopy. Of the latter, endoscopic therapy of recurrence was successful in 149 (92.5%) of 161 in the per-protocol analysis, and 149 (73.8%) of 202 in the intention-to-treat analysis, with a mean of 1.15 (SD 0.36) retreatment sessions. No adverse events were directly attributable to endoscopic therapy. Further RRA after endoscopic therapy was endoscopically treatable in most cases. Overall, only 9 (4.2%, 95% CI 2.2% to 7.8%) of 213 patients with RRA required surgery.Thus 159 (98.8%, 95% CI 95.1% to 99.8%) of 161 cases with initially successful endoscopic treatment of RRA and follow-up remained surgery-free for a median of 13 months (IQR 25.0) of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS RRA after EMR of LNPCPs can be effectively treated using simple endoscopic techniques with long-term adenoma remission of >90%; only 16% required retreatment. Therefore, more technically complex, morbid and resource-intensive endoscopic or surgical techniques are required only in selected cases. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS NCT01368289 and NCT02000141.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David J Tate
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Hospital of Ghent, Gent, Belgium
- Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Ghent, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Lobke Desomer
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Maria Eva Argenziano
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Hospital of Ghent, Gent, Belgium
| | - Neha Mahajan
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Mayenaaz Sidhu
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
- Westmead Clinical School, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Sergei Vosko
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Neal Shahidi
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
- Department of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Eric Lee
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Stephen J Williams
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Nicholas G Burgess
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
- Westmead Clinical School, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Michael J Bourke
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
- Westmead Clinical School, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Mun EJ, Wagh MS. Recent advances and current challenges in endoscopic resection with the full-thickness resection device. World J Gastroenterol 2023; 29:4009-4020. [PMID: 37476589 PMCID: PMC10354579 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v29.i25.4009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/10/2023] [Revised: 03/27/2023] [Accepted: 06/05/2023] [Indexed: 06/28/2023] Open
Abstract
Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) has emerged as a viable technique in the management of mucosal and subepithelial lesions of the gastrointestinal tract (GIT) not amenable to conventional therapeutic approaches. While various devices and techniques have been described for EFTR, a single, combined full-thickness resection and closure device (full-thickness resection device, FTRD system, Ovesco Endoscopy AG, Tuebingen, Germany) has become commercially available in recent years. Initially, the FTRD system was limited to use in the colorectum only. Recently, a modified version of the FTRD has been released for EFTR in the upper GIT as well. This review provides a broad summary of the FTRD, highlighting recent advances and current challenges.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elijah J Mun
- Division of Gastroenterology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO 80045, United States
| | - Mihir S Wagh
- Interventional Endoscopy, Division of Gastroenterology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO 80045, United States
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Tate DJ, Argenziano ME, Anderson J, Bhandari P, Boškoski I, Bugajski M, Desomer L, Heitman SJ, Kashida H, Kriazhov V, Lee RRT, Lyutakov I, Pimentel-Nunes P, Rivero-Sánchez L, Thomas-Gibson S, Thorlacius H, Bourke MJ, Tham TC, Bisschops R. Curriculum for training in endoscopic mucosal resection in the colon: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Position Statement. Endoscopy 2023. [PMID: 37285908 DOI: 10.1055/a-2077-0497] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/09/2023]
Abstract
Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is the standard of care for the complete removal of large (≥ 10 mm) nonpedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs). Increased detection of LNPCPs owing to screening colonoscopy, plus high observed rates of incomplete resection and need for surgery call for a standardized approach to training in EMR. 1 : Trainees in EMR should have achieved basic competence in diagnostic colonoscopy, < 10-mm polypectomy, pedunculated polypectomy, and common methods of gastrointestinal endoscopic hemostasis. The role of formal training courses is emphasized. Training may then commence in vivo under the direct supervision of a trainer. 2 : Endoscopy units training endoscopists in EMR should have specific processes in place to support and facilitate training. 3: A trained EMR practitioner should have mastered theoretical knowledge including how to assess an LNPCP for risk of submucosal invasion, how to interpret the potential difficulty of a particular EMR procedure, how to decide whether to remove a particular LNPCP en bloc or piecemeal, whether the risks of electrosurgical energy can be avoided for a particular LNPCP, the different devices required for EMR, management of adverse events, and interpretation of reports provided by histopathologists. 4: Trained EMR practitioners should be familiar with the patient consent process for EMR. 5: The development of endoscopic non-technical skills (ENTS) and team interaction are important for trainees in EMR. 6: Differences in recommended technique exist between EMR performed with and without electrosurgical energy. Common to both is a standardized technique based upon dynamic injection, controlled and precise snare placement, safety checks prior to the application of tissue transection (cold snare) or electrosurgical energy (hot snare), and interpretation of the post-EMR resection defect. 7: A trained EMR practitioner must be able to manage adverse events associated with EMR including intraprocedural bleeding and perforation, and post-procedural bleeding. Delayed perforation should be avoided by correct interpretation of the post-EMR defect and treatment of deep mural injury. 8: A trained EMR practitioner must be able to communicate EMR procedural findings to patients and provide them with a plan in case of adverse events after discharge and a follow-up plan. 9: A trained EMR practitioner must be able to detect and interrogate a post-endoscopic resection scar for residual or recurrent adenoma and apply treatment if necessary. 10: Prior to independent practice, a minimum of 30 EMR procedures should be performed, culminating in a trainer-guided assessment of competency using a validated assessment tool, taking account of procedural difficulty (e. g. using the SMSA polyp score). 11: Trained practitioners should log their key performance indicators (KPIs) of polypectomy during independent practice. A guide for target KPIs is provided in this document.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David J Tate
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Hospital of Ghent, Ghent, Belgium
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Ghent, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Maria Eva Argenziano
- Clinic of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Emergency Digestive Endoscopy, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Ancona, Italy
| | - John Anderson
- Cheltenham General Hospital, Gloucestershire Hospitals Foundation Trust, Cheltenham, UK
| | - Pradeep Bhandari
- Endoscopy Department, Portsmouth Hospitals University NHS Trust, Portsmouth, UK
| | - Ivo Boškoski
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Marek Bugajski
- Department of Gastroenterology, Luxmed Oncology, Warsaw, Poland
| | - Lobke Desomer
- AZ Delta Roeselare, University Hospital Ghent, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Steven J Heitman
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Departments of Medicine and Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada
| | - Hiroshi Kashida
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Kindai University, Faculty of Medicine, Osaka, Japan
| | - Vladimir Kriazhov
- Endoscopy Department, Nizhny Novgorod Regional Clinical Oncology Center, Nizhny Novgorod, Russia Federation
| | - Ralph R T Lee
- The Ottawa Hospital - Civic Campus, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Ivan Lyutakov
- University Hospital Tsaritsa Yoanna-ISUL, Medical University Sofia, Sofia, Bulgaria
| | - Pedro Pimentel-Nunes
- Gastroenterology Department, Portuguese Oncology Institute of Porto, Porto, Portugal
- Center for Research in Health Technologies and Information Systems (CINTESIS), Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal
- Surgery and Physiology Department, Faculty of Medicine of the University of Porto, Porto, Portugal
| | - Liseth Rivero-Sánchez
- Gastroenterology Department, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
- Centro de Investigacion Biomedica en Red de Enfermedades Hepaticas y Digestivas (CIBERehd), Institut d'Investigacions Biomediques August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS), Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | | | | | - Michael J Bourke
- Department of Gastroenterology, Westmead Hospital, Sydney, Australia
- University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Tony C Tham
- Division of Gastroenterology, Ulster Hospital, Dundonald, Belfast, Northern Ireland
| | - Raf Bisschops
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Hospitals Leuven, TARGID, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Trindade AJ, Kumta NA, Bhutani MS, Chandrasekhara V, Jirapinyo P, Krishnan K, Melson J, Pannala R, Parsi MA, Schulman AR, Trikudanathan G, Watson RR, Maple JT, Lichtenstein DR. Devices and techniques for endoscopic treatment of residual and fibrotic colorectal polyps (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc 2020; 92:474-482. [PMID: 32641215 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2020.03.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/06/2020] [Accepted: 03/08/2020] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS Residual neoplasia after macroscopically complete EMR of large colon polyps has been reported in 10% to 32% of resections. Often, residual polyps at the site of prior polypectomy are fibrotic and nonlifting, making additional resection challenging. METHODS This document reviews devices and methods for the endoscopic treatment of fibrotic and/or residual polyps. In addition, techniques reported to reduce the incidence of residual neoplasia after endoscopic resection are discussed. RESULTS Descriptions of technologies and available outcomes data are summarized for argon plasma coagulation ablation, snare-tip coagulation, avulsion techniques, grasp-and-snare technique, EndoRotor endoscopic resection system, endoscopic full-thickness resection device, and salvage endoscopic submucosal dissection. CONCLUSIONS Several technologies and techniques discussed in this document may aid in the prevention and/or resection of fibrotic and nonlifting polyps.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Arvind J Trindade
- Division of Gastroenterology, Mount Sinai Hospital, New York, New York, USA
| | - Nikhil A Kumta
- Department of Gastroenterology, Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Long Island Jewish Medical Center, New Hyde Park, New York, USA
| | - Manoop S Bhutani
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, Division of Internal Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Vinay Chandrasekhara
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
| | - Pichamol Jirapinyo
- Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Endoscopy, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Kumar Krishnan
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Joshua Melson
- Division of Digestive Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA
| | - Rahul Pannala
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, Arizona, USA
| | - Mansour A Parsi
- Section for Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Tulane University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA
| | - Allison R Schulman
- Department of Gastroenterology, Michigan Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
| | - Guru Trikudanathan
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | - Rabindra R Watson
- Department of Gastroenterology, Interventional Endoscopy Services, California Pacific Medical Center, San Francisco, California, USA
| | - John T Maple
- Division of Digestive Diseases and Nutrition, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA
| | - David R Lichtenstein
- Division of Gastroenterology, Boston Medical Center, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Outcomes of endoscopic resection of large colorectal lesions subjected to prior failed resection or substantial manipulation. Int J Colorectal Dis 2019; 34:1033-1041. [PMID: 30944999 DOI: 10.1007/s00384-019-03285-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 03/19/2019] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Injudicious attempts at resection and extensive sampling of large colorectal adenomas prior to referral for endoscopic resection (ER) are common. This has deleterious effects, but little is known about the outcomes following ER. We retrospectively analysed the outcomes of ER of large adenomas previously subjected to substantial manipulation. METHOD ER of large (≥ 2 cm) colorectal adenomas were grouped according to level of manipulation: prior attempted resection, heavy manipulation (≥ six biopsies or tattoo under lesion) or minimal manipulation (< six biopsies). Outcomes were compared between groups. Independent predictors of outcomes were identified using multiple logistic regression. RESULTS Five hundred forty-two lesions (mean size 53.7 mm) were included. Two hundred sixty-five (49%) had been subjected to prior attempted resection or heavy manipulation, 151 (28%) to minimal manipulation, and 126 (23%) were not previously manipulated. ESD techniques were used more frequently than EMR after substantial manipulation. There were no differences in initial success of ER (99%, 98%, 98%, p = 0.71). Prior attempted resection was independently associated with recurrence (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.1-4.5, p = 0.03) and negatively associated with en bloc resection (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.1-0.7, p = 0.004). Regardless of level of prior manipulation, there were no differences in sustained endoscopic cure with > 95% of patients overall free from recurrence and avoiding surgery at last follow-up. CONCLUSION There is a substantial burden of injudicious lesion manipulation before referral, which makes recurrence more likely and en bloc resection less likely. However, with appropriate expertise, sustained successful endoscopic treatment is achievable for the vast majority of patients treated in a specialist unit.
Collapse
|
6
|
Fuccio L, Repici A, Hassan C, Ponchon T, Bhandari P, Jover R, Triantafyllou K, Mandolesi D, Frazzoni L, Bellisario C, Bazzoli F, Sharma P, Rösch T, Rex DK. Why attempt en bloc resection of non-pedunculated colorectal adenomas? A systematic review of the prevalence of superficial submucosal invasive cancer after endoscopic submucosal dissection. Gut 2018; 67:1464-1474. [PMID: 29208675 DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2017-315103] [Citation(s) in RCA: 53] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/21/2017] [Revised: 11/14/2017] [Accepted: 11/20/2017] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) aims to achieve en bloc resection of non-pedunculated colorectal adenomas which might be indicated in cases with superficial submucosal invasive cancers (SMIC), but the procedure is time consuming and complex. The prevalence of such cancers is not known but may determine the clinical necessity for ESD as opposed to the commonly used piecemeal mucosal resection (endoscopic mucosal resection) of colorectal adenomas. The main aim was to assess the prevalence of SMIC SM1 (ie, invasion ≤1000 µm or less than one-third of the submucosa) on colorectal lesions removed by ESD. DESIGN A literature review was conducted using electronic databases (up to March 2017) for colorectal ESD series reporting the histology of the dissected lesions. RESULTS 51 studies with data on 11 260 colorectal dissected lesions were included. Most resected lesions (82.2%; 95% CI 78.8% to 85.3%) were adenomas (low- and high-grade dysplasia, 26.8% and 55.4%, respectively). Overall, 15.7% were submucosal cancers, but only slightly more than half (8.0%; 95% CI 6.1% to 10.3%) had an infiltration depth of ≤1000 µm, providing a number needed to treat (NNT) to avoid one surgery of 12.5. Estimating an oncologically curative (R0; G1/2; L0/V0) resection rate of 75.3% (95% CI 52.2% to 89.4%) for malignant lesions, the prevalence of curative resection lowered to 6% (95% CI 4.2% to 7.2%) with an NNT of 16.7. CONCLUSION The low prevalence of SMIC SM1 in lesions selected for ESD as well as the even lower rate of curative resection limits the clinical applicability of endoscopic en bloc resection. This calls for caution over an indiscriminate use of this technique in the resection of colorectal neoplasia.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lorenzo Fuccio
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Alessandro Repici
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Division of Gastroenterology, Humanitas Research and University Hospital, Rozzano, Italy
| | | | - Thierry Ponchon
- Department of Gastroenterology and Endoscopy, Edouard Herriot Hospital, Lyon, France
| | | | - Rodrigo Jover
- Service of Digestive Medicine, Alicante Institute for Health and Biomedical Research (ISABIAL-FISABIO Foundation), Alicante, Spain
| | - Konstantinos Triantafyllou
- Ηepatogastroenterology Unit, Second Department of Internal Medicine, Research Institute and Diabetes Center, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Attikon University General Hospital, Athens, Greece
| | - Daniele Mandolesi
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Leonardo Frazzoni
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Cristina Bellisario
- Department of Cancer Screening, Centre for Epidemiology and Prevention in Oncology (CPO), University Hospital Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, Turin, Italy
| | - Franco Bazzoli
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Prateek Sharma
- Division of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas, Missouri, USA.,Department of Gastroenterology, Veteran Affairs Medical Center, Kansas, Missouri, USA
| | - Thomas Rösch
- Department of Interdisciplinary Endoscopy, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Douglas K Rex
- Division of Gastroenterology/Hepatology, Indiana University Hospital, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Treatment strategy for local recurrences after endoscopic resection of a colorectal neoplasm. Surg Endosc 2018; 33:1140-1146. [DOI: 10.1007/s00464-018-6373-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/20/2018] [Accepted: 07/20/2018] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
|
8
|
Fuccio L, Bhandari P, Maselli R, Frazzoni L, Ponchon T, Bazzoli F, Repici A. Ten quality indicators for endoscopic submucosal dissection: what should be monitored and reported to improve quality. ANNALS OF TRANSLATIONAL MEDICINE 2018; 6:262. [PMID: 30094248 DOI: 10.21037/atm.2018.05.42] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
In the last decade, endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has become more popular in Asia and, more recently, also in Europe and North America, however the issue of quality control has never been raised. Therefore, there is an urgent need to identify possible quality indicators to monitor as part of internal audit process. This is particularly compelling, since the diffusion of ESD outside Asian, super-expert, high-volume, tertiary referral centers. In the current review, we raised the issue of quality control for ESD and proposed a list of ten possible quality indicators that should be monitored by each endoscopist and reported in every study reporting results on ESD procedures. We feel that these quality indicators should be used in clinical practice by endoscopists to benchmark the data with the internationally recommended standards.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lorenzo Fuccio
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Pradeep Bhandari
- Department of Digestive Diseases, Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth, UK
| | - Roberta Maselli
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Division of Gastroenterology, Humanitas Research and University Hospital, Rozzano, Italy
| | - Leonardo Frazzoni
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Thierry Ponchon
- Department of Gastroenterology and Endoscopy, Edouard Herriot Hospital, Lyon, France
| | - Franco Bazzoli
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Alessandro Repici
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Division of Gastroenterology, Humanitas Research and University Hospital, Rozzano, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Fuccio L, Hassan C, Ponchon T, Mandolesi D, Farioli A, Cucchetti A, Frazzoni L, Bhandari P, Bellisario C, Bazzoli F, Repici A. Clinical outcomes after endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal neoplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2017; 86:74-86.e17. [PMID: 28254526 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2017.02.024] [Citation(s) in RCA: 163] [Impact Index Per Article: 23.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/22/2016] [Accepted: 02/16/2017] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is an endoscopic resection technique for lesions suspicious of superficial malignancy. It is performed using an ESD knife on its own (standard technique) or by the sequential use of a knife and a snare (hybrid technique). The experience with these techniques is different in Asian and non-Asian countries. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of available evidence on colorectal ESD. METHODS Electronic databases were searched up to August 2016 for studies evaluating R0, en bloc resection, and adverse event rates of both techniques for the treatment of colorectal lesions. Proportions were pooled by a random effects model. RESULTS Ninety-seven studies (71 performed in Asia) evaluated the standard technique and 12 studies (7 in Asia) the hybrid technique. The R0 resection rate of the standard technique was 82.9%, and it was significantly lower in non-Asian versus Asian countries: 71.3% versus 85.6%. The en bloc resection rate was 91% and was significantly lower in non-Asian versus Asian countries (81.2% vs 93%, respectively). Surgery was needed in 1.1% of the ESD-related adverse events, with a significant difference between non-Asian and Asian countries (3.1% vs 0.8%). The R0 and en bloc resection rates with the hybrid technique were significantly lower than those achieved with the standard technique: 60.6% and 68.4%, respectively, with similar adverse event rates. CONCLUSIONS In non-Asian countries the standard ESD technique is still failing to achieve acceptable levels of performance. The hybrid technique showed low R0 resection rates and should not be considered as an adequate alternative to the standard technique.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lorenzo Fuccio
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | | | - Thierry Ponchon
- Gastroenterology and Endoscopy, Edouard Herriot Hospital, Lyon, France
| | - Daniele Mandolesi
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Andrea Farioli
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Alessandro Cucchetti
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Leonardo Frazzoni
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | | | - Cristina Bellisario
- Department of Cancer Screening, Centre for Epidemiology and Prevention in Oncology (CPO), University Hospital Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, Turin, Italy
| | - Franco Bazzoli
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Alessandro Repici
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Division of Gastroenterology, Humanitas Research and University Hospital, Rozzano (MI), Italy
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Experience with a new device for pathological assessment of colonic endoscopic submucosal dissection. Tech Coloproctol 2014; 18:1117-23. [PMID: 25214205 DOI: 10.1007/s10151-014-1213-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/09/2014] [Accepted: 07/02/2014] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
|
11
|
Okamoto K, Muguruma N, Kitamura S, Shiba M, Takayama T. Lessons from imperfect endoscopic submucosal dissection of rectal tumor. Dig Endosc 2013; 25 Suppl 2:31-6. [PMID: 23617646 DOI: 10.1111/den.12074] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/17/2012] [Accepted: 01/04/2013] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is a standard endoscopic treatment for gastrointestinal tumors, but resections done in a piecemeal fashion are difficult to diagnose pathologically as curative resections, and the local recurrence rate is relatively high. Recently, endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for colorectal tumors, which provides a higher complete resection rate than conventional EMR, has rapidly come into widespread use in Japan. However, colorectal ESD is still technically difficult and has complications such as perforation, and the procedure time is longer than that of conventional EMR. We report herein a case in which a rectal tumor was resected with an inappropriate specimen due to imperfect ESD. This lesion had severe fibrosis in the submucosal layer because the lesion had been injected with a solution for EMR in another hospital, which resulted in non-lifting signs, and had been subjected to many biopsies. During the ESD in our hospital, the submucosal layer was not clearly identified, and a small injury was caused in the specimen. A precise diagnosis based on histopathological findings could not be made because of the inappropriate specimen. Thus, expertise in both the diagnostic and the therapeutic aspects is required before treating large colorectal tumors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Koichi Okamoto
- Department of Gastroenterology and Oncology, Institute of Health Biosciences, The University of Tokushima Graduate School, Tokushima city, Japan.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|