Clinical outcome of EMR of sporadic, nonampullary, duodenal adenomas: a 10-year retrospective

Outcomes of cold snare EMR of nonampullary duodenal adenomas ≥1 cm: a multicenter study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) with use of electrocautery (conventional EMR) has historically been used to remove large duodenal adenomas; however, use of electrocautery can predispose to adverse events including delayed bleeding and perforation. Cold snare EMR (cs-EMR) has been shown to be safe and effective for removal of colon polyps, but data regarding its use in the duodenum are limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of cs-EMR for nonampullary duodenal adenomas ≥1 cm.

METHODS

This was a multicenter retrospective study of patients with nonampullary duodenal adenomas ≥1 cm who underwent cs-EMR from October 2014 to May 2023. Patients who received any form of thermal therapy were excluded. Primary outcomes were technical success and rate of recurrent adenoma. Secondary outcomes were adverse events and predictors of recurrence.

RESULTS

A total of 125 patients underwent resection of 127 nonampullary duodenal adenomas with cs-EMR. Follow-up data were available in 89 cases (70.1%). The recurrent adenoma rate was 31.5% (n = 28). Adverse events occurred in 3.9% (n = 5), with 4 cases of immediate bleeding (3.1%) and 1 case of delayed bleeding (.8%). There were no cases of perforation. The presence of high-grade dysplasia was found to be an independent predictor of recurrence (odds ratio, 10.9 [95% confidence interval, 1.1-102.1]; P = .036).

CONCLUSIONS

This retrospective multicenter study demonstrates that cs-EMR for nonampullary duodenal adenomas is safe and technically feasible with an acceptable recurrence rate. Future prospective studies are needed to directly compare outcomes of cs-EMR with conventional and underwater EMR.

Underwater Endoscopic Mucosal Resection Vs Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for Superficial Nonampullary Duodenal Epithelial Tumors in the Western Setting

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (C-EMR) is established as the primary treatment modality for superficial nonampullary duodenal epithelial tumors (SNADETs), but recently underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (U-EMR) has emerged as a potential alternative. The majority of previous studies focused on Asian populations and small lesions (≤20 mm). We aimed to compare the efficacy and outcomes of U-EMR vs C-EMR for SNADETs in a Western setting.

METHODS

This was a retrospective multinational study from 10 European centers that performed both C-EMR and U-EMR between January 2013 and July 2023. The main outcomes were the technical success, procedure-related adverse events (AEs), and the residual/recurrent adenoma (RRA) rate, evaluated on a per-lesion basis. We assessed the association between the type of endoscopic mucosal resection and the occurrence of AEs or RRAs using mixed-effects logistic regression models (propensity scores). Sensitivity analyses were performed for lesions ≤20 mm or >20 mm.

RESULTS

A total of 290 SNADETs submitted to endoscopic resection during the study period met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed (C-EMR: n = 201, 69.3%; U-EMR: n = 89, 30.7%). The overall technical success rate was 95.5% and comparable between groups. In logistic regression models, compared with U-EMR, C-EMR was associated with a significantly higher frequency of overall delayed AEs (odds ratio [OR], 4.95; 95% CI, 2.87-8.53), postprocedural bleeding (OR, 7.92; 95% CI, 3.95-15.89), and RRAs (OR, 3.66; 95% CI, 2.49-5.37). Sensitivity analyses confirmed these results when solely considering either small (≤20 mm) or large (>20 mm) lesions.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with C-EMR, U-EMR was associated with a lower rate of overall AEs and RRAs, regardless of lesion size. Our results confirm the possible role of U-EMR as an effective and safe technique in the management of SNADETs.

Can underwater endoscopic mucosal resection be an alternative to conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors?

Objectives

Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) is a simpler procedure for superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors (SNADET) than conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (cEMR). This study aimed to evaluate whether cEMR can be substituted by UEMR for SNADET in terms of effectiveness, safety, and learning curve.

Methods

A total of 157 consecutive patients with 203 SNADETs ≤20 mm in diameter, including 107 lesions resected by cEMR and 96 lesions resected by UEMR, between January 2019 and May 2023, were retrospectively recruited. The treatment outcomes were compared between the cEMR and UEMR groups. The risk factors for incomplete resection by UEMR were analyzed using univariate and multivariate analyses. Lesions in the UEMR group were divided chronologically into five periods; thereafter, the en bloc resection rate and procedure time were compared.

Results

No significant differences existed between the cEMR and UEMR groups in the mean procedure time (3.9 min vs. 3.6 min, p = 0.1380) or en bloc resection rate (91% vs. 94%, p = 0.4138). No perforation was observed in either group. Tumor size was an independent risk factor for incomplete resection using UEMR (p < 0.01). The history of biopsy was not associated with incomplete resection using UEMR. The en bloc resection rate of UEMR was 100% (20/20) in the first period and ranged from 90% to 100% over all periods.

Conclusion

UEMR is safe and effective for SNADET ≤20 mm, regardless of a history of biopsy, and is easy to learn. Thus, UEMR can serve as an alternative to cEMR.

Cold-snare endoscopic resection of non-ampullary duodenal adenomas: Systematic review and pooled-analysis

BACKGROUND

Mirroring the experience with colonic resections, cold snare-based techniques have been recently proposed for non-ampullary duodenal lesions to reduce the risk of adverse events (AEs). As the duodenal wall is thinner and more vascularized than in the colon, electrocautery-related AEs are relevant issues in this setting.

AIMS

We performed a systematic review with pooled-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of this technique.

METHODS

Electronic databases (Medline, Scopus, EMBASE) were searched up to January 2023. Full articles including patients with duodenal lesions resected by cold-snare technique were eligible. The adverse events (i.e., bleeding, perforation, stricture), complete resection, and recurrence rates were pooled using a random model.

RESULTS

Eleven studies were eligible, providing data on 3137 lesions removed from 233 patients. The overall AE rate for cold snaring was 0.25% (95% CI, 0.19%-0.69%). Among the three studies comparing cold- and hot-snare approaches, procedure-related bleeding rate was significantly lower with cold approach (OR 1.21, 0.51-2.85; p = 0.66). The complete resection rate was 99.40% (95% CI, 98.60%-100%), with a residual/recurrence rate of 12.95% (95% CI, 4.75%-21.16%). On univariate meta-regression, lesion size significantly affected both the adverse events and recurrence risk.

CONCLUSION

Cold-snare resection appears effective and extremely safe for resecting non-ampullary duodenal lesions.

Endoscopic papillectomy could be rewarding to patients with early stage duodenal ampullary carcinoma?

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

There is currently no consensus on the use of endoscopic papillectomy (EP) for early stage duodenal ampullary adenocarcinoma. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of EP for patients with early stage duodenal ampullary adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

Patients who underwent EP for ampullary adenocarcinomas were investigated. Complete and clinical complete resection rates were evaluated. Clinical complete resection was defined as either complete resection or resection with positive or unknown margins but no cancer in the surgically resected specimen, or no recurrence on endoscopy after at least a 1-year follow-up.

RESULTS

Adenocarcinoma developed in 30 patients (carcinoma in situ [Tis]: 21, mucosal tumors [T1a(M)]: 4, tumors in the sphincter of Oddi [T1a(OD)]: 5). The complete resection rate was 60.0% (18/30) (Tis: 66.7% [14/21], T1a[M]: 50.0% [2/4], and T1a[OD]: 40.0% [2/5]). The mean follow-up period was 46.8 months. The recurrence rate for all patients was 6.7% (2/30). The clinical complete resection rates of adenocarcinoma were 89.2% (25/28); rates for Tis, T1a(M), and T1a(OD) were 89.4% (17/19), 100% (4/4), and 80% (4/5), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

EP may potentially achieve clinical complete resection of early stage (Tis and T1a) duodenal ampullary adenocarcinomas.

Cold snare resection for non-ampullary sporadic duodenal adenomas: systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and study aims The role of cold snare polypectomy (CSP) in curative resection of non-ampullary sporadic duodenal adenomas (NASDA) is debated. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and safety of CSP for NASDA. Patients and methods In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we identified published series of patients with CSP for NASDA by searching PubMed and Google Scholar, which resulted in six papers (205 lesions). The main outcome was the rate of local remission after repeated CSP, the secondary outcomes were rates of local remission at first control and rates for delayed bleeding and immediate perforations. We computed the weighted summary proportions under the fixed and random effects model. Results The pooled proportion of local remission after repeated CSP was 88% (95% confidence interval [CI] 57%-100%). The pooled proportion of local remission at first control was 81% (95% CI 55%-98%), the pooled proportion of delayed bleeding was 1% (95% CI 0%-4%) and the pooled proportion of immediate perforation was 0% (95% CI 0%-2%). Conclusions Our meta-analysis suggests that CSP should be considered as the first-line therapy for NASDA.

Feasibility of underwater endoscopic mucosal resection in the right lateral decubitus position for superficial nonampullary duodenal epithelial tumors

Watch a video of this article.

Underwater Endoscopic Mucosal Resection Versus Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for Superficial Non-ampullary Duodenal Epithelial Tumors ≤20 mm: A Systematic Review With Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) is increasingly applied in the treatment of superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors (SNADETs). This meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of UEMR for SNADETs ≤20 mm in comparison with conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (CEMR).

METHODS

The following electronic databases were searched from 2012 until November 20, 2021: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science databases, and Cochrane Library. The primary outcomes were the rates of en bloc resection and complete (R0) resection, and the secondary outcomes were procedure time, adverse events (delayed bleeding and delayed perforation), and recurrence rate.

RESULTS

A total of 6 studies with 679 lesions (331 underwent UEMR and 348 CEMR) were included in this study. The pooled analysis showed that UMER achieves a similar en bloc resection rate (87.6 vs. 89.9%; odds ratio [OR], 1.29; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45 to 3.73; P =0.64; I2 =74%), a similar R0 resection rate (67.3 vs. 73.6%; OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.55 to 2.23; P =0.78; I2 =59%), a shorter procedure time (min) (mean difference [MD], -4.05, 95% CI: -6.40 to -1.71; P =0.0007; I2 =70%) compared with CEMR. There were no significant differences in the rates of delayed bleeding, delayed perforation, and recurrence (2.4 vs. 1.7%, 0 vs. 0.6%, 2.2 vs. 4.4%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis demonstrated that UEMR appears to be an effective and safe alternative to CEMR for SNADETs ≤20 mm.

Endoscopic diagnosis and treatment of superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors: A review

The surface of the small bowel mucosa is covered more than any other section of the digestive canal; however, the overall prevalence of small bowel tumors of the whole gastrointestinal tract is evidently low. Owing to the improvement in endoscopic techniques, the prevalence of small bowel tumors has increased across multiple countries, which is mainly due to an increase in duodenal tumors. Superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors (SNADETs) are defined as tumors originating from the non-ampullary region in the duodenum that share similarities and discrepancies with their gastric and colorectal counterparts in the pathogenesis and clinicopathologic characteristics. To date, white light endoscopy (WLE) remains the cornerstone of endoscopic diagnosis for SNADETs. Besides, narrow-band imaging (NBI) techniques and magnifying endoscopy (ME) have been widely used in the clinic and endorsed by multiple guidelines and consensuses for SNADETs' evaluation. Confocal laser endomicroscopy (CLE), endocytoscopy (ECS), and artificial intelligence (AI) are also up-and-coming methods, showing an exceptional value in the diagnosis of SNADETs. Similar to the endoscopic treatment for colorectal polyps, the choices for SNADETs mainly include cold snare polypectomy (CSP), endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), and laparoscopic endoscopic cooperative surgery (LECS). However, owing to the narrow lumen, rich vascularity, weak muscle layer, abundant Brunner's gland, and the hardship of endoscope control, the duodenum ranks as one of the most dangerous operating areas in the digestive tract. Therefore, endoscopists must anticipate the difficulties in endoscopic maneuverability, remain aware of the increased risk of complications, and then select the appropriate treatment according to the advantages and disadvantages of each method.

Endoscopic Resection Techniques for Duodenal and Ampullary Adenomas

Background and Aims

Duodenal polyps have a reported incidence of 0.3% to 4.6%. Sporadic, nonampullary duodenal adenomas (SNDAs) comprise less than 10% of all duodenal polyps, and ampullary adenomas are even less common. Nonetheless, the incidence continues to rise because of widespread endoscopy use. Duodenal polyps with villous features or those that are larger than 10 mm may raise concern for malignancy and require removal. We demonstrate endoscopic resection of SNDAs and ampullary adenomas using some of our preferred techniques.

Methods

The duodenum has several components that can make EMR of duodenal polyps technically challenging. Not only does the duodenum have a thin muscle layer, but it is also highly mobile and vascular, which may explain higher rates of perforation and bleeding of duodenal EMR reported in the literature compared with colon EMR. A standard adult gastroscope with a distal cap is commonly used for duodenal EMRs. Based on the location, however, side-viewing duodenoscopes or pediatric colonoscopes may be used. To prepare for EMR, a submucosal injection is performed for an adequate lift. The polyp is then resected via stiff monofilament snares and subsequently closed with hemostatic clips if feasible. The ampullectomy technique differs slightly from duodenal EMRs and carries the additional risk of pancreatitis. Submucosal injection in the ampulla may not lift well; thus, its utility is debatable. Biliary sphincterotomy should be performed, and based on endoscopist preference, the pancreatic duct (PD) guidewire can be left during resection to maintain access. After resection, a PD stent is placed to minimize pancreatitis risk.

Results

The video shows the aforementioned duodenal EMR techniques. Two clips of ampullectomy are also shown in the video.

Conclusions

A few common techniques used to perform duodenal EMR and ampullectomy are highlighted in the video. It is important to understand and manage adverse events associated with these procedures and to have established surveillance plans.

Endoscopic resection of non-ampullary duodenal adenomas: Is cold snaring the promised land?

Due to the high risk of morbidity and mortality associated with surgical resection in this tract, endoscopic resection (ER) has taken the place of surgical resection as the first line treatment for non-ampullary duodenal adenomas. However, due to the anatomical characteristics of this area, which enhance the risk of post-ER problems, ER in the duodenum is particularly difficult. Due to a lack of data, no ER technique for superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumours (SNADETs) has yet been backed by strong, high-quality evidence; yet, traditional hot snare-based techniques are still regarded as the standard treatment. Despite having a favourable efficiency profile, adverse events during duodenal hot snare polypectomy (HSP) and hot endoscopic mucosal resection, such as delayed bleeding and perforation, have been reported to be frequent. These events are primarily caused by electrocautery-induced damage. Thus, ER techniques with a better safety profile are needed to overcome these shortcomings. Cold snare polypectomy, which has already been shown as a safer, equally effective procedure compared to HSP for treatment of small colorectal polyps, is being increasingly evaluated as a potential therapeutic option for non-ampullary duodenal adenomas. The aim of this review is to report and discuss the early outcomes of the first experiences with cold snaring for SNADETs.

Characteristics of synchronous and metachronous duodenal tumors and association with colorectal cancer: a supplementary analysis

BACKGROUND

We previously reported outcomes of endoscopic resection for duodenal tumors in a large cohort. This study investigated the frequency and characteristics of synchronous and metachronous lesions, and their association with colorectal advanced adenoma (CAA) and colorectal cancer (CRC).

METHODS

Patients underwent duodenal endoscopic resection during January 2008 to December 2018. Background and characteristics, incidence of synchronous and metachronous lesions, and incidence of CAA and CRC were investigated. Patients without synchronous lesions were classified as the single group, and those with synchronous lesions as the synchronous group. Patients were also classified as the metachronous and non-metachronous groups. The characteristics among the groups were compared.

RESULTS

We included 2658 patients with 2881 duodenal tumors: 2472 (93.0%) patients had single, 186 (7.0%) had synchronous, and 54 (2.0%) had metachronous lesions. The 5-year cumulative incidence of metachronous lesions was 4.1%. In total, 208 (7.8%) had CAA and 127 (4.8%) patients had CRC, and colonoscopy was performed in 936 (35.2%) patients. The incidence of CAA in the synchronous groups tended to be higher compared with that in the single groups (11.8% vs 7.5%, adjusted risk ratio 1.56), and the incidence of CRC in the metachronous groups tended to be higher compared with that in the non-metachronous groups (13.0% vs 4.6%, adjusted risk ratio 2.75), but there was no difference after adjusting for colonoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed the incidence of synchronous and metachronous duodenal lesions. There was no significant difference in incidence of CAA and CRC among each group, but further studies are warranted.

Endoscopic therapy of sporadic non-ampullary duodenal adenomas, single centre retrospective analysis

INTRODUCTION

Although sporadic non-ampullary duodenal adenomas (SNADA) are rare, with the risk of progression to cancer, they deserve therapy. Endoscopic therapy of SNADA is effective, but with the increased risk of complications, endotherapy should be performed in high-volume units. The results of endotherapy of SNADA in our unit are presented.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 97 patients with SNADA had endoscopic resection in 2005-2021 and control endoscopies between 3 and 24 months. Snare polypectomy, endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), endoscopic band ligation (EBL) and endoloop were used (en bloc 37% and piecemeal 63%). In cases of residual/recurrent adenomas, endotherapy was repeated.

RESULTS

The median size of the adenoma was 12 (5-60) mm and most polyps were sessile (25%) or flat (65%). Primary endotherapy eradicated adenomas in 57 (59%) cases. Residual and recurrence rates were 24% (n = 23) and 17% (n = 16) with successful endotherapy in 16 (70%) and 13 (81%) patients. Endotherapy was successful in 86 (89%) patients after a median (range) follow-up of 23 (1-166) months. Four out of 11 patients with failed endotherapy had surgery; seven patients were not fit for surgery. There were no disease-specific deaths or carcinoma. Eleven patients (11%) suffered from complications: perforation requiring surgery (n = 1), sepsis (n = 1), postprocedure bleeding (n = 7), cardiac arrest (n = 1) and coronary infarct (n = 1). The thirty-day mortality was zero. Colonoscopy was performed on 67 (69%) patients with neoplastic lesions in 33% patients during follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Endotherapy of SNADA is effective and safe. Repeat endotherapy in residual and recurrent adenomas is successful. Careful patient selection is mandatory. Abbreviations: ASA: American Society of Anesthesiologist classification; BMI: body mass index; CT: computed tomography; EBL: endoscopic band ligation; EMR: endoscopic mucosal resection; ESD: endoscopic submucosal dissection; ET: endotherapy; FAP: familial adenomatous polyposis; F: female; LST: laterally spreading tumours; M: male; SD: standard deviation; SNADA: sporadic nonampullary duodenal adenoma.

Clinical practice guidelines for duodenal cancer 2021

Duodenal cancer is considered to be a small intestinal carcinoma in terms of clinicopathology. In Japan, there are no established treatment guidelines based on sufficient scientific evidence; therefore, in daily clinical practice, treatment is based on the experience of individual physicians. However, with advances in diagnostic modalities, it is anticipated that opportunities for its detection will increase in future. We developed guidelines for duodenal cancer because this disease is considered to have a high medical need from both healthcare providers and patients for appropriate management. These guidelines were developed for use in actual clinical practice for patients suspected of having non-ampullary duodenal epithelial malignancy and for patients diagnosed with non-ampullary duodenal epithelial malignancy. In this study, a practice algorithm was developed in accordance with the Minds Practice Guideline Development Manual 2017, and Clinical Questions were set for each area of epidemiology and diagnosis, endoscopic treatment, surgical treatment, and chemotherapy. A draft recommendation was developed through a literature search and systematic review, followed by a vote on the recommendations. We made decisions based on actual clinical practice such that the level of evidence would not be the sole determinant of the recommendation. This guideline is the most standard guideline as of the time of preparation. It is important to decide how to handle each case in consultation with patients and their family, the treating physician, and other medical personnel, considering the actual situation at the facility (and the characteristics of the patient).

Underwater Versus Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for Superficial Non-ampullary Duodenal Epithelial Tumors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Duodenal underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) has been suggested as a feasible treatment option for superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors (SNADETs). However, its efficacy and safety have not been fully established yet. Thus, the objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the efficacy and safety of UEMR as compared with conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (CEMR) in the treatment of SNADETs.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive literature search in PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library. Studies comparing CEMR and UEMR for the resection of SNADET were included. Outcomes included en-bloc and complete resection rates, adverse events, and procedure time.

RESULTS

A total of six studies with 2454 lesions were included in the quantitative synthesis. En-bloc and complete resection rates were not significantly different between UEMR and CEMR (OR for en-bloc resection: 0.997 [95% CI 0.439-2.266]; OR for complete resection: 0.960 [95% CI 0.628-1.468]). There was no significant risk difference for perforation (risk difference: - 0.002; 95% CI - 0.009 to 0.005) or delayed bleeding (risk difference: - 0.001; 95% CI - 0.014 to 0.011). Procedure time was significantly shorter in the UEMR (standardized mean difference: - 1.294; 95% CI - 2.461 to - 0.127). The risk of recurrence was not significantly different between UEMR and CEMR (risk difference: 0.001; 95% CI - 0.041 to 0.044).

CONCLUSION

Although our results did not show any superiority of UEMR over CEMR in the treatment of SNADETs, UEMR showed equivalent efficacy and safety as compared with CEMR and was associated with a shorter procedure time.

Comparison of cold snare and hot snare polypectomy for the resection of sporadic nonampullary duodenal adenomas

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Nonampullary duodenal adenomas can undergo malignant transformation, making endoscopic resection, often by hot snare (HSP) or cold snare polypectomy (CSP), necessary. Although CSP has been shown to be safer for removal of colon polyps, data comparing these techniques for the resection of duodenal adenomas are limited. Our aim was to compare the safety and efficacy of CSP and HSP for the removal of nonampullary duodenal adenomas.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients referred to 2 academic medical centers with a histologically confirmed sporadic, nonampullary duodenal adenoma who underwent endoscopic snare polypectomy between January 1, 2007 and March 1, 2021. Patients with underlying polyposis syndromes were excluded. Outcomes included postprocedural adverse events and polyp recurrence.

RESULTS

Of 110 total patients, 69 underwent HSP and 41 underwent CSP. Intraprocedural bleeding was similar between both groups, but 7 patients in the HSP group experienced delayed adverse events versus none in the CSP group (P = .04). Fifty-four patients had complete polyp resection and subsequent surveillance endoscopies. Multivariate analysis showed polyp size to be associated with recurrence (per mm; odds ratio, 1.11; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-1.20; P < .01). Endoscopic resection technique (HSP vs CSP) was not a predictor of recurrence (P = .18).

CONCLUSIONS

HSP led to more delayed adverse events compared with CSP, whereas no significant differences on outcomes were noted, suggesting that CSP is equally effective and potentially safer for the removal of duodenal adenomas.

Outcomes of endoscopic mucosal resection for large superficial non-ampullary duodenal adenomas

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is the recommended treatment for superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors larger than 6 mm. This endoscopic technique carries a high risk of adverse events. Our aim was to identify the risk factors for adverse events following EMR for non-ampullary duodenal adenomatous lesions. We retrospectively analyzed a prospectively collected database of consecutive endoscopic resections for duodenal lesions at a tertiary referral center for therapeutic endoscopy. We analyzed patients with non-ampullary duodenal adenomatous lesions ≥ 10 mm resected by EMR, and searched for factors associated with adverse events after EMR. 167 duodenal adenomatous lesions, with a median size of 25 (25–40) mm, were resected by EMR between January 2015 and December 2020. Adverse events occurred in 37/167 (22.2%) after endoscopic resection, with 29/167 (17.4%) delayed bleeding, 4/167 (2.4%) immediate perforation and 4/167 (2.4%) delayed perforation. In logistic regression, the size of the lesion was the only associated risk factor of adverse events (OR = 2.81, 95% CI [1.27; 6.47], p = 0.012). Adverse events increased mean hospitalization time (7.7 ± 9 vs. 1.9 ± 1 days, p < 0.01). None of the currently recommended preventive methods, particularly clips, affected the adverse event rate. EMR of centimetric and supracentimetric duodenal adenomatous lesions carries a high risk of adverse events, increasing with the size of the lesion and with no benefit from any preventive method. These results suggest that these procedures should be performed in expert centers, and underline the need for novel endoscopic tools to limit the rate of adverse events.

Gel Immersion Endoscopic Mucosal Resection (EMR) for Superficial Nonampullary Duodenal Epithelial Tumors May Reduce Procedure Time Compared with Underwater EMR (with Video)

Materials and Methods

This was a retrospective cohort study conducted in two municipal hospitals. We identified 24 patients with SNADETs of 3–18 mm in diameter who underwent UEMR or GIEMR. One lesion was excluded from the analysis because it was found to be in the stomach after surgery. The primary outcome was procedure time.

Results

GIEMR significantly reduced the procedure time compared with UEMR (5 min vs. 10 min, P = 0.016). There was no significant difference between the UEMR and GIEMR groups for en bloc resection rate (93% vs. 100%, P = 1.0) and R0 resection rate (57% vs. 80%, P = 0.39). No serious complications were observed in either group.

Conclusions

GIEMR of SNADET has the potential to reduce procedure time compared with UEMR and may be particularly effective in areas where immersion in water is difficult.

Outcomes of cold snare piecemeal EMR for nonampullary small-bowel adenomas larger than 1 cm: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Nonampullary small-bowel adenomas ≥10 mm are typically resected using cautery-based polypectomy, which is associated with significant adverse events. Studies have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of piecemeal cold snare EMR for removing large colon polyps. Our aim was to assess the safety and efficacy of cold snare EMR for removal of large adenomas in the small bowel.

METHODS

A retrospective study of patients who underwent lift and piecemeal cold snare EMR of small-bowel adenomas ≥1 cm between January 2014 and March 2019 was conducted at a tertiary care medical center. Polyp characteristics at the time of index and surveillance endoscopy were collected. Primary outcomes were residual or recurrent adenoma (RRA) seen on surveillance endoscopy, polyp eradication rate, and number of endoscopic procedures required for eradication. Adverse events including immediate and delayed bleeding, perforation, stricture, pancreatitis, and postpolypectomy syndrome were assessed.

RESULTS

Of 43 patients who underwent piecemeal cold snare EMR, 39 had follow-up endoscopy. Polyps ranged in size from 10 to 70 mm (mean, 26.5 mm). RRA was found in 18 patients (46%), with increased polyp size correlating with higher recurrence (P < .001). Polyp eradication was observed in 35 patients (89%), requiring a median of 2 (range, 1-6) endoscopic procedures. Only 1 patient (2.3%) had immediate postprocedural bleeding. No cases of perforation or postpolypectomy syndrome were seen.

CONCLUSIONS

Piecemeal cold snare EMR may be a feasible, safe, and efficacious technique for small-bowel polyps >10 mm. Prospective, randomized studies are needed to assess how outcomes compare with traditional cautery-based polypectomy.

Risk Factors of Non-en Bloc Resection and Non-R0 Resection During Endoscopic Resection in the Treatment of Superficial Duodenal Epithelial Lesions

Background

Superficial duodenal epithelial lesions are precancerous lesions of duodenal carcinoma. Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy has been widely used in the screening and treatment of this disease. This article will collect the data of patients who underwent endoscopic resection of superficial duodenal epithelial lesions in our hospital from 2010 to 2021, aiming to describe the efficacy and safety of endoscopic resection, as well as to explore the risk factors of non-en bloc resection and non-R0 resection.

Methods

Patients who underwent endoscopic resection for superficial duodenal epithelial lesions in our hospital from January 2010 to September 2021 were selected. The curative effect was expressed by the en bloc resection rate and R0 resection rate. The safety was expressed by intra- or postoperative complications, such as bleeding and perforation. The potential risk factors of curative effect were analyzed by logistic regression.

Results

A total of 137 patients were included. The en bloc resection rate was 95.62% (131/137), R0 resection rate was 91.97% (126/137), the postoperative bleeding rate was 2.19% (3/137), and no postoperative perforation was found. The histology result of ectopic gastric mucosa was the risk factor of non-en bloc resection (OR: 8.86, 95% CI: 1.38-56.92); the lesion size ≥2 cm was the risk factor of non-R0 resection (OR: 12.55, 95% CI: 2.95-53.38).

Conclusion

Endoscopic resection is a safe and effective method for the treatment of superficial duodenal epithelial lesions. The histology result of ectopic gastric mucosa was the risk factor of non-en bloc resection and the lesion size ≥2 cm was the risk factor of non-R0 resection.

Nonrecurrence Rate of Underwater EMR for ≤20-mm Nonampullary Duodenal Adenomas: A Multicenter Prospective Study (D-UEMR Study)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic resection of nonampullary duodenal adenoma is often challenging, and its technique has not yet been standardized. To overcome the practical difficulty of conventional endoscopic mucosal resection, underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) was recently developed; therefore, we investigated the effectiveness and safety of UEMR for nonampullary duodenal adenoma.

METHODS

A multicenter, prospective cohort study was conducted at 21 institutions in Japan. We enrolled patients with no more than 2 nonampullary duodenal adenomas ≤20 mm in size, who were planned to undergo UEMR. After UEMR, follow-up endoscopies were scheduled at 2 and 12 months after the procedure, and biopsy specimens were taken from the post-UEMR scars. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with histologically proven nonrecurrence at follow-up endoscopy and biopsy.

RESULTS

A total of 155 patients with 166 lesions underwent UEMR. One patient with a non-neoplastic lesion in the resected specimen and 10 patients with 10 lesions who were lost to follow-up were excluded. Finally, 144 patients with 155 lesions who received all follow-up endoscopies were analyzed for the primary endpoint. The proportion of patients with proven nonrecurrence was 97.2% (n = 140 of 144; 95% confidence interval, 92.8%-99.1%) which exceeded the predefined threshold value (92%). Two cases of delayed bleeding (1.2%) occurred and they were successfully managed by clips. All recurrences were successfully treated by additional endoscopic treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

This multicenter, prospective cohort study demonstrated effectiveness and safety of UEMR for nonampullary duodenal adenomas ≤20 mm in size. (University Hospital Medical Network Clinical Trials Registry, Number: UMIN000030414).

Clinical outcomes of endoscopic resection of superficial nonampullary duodenal epithelial tumors: A 10-year retrospective, single-center study

BACKGROUND

Although premalignant duodenal lesions such as adenomas are uncommon, the incidences of these lesions have increased in recent times, and thus, the demand for minimally invasive treatments such as endoscopic resection (ER) has also increased. However, ER in the duodenum is more challenging than ER in other locations of the gastrointestinal tract.

AIM

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of ER for superficial nonampullary duodenal epithelial tumors (SNADETs)

METHODS

We performed a retrospective observational study on 56 consecutive patients (58 lesions) diagnosed with SNADETs that underwent ER from January 2011 to December 2020 at Yeungnam University Hospital. Patient demographics, lesion characteristics, and procedural and technical data were collected, and clinical outcomes, including procedure-related complications, completeness of resection, and recurrence were analyzed.

RESULTS

Median patient age was 57 years [range, 26–77, 30 (53.6%) men]. Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) was performed on 57 lesions (98.3%) and snare polypectomy on one (1.7%). Lesions consisted of 52 adenomas with low-grade dysplasia (89.7%), 3 adenomas with high-grade dysplasia (5.2%), and 3 intramucosal adenocarcinomas (5.2%). There were 16 cases of intraprocedural bleeding (27.6%) and 1 case of delayed bleeding (1.7%), and all these 17 cases were successfully managed endoscopically. No perforation or procedure-related death occurred. Larger lesion size was associated with an increased risk of EMR-related bleeding (P = 0.033). During a median follow-up period of 23 mo (range 6–100 mo), no local recurrence occurred, despite the fact one-third of the patients (19 lesions, 32.8%) underwent piecemeal resection and 3 patients (3 lesions, 5.2%) that underwent en bloc resection had a pathologically determined positive lateral margin. No patient died from a primary duodenal neoplasm.

CONCLUSION

The majority of SNADETs can be safely and curatively resected by EMR, and thus, based on consideration of the high incidence of fatal complications attributable to ESD, we conclude EMR, including piecemeal resection, should be considered the treatment of first choice for SNADETs.

Endoscopic resection of superficial non‐ampullary duodenal epithelial tumor

Although superficial non‐ampullary duodenal epithelial tumor (SNADET) was previously considered a rare disease, in recent years, the opportunities to detect and treat SNADET are increasing. Considering the high morbidity of pancreatoduodenectomy, endoscopic resection can be a treatment option that preserves the organs and contributes maintain patients’ quality of life. Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is a standard treatment for relatively small lesions in gastrointestinal tracts, however, it is difficult because submucosal fibrosis frequently occurs due to the previous biopsy. Recently, some modified EMR techniques including underwater EMR (UEMR) and cold polypectomy (CP) have been proposed. In UEMR, the duodenal lumen is filled with water or saline and resected the targe lesion with a snare without injection into the submucosa. It would be a treatment option that could reduce candidates for ESD especially SNADET less than 20 mm. CP was reported as a safe and convenient means for SNADET. It would also be one of the standard treatments for diminutive lesions, though there remain some concerns on its resectability. ESD for SNADET is technically challenging, especially with an extremely high risk of adverse event (AE) with a reported bleeding rate of more than 20% and perforation rate up to about 40%. However, modified treatment techniques including the water pressure method and pocket creation method have been reported to potentially contribute to improving outcomes of ESD. Moreover, accumulated evidence shows closing the mucosal defect significantly reduces delayed adverse events after duodenal endoscopic treatments. Further studies are warranted to elucidate curative criteria, long‐term outcomes, and appropriate surveillance strategy.

Endoscopic management of non-ampullary duodenal adenomas

Duodenal polyps are found in 0.1 % to 0.8 % of all upper endoscopies. Duodenal adenomas account for 10 % to 20 % of these lesions. They can be sporadic or occur in the setting of a hereditary predisposition syndrome, mainly familial adenomatous polyposis. Endoscopy is the cornerstone of management of duodenal adenomas, allowing for diagnosis and treatment, primarily by endoscopic mucosal resection. The endoscopic treatment of duodenal adenomas has a high morbidity, reaching 15 % in a prospective study, consisting of bleeding and perforations, and should therefore be performed in expert centers. The local recurrence rate ranges from 9 % to 37 %, and is maximal for piecemeal resections of lesions > 20 mm. Surgical resection of the duodenum is flawed with major morbidity and considered a rescue procedure in cases of endoscopic treatment failures or severe endoscopic complications such as duodenal perforations. In this paper, we review the existing evidence on endoscopic diagnosis and treatment of non-ampullary duodenal adenomas.

Sporadic non-ampullary duodenal adenomas: efficacy and outcomes of endoscopic resection

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Sporadic non-ampullary duodenal adenomas (SNDAs) are often referred to tertiary centers because of the challenges in endoscopic resection. There is a paucity of data on both technical and clinical outcomes. The aim of our study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of endoscopic resection for the treatment of SNDA in two western centers.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study reporting data of a cohort of patients referred for resection of SNDA between 2013 and 2017. Patients with familial adenomatous polyposis or ampullary lesions were excluded from present analysis. Outcomes considered for this study were technical success, adverse events, recurrence and need for surgery.

RESULTS

120 patients (mean age 66 ± 11.9 years, 64male) were enrolled in the study. Mean size of the lesions was 23.3 mm (range 5-80). Fifty-six en-bloc endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) (46.6%), 41 piecemeal EMR (pEMR) and 23 endoscopic submucosal dissection were performed. Intra-procedural perforation was observed in 4 patients (3.3%). Fourteen post-procedural (11.6%) adverse events were recorded. All post-procedural perforations occurred in lesions > 30 mm. Recurrence was observed in 11 patients (9.5%) during a mean follow-up of 29 months. All recurrences were successfully managed endoscopically. 119 patients were still alive at last follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic resection can be successfully carried out in majority of patients. Size > 30 mm seems to be the predictor of high adverse events risk.

Clinical characteristics and course of sporadic non-ampullary duodenal adenomas: A multicenter retrospective study

Sporadic non-ampullary duodenal adenoma (SNADA) is a rare disease, and therefore, its clinical characteristics have not been comprehensively investigated. Furthermore, owing to the high complication rates and severity of endoscopic resection, treatment strategies vary among facilities. In the present study, we aimed to clarify the clinical characteristics and course of SNADA.We extracted clinical and histological records of SNADA cases diagnosed in 11 hospitals between September 1999 and August 2014. The patients were divided into "no-resection" and "resection" groups based on the initial treatment approach. We investigated the long-term outcome of the "no-resection" group and treatment results of the "resection" group, with particular interest in endoscopic resection.Overall, 299 patients were diagnosed with SNADA. The median age at diagnosis was 67 years (range, 31-88 years), with approximately twice as many men as women. The median tumor size was 8.0 mm (2-60 mm). In total, 161 patients were initially selected for no-resection and 138 underwent resection. Age >70 years and the presence of either severe illness or poor performance status were significantly related to opting for no-resection. In the no-resection group, 101 patients underwent endoscopic follow-up for at least 1 year. During the observational period (2.5 ± 2.2 years), 27 lesions (27%) disappeared following cold forceps biopsy, and 13 lesions (14%) presented lateral growth. Four lesions (4%) changed to mucosal carcinoma, 3 were treated endoscopically, and 1 was surgically resected. Nineteen patients died; however, no one died of duodenal carcinoma. In the endoscopic resection group, en bloc resection was achieved in 78% of patients. However, the complication rate for perforation was 7%, and endoscopic submucosal dissection was associated with a 36% perforation rate.With the low incidence of cancer development and no disease specific death, the strategy of initially not performing resection could be considered especially for the older adults, poor-prognosis patients, or small lesions.

Current Treatment Strategy for Superficial Nonampullary Duodenal Epithelial Tumors

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is the standard treatment method for esophageal, gastric, and colorectal cancers. However, it has not been standardized for duodenal lesions because of its high complication rates. Recently, minimally invasive and simple methods such as cold snare polypectomy and underwater endoscopic mucosal resection have been utilized more for superficial nonampullary duodenal epithelial tumors (SNADETs). Although the rate of complications associated with duodenal ESD has been gradually decreasing because of technical advancements, performing ESD for all SNADETs is unnecessary. As such, the appropriate treatment plan for SNADETs should be chosen according to the lesion type, patient condition, and endoscopist’s skill.

The mucin phenotype does not affect the endoscopic resection outcome of non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors

Background and study aims  Some studies have reported an association between clinicopathological features and mucin phenotypes of non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors (NADETs). However, the association between clinical outcomes of endoscopic resection (ER) and mucin phenotypes has not been elucidated. The aim of this retrospective study was to analyze clinical outcomes of ER of NADETs with reference to mucin phenotypes. Patients and methods  We retrospectively evaluated the clinical outcomes of ER for NADETs performed from 2006 to 2019 and compared clinicopathological characteristics, ER procedures, and outcomes, including adverse events (AEs) among tumors classified by mucin phenotype. Mucin phenotypes were classified as gastric, gastrointestinal, and intestinal based on immunohistochemical examination. Grade of dysplasia was determined according to the Vienna classification (VCL). Results  The proportion of VCL 4/5 was higher in the gastric type (50 %) compared with that in the gastrointestinal (39.1 %, P  = 0.009) and intestinal types (5.4 %, P  = 0.008), respectively. With no statistical difference in tumor size and ER method among the three groups, no significant difference was observed for ER outcomes, i. e., en bloc and R0 resection rates. In the gastrointestinal and intestinal types, AEs occurred in four cases treated with ESD, but none developed in the gastric type. Conclusions  This study suggests that the mucin phenotype does not affect resection outcome. However, considering high malignant potential and tendency for low AE rates, the gastric type NADETs may be more appropriate for proactive ER than the others.

Outcomes of thermal ablation of the defect margin after duodenal endoscopic mucosal resection (with videos)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Laterally spreading lesions (LSLs) in the duodenum are conventionally treated by EMR. Recurrence is commonly encountered and can be difficult to treat safely due to the unique anatomic characteristics of the duodenum. Auxiliary techniques designed to prevent recurrence have not been described.

METHODS

We sought to evaluate the effectiveness of thermal ablation of the defect margin after EMR (EMR-T) in reducing recurrence at first surveillance endoscopy (SE1, scheduled at 6 months) in a single tertiary referral center. All duodenal LSLs ≥10 mm referred for EMR were eligible. After successful EMR, thermal ablation was performed using snare-tip soft coagulation around the entire circumference of the resection defect. The primary outcome was the frequency of recurrence at SE1. A previous, well-characterized, prospective cohort of duodenal LSLs ≥10 mm treated by conventional EMR was the comparator.

RESULTS

Over 43 months up to October 2019, 54 LSLs underwent EMR-T. One hundred twenty-five LSLs underwent conventional EMR in the comparator group. Patient and lesion characteristics were similar between the groups. Recurrence was significantly lower in the EMR-T group compared with the conventional EMR group (1 of 49 [2.3%] vs 19 of 108 [17.6%]; P = .01). No difference in technical success, EMR-related adverse outcomes, or referral to surgery were identified between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

EMR-T significantly reduces the frequency of recurrence for duodenal LSLs. This technique is safe in the duodenum and has the potential to significantly improve the effectiveness of duodenal EMR. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT02306603.).

Current status of endoscopic diagnosis and treatment for superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors

Though superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors (SNADETs) have been traditionally considered rare, there is a growing detection under the development and widespread of endoscopic techniques in recent times. Many case studies have revealed early manifestations of lesions through advanced endoscopic technology, however, because of the low incidence of duodenal tumors and challenges in diagnosing, the preoperative diagnosis criteria have not been established so far. In spite of this, recently the increasing detection rate of early duodenal epithelial lesions enhances the demand for minimally invasive treatment as well. The most suitable therapeutic endoscopic modality to remove duodenal lesions should be selected according to the size, location and histological invasive depth of duodenal lesions. Nevertheless, due to the special anatomical structure of the duodenum, the incidence of complications is much higher than in any other part of the digestive tract. To prevent these adverse events prophylactically, a few novel strategies have been applied effectively after resection. This review describes the current status of preoperative endoscopic diagnosis and endoscopic resection approaches, as well as countermeasures for avoiding procedure-related complications.

Endoscopic management of superficial nonampullary duodenal tumors: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline

1: ESGE recommends that all duodenal adenomas should be considered for endoscopic resection as progression to invasive carcinoma is highly likely.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 2: ESGE recommends performance of a colonoscopy, if that has not yet been done, in cases of duodenal adenoma.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends the use of the cap-assisted method when the location of the minor and/or major papilla and their relationship to a duodenal adenoma is not clearly established during forward-viewing endoscopy.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 4: ESGE recommends the routine use of a side-viewing endoscope when a laterally spreading adenoma with extension to the minor and/or major papilla is suspected.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 5: ESGE suggests cold snare polypectomy for small (< 6 mm in size) nonmalignant duodenal adenomas.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 6: ESGE recommends endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) as the first-line endoscopic resection technique for nonmalignant large nonampullary duodenal adenomas.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 7: ESGE recommends that endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for duodenal adenomas is an effective resection technique only in expert hands.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 8: ESGE recommends using techniques that minimize adverse events such as immediate or delayed bleeding or perforation. These may include piecemeal resection, defect closure techniques, noncontact hemostasis, and other emerging techniques, and these should be considered on a case-by-case basis.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 9: ESGE recommends endoscopic surveillance 3 months after the index treatment. In cases of no recurrence, a further follow-up endoscopy should be done 1 year later. Thereafter, surveillance intervals should be adapted to the lesion site, en bloc resection status, and initial histological result. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.

The incidence of non-ampullary duodenal cancer in Japan: The first analysis of a national cancer registry

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Although duodenal cancer is rare, no epidemiological research on this disease has been conducted in Asian countries. We aimed to elucidate the incidence and clinical features of duodenal cancer in Japan using a large-scale national database.

METHODS

Data of patients with primary duodenal cancer diagnosed from January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2016, were extracted from the Japanese national cancer registry. Excluding malignant neoplasm of the Vater's ampulla, we calculated the incidence among the population as a crude number of patients with duodenal cancer divided by the total Japanese population in 2016. We performed multivariate analyses using logistic regression models to identify risk factors for advanced cancer, defined as metastatic cancer or local invasion to adjacent organs.

RESULTS

Data on 3005 patients were included. The incidence of duodenal cancer was 23.7 per 1 000 000 person-years. In total, 56.4% of cases were detected at the localized stage. In the localized cancer group, endoscopic resection was more frequently performed (48.0%), whereas in the advanced cancer group, surgery and chemotherapy were the major treatment options (39.3% and 41.5%, respectively). Multivariate analyses identified age ≥80 years (odds ratio [OR], 1.489; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.113-1.992; P = 0.007), incidental detection (OR, 2.325; CI, 1.623-3.331; P < 0.0001), and precise examination for symptomatic patients (OR, 10.561; CI, 7.416-15.042; P < 0.0001) as independent risk factors for advanced cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study revealed the incidence of duodenal cancer in Japan. However, localized cancer was the major tumor stage at detection, resulting in a high rate of endoscopic resection.

Endoscopic Treatment for Superficial Nonampullary Duodenal Tumors

Superficial nonampullary duodenal epithelial tumors are considered rare but have been increasingly recognized in recent years. Accordingly, the importance of endoscopic treatment for the lesions are also increasing. An endoscopic resection can be considered for duodenal adenoma and mucosal cancer. The choice of resection method should be made based on the size of the lesion, endoscopic findings, pathologic diagnosis, and risk of procedure-related complication. For small adenomas <10 mm in size, endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), cold snare polypectomy, and underwater EMR can be considered. An en bloc or piecemeal resection using EMR or underwater EMR can be selected for 10-20 mm sized adenomas. For lesions ≥20 mm in size or suspicious for mucosal cancer, an endoscopic submucosal dissection followed by closure of the mucosal defect conducted by an experienced endoscopist is appropriate.

Risk Factors for Non-Ampullary Duodenal Adenocarcinoma: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

An increase in the incidence of duodenal adenocarcinoma has been recently reported. However, little is known about the risk factors for duodenal adenocarcinoma, which are important for screening purposes. We, therefore, aimed to conduct a systematic review to identify risk factors for non-ampullary duodenal adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

A medical literature search was performed using electronic databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Japan Medical Abstracts Society, and Web of Science. Studies that assessed the association between dietary habits, lifestyle behaviors, comorbidities, and non-ampullary duodenal adenocarcinoma were extracted. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the risk of bias in individual studies, and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations approach was used to assess the quality of evidence across studies included in this review.

RESULTS

Out of 1,244 screened articles, 10 were finally selected for qualitative synthesis. In the general population, no consistent risk factors were identified except for Helicobacter pylori positivity, which was considered a risk factor in 2 studies, but the quality of evidence was considered very low because of the high risk of bias. In patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), Spigelman stage IV at initial endoscopy was considered a consistent risk factor in 3 studies.

CONCLUSIONS

There are currently limited data regarding risk factors for non-ampullary duodenal adenocarcinoma, and no conclusive risk factors were identified in the general population. However, in patients with FAP, Spigelman stage IV was identified as a consistent risk factor. Further studies are needed to improve diagnosis and support effective clinical management of this malignancy.

Efficacy of endoscopic preventive procedures to reduce delayed adverse events after endoscopic resection of superficial nonampullary duodenal epithelial tumors: a meta-analysis of observational comparative trials

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Although various procedures have been used to prevent serious adverse events after endoscopic resection of the duodenum, their effectiveness has not been determined. In this study, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine whether endoscopic preventive procedures reduce delayed adverse events.

METHODS

Studies on endoscopic treatment for superficial nonampullary duodenal tumors were selected. We compared the following 2 groups: the closure group, which underwent mucosal sutures and coverage of mucosal defects after resection, and the unclosed group, which did not. The primary outcome was the rate of delayed adverse events, including perforation and bleeding. The pooled risk ratios (RRs) of all outcomes investigated, the 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and P values were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 438 patients from 4 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled overall adverse event rates in the closure group and unclosed group were 3.6% and 21.1%, respectively. This rate was significantly lower in the closure group (RR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.10-0.38; P < .01; I² = 0%), and the rate of delayed bleeding was significantly lower in the closure group (RR, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.06-0.33; P < .01; I² = 0%). Regarding delayed perforation, the RR in the closure group was 0.39 (95% CI, 0.12-1.32; P = .13; I² = 0%).

CONCLUSIONS

Preventive procedures significantly reduced the risk of delayed adverse events by more than 80%. After endoscopic resection of the duodenum, the implementation of preventive procedures, including mucosal sutures and coverage of mucosal defects, to delay adverse events is strongly recommended.

Endoscopic mucosal resection of sporadic duodenal nonampullary adenoma: outcomes of 130 patients with a long-term follow up in two tertiary French centers

Background

The long-term outcomes and safety of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of sporadic duodenal adenoma (SDA), and the management of adverse events need to be confirmed.

Methods

A bicentric retrospective study was performed including all patients who underwent EMR for SDAs from 2003-2016. The primary aim was to evaluate the efficiency of EMR for SDA. The secondary objectives were to assess safety, recurrence management, predictive factors for treatment success, and adverse events.

Results

One hundred thirty patients (134 procedures) were included (median age 65 years, 49.3% male). The mean SDA size was 20.7 (range 5-50) mm. Of the SDAs, 58.2% were category 3 of the Vienna classification, 35.8% were category 4, and 5.9% were category 5. The median follow up was 25.0 (range 2-120) months. Complete mucosal resection was achieved for 129/134 lesions (96.2%), with en bloc resection in 59/134 (44%). Recurrence occurred in 28.6% of cases (30/105 procedures). Recurrence was successfully treated by new endoscopic procedures in 72.2% (13/18) and by surgery in 27.8% (5/18). Delayed bleeding occurred in 13.4% of cases (18/134) and was successfully managed endoscopically. The perforation rate was 3.7% (5/134); perforations were managed without surgery in 60% (3/5 patients) of cases.

Conclusions

Endoscopic treatment of SDA appears to be effective and relatively safe in tertiary centers. All bleeding complications were endoscopically controlled, and perforation was rare. Recurrence was frequent but could be managed endoscopically. EMR is confirmed as a first-line treatment in cases of SDA, and surgery is useful only if repeated EMRs fail.

Initial multicenter experience with nitrous oxide cryoballoon for treatment of flat duodenal adenomas (with video)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EMR is the preferred endoscopic therapy for duodenal adenomas (DAs) but is associated with an overall adverse event rate of 26%. Cryotherapy using a Cryoballoon Focal Ablation System (CbFAS) can safely and effectively eradicate esophageal intestinal metaplasia. We report our first experience with cryoballoon ablation for treatment of flat DAs.

METHODS

This was an American, multicenter, retrospective study involving 5 centers. DAs (Paris 0-IIa and 0-IIb) were treated with nitrous oxide for 5 to 12 seconds using CbFAS. Follow-up EGD was performed at 3 to 12 months.

RESULTS

Seventeen DAs (mean size, 22.7 ± 14.3 mm; 12 tubular, 5 tubulovillous) from 13 patients (mean age, 66.5 ± 9.99 years; 61.5% males) were included in the study. Thirteen of 17 DAs (76.5%) had failed previous treatment, and 4 of 17 (23.5%) were treatment naÏve. All procedures were technically successful and achieved a >50% decrease in size after cryoballoon ablation There was no increase in size or progression of disease for any lesions. Overall, treatment was completed in 15 of 17 patients, and recurrence-free survival was achieved in 12 of 17 (71%) after a median follow-up of 15.5 months (interquartile range [IQR], 6.8-19.4). The median cryoablation time per polyp was 4 minutes (IQR, 1-7.5 minutes), and the median total procedure time was 25 minutes (IQR, 22-30.5 minutes). There were no intra- or postprocedural adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Nitrous oxide cryoballoon ablation of nonpolypoid DAs is feasible, with promising safety and efficacy.

Application of endoscopic submucosal dissection in duodenal space-occupying lesions

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been advocated by digestive endoscopists because of its comparable therapeutic effect to surgery, reduced trauma, faster recovery, and fewer complications. However, ESD for lesions of the duodenum is more challenging than those occurring at other levels of the gastrointestinal tract due to the thin intestinal wall of the duodenum, narrow intestinal space, rich peripheral blood flow, proximity to vital organs, and high risks of critical adverse events including intraoperative and delayed bleeding and perforation. Because of the low prevalence of the disease and the high risks of severe adverse events, successful ESD for lesions of the duodenum has rarely been reported in recent years.

AIM

To investigate the efficacy and safety of ESD in the treatment of duodenal space-occupying lesions.

METHODS

Clinical data of 24 cases of duodenal lesions treated by ESD at the Digestive Endoscopy Center of the Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University from January 2016 to December 2019 were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

All of the 24 cases from 23 patients underwent ESD treatment for duodenal space-occupying lesions under general anesthesia, including 15 male and 8 female patients, with a mean age of 58.5 (32.0-74.0) years. There were 12 lesions (50%) in the duodenal bulb, 9 (37.5%) in the descending part, and 3 (12.5%) in the ball-descending junction. The mean diameter of the lesion was 12.75 (range, 11-22) mm. Thirteen lesions originated from the mucosa, of which 4 were low-grade intraepithelial neoplasia, 3 were hyperplastic polyps, 2 were chronic mucositis, 2 were adenomatous hyperplasia, 1 was high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia, and 1 was tubular adenoma. Eleven lesions were in the submucosa, including 5 neuroendocrine neoplasms, 2 cases of ectopic pancreas, 1 stromal tumor, 1 leiomyoma, 1 submucosal duodenal adenoma, and 1 case of submucosal lymph follicular hyperplasia. The intraoperative perforation rate was 20.8% (5/24), including 4 submucosal protuberant lesions and 1 depressed lesion. The mean length of hospital stay was 5.7 (range, 3-10) d, and the average follow-up time was 25.8 (range, 3.0–50.0) mo. No residual disease or recurrence was found in all patients, and no complications, such as infection and stenosis, were found during the follow-up period.

CONCLUSION

ESD is safe and effective in the treatment of duodenal lesions; however, the endoscopists should pay more attention to the preoperative preparation, intraoperative skills, and postoperative treatment.

Diagnostic algorithm of magnifying endoscopy with crystal violet staining for non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors

OBJECTIVES

Little is known about the usefulness of magnifying endoscopy with crystal violet staining (ME-CV) for the diagnosis of duodenal tumors. We assessed the ability of ME-CV to distinguish Vienna classification (VCL) category 4/5 (C4/5) from category 3 (C3) non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors (NADETs).

METHODS

A total of 76 NADETs were studied. We retrospectively analyzed the diagnostic values of the white light endoscopy (WLE) scoring system and the ME-CV algorithm with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, and three endoscopists calculated the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and the area under the curve (AUC) of each. The diagnostic values were tested among NADETs overall and among subgroups of tumors with gastric, gastrointestinal or intestinal mucin phenotypes. Inter-observer agreement of the diagnostic results was also calculated.

RESULTS

According to the VCL, 54 lesions (71.1%) were regarded as C3 and 22 lesions (28.9%) as C4/5. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy and AUC of ME-CV were higher than those of the WLE scoring system (63.6 vs 54.5, 85.2 vs 75.9, 78.9 vs 69.7, 0.744 vs 0.652, respectively). Inter-observer agreements of the WLE scoring system and ME-CV were both moderate (kappa 0.45 and 0.41). ME-CV had higher sensitivity, specificity, accuracy and AUC than those of the WLE scoring system among the gastric and intestinal phenotypes of NADETs.

CONCLUSIONS

ME-CV is appropriate for the diagnosis of C4/5 and C3 NADETs.

Complication risk despite preventive endoscopic measures in patients undergoing endoscopic mucosal resection of large duodenal adenomas

BACKGROUND : Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is the standard treatment of ampullary and nonampullary duodenal adenomas. EMR of large (10-29 mm) and giant (≥ 30 mm) lesions carries a risk of complications such as delayed bleeding and perforation. Prospective data on duodenal EMR are scarce. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of endoscopic procedures (clipping and coagulation of visible vessels) to prevent complications after EMR of large and giant lesions. METHODS : 110 patients with 118 adenomas (29 ampullary and 89 nonampullary) were included prospectively. RESULTS : 15 lesions were small (12.7 %), 68 were large (57.6 %), and 35 were giant (29.7 %). Endoscopic prevention of delayed complications was performed in 81.4 % (n = 96) of all lesions and 94.3 % (n = 33) of giant lesions. Complete resection was achieved in 111 lesions (94.1 %). Complications were 22 delayed bleedings (18.6 %), 3 intraprocedural perforations (2.5 %), 2 delayed perforations (1.7 %), and 1 stricture (0.8 %). Major complications were associated with lesions size ≥ 30 mm (28.6 % vs. 9.6 %; P = 0.02) and ampullary adenomas (27.6 % vs. 11.2 %; P = 0.07). All minor bleeding and 75 % of major bleeding episodes were treated endoscopically; 25 % of major bleedings needed radiologic embolization. Two fatal courses were observed when delayed perforation occurred after EMR of giant lesions. Residual adenoma was detected in 20.4 % at first follow-up. CONCLUSIONS : EMR of giant duodenal neoplasia carries a substantial risk of major complications and recurrences. Resection technique and prevention of delayed complications need to be improved. Further measures should be evaluated in randomized studies.

American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on the role of endoscopy in familial adenomatous polyposis syndromes

Familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) syndrome is a complex entity, which includes FAP, attenuated FAP, and MUTYH-associated polyposis. These patients are at significant risk for colorectal cancer and carry additional risks for extracolonic malignancies. In this guideline, we reviewed the most recent literature to formulate recommendations on the role of endoscopy in this patient population. Relevant clinical questions were how to identify high-risk individuals warranting genetic testing, when to start screening examinations, what are appropriate surveillance intervals, how to identify endoscopically high-risk features, and what is the role of chemoprevention. A systematic literature search from 2005 to 2018 was performed, in addition to the inclusion of seminal historical studies. Most studies were from worldwide registries, which have compiled years of data regarding the natural history and cancer risks in this cohort. Given that most studies were retrospective, recommendations were based on epidemiologic data and expert opinion. Management of colorectal polyps in FAP has not changed much in recent years, as colectomy in FAP is the standard of care. What is new, however, is the developing body of literature on the role of endoscopy in managing upper GI and small-bowel polyposis, as patients are living longer and improved endoscopic technologies have emerged.

Impact of electrical pulse cut mode during endoscopic papillectomy: Pilot randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

Endoscopic papillectomy is increasingly being used for ampullary adenoma treatment. However, it remains challenging despite increased safety with treatment advances. The ideal power output and electrosurgical current mode for mucosal resection are not established. We aimed to identify the ideal electrical pulse for use during resection.

METHODS

This pilot randomized, single-blind, prospective, multicenter trial, recruited patients with ampullary adenomas and conventional anatomy who were scheduled to undergo endoscopic papillectomy. Endoscopic treatment was performed using a standardized algorithm and patients were randomized for endoscopic papillectomy with Endocut or Autocut. The primary outcome was the incidence of delayed bleeding. Incidence of procedure-related pancreatitis, successful complete resection, pathological findings, and other adverse events were secondary endpoints.

RESULTS

Sixty patients were enrolled over a 2-year period. The incidences of delayed bleeding (13.3% vs. 16.7%, P = 1.00) and pancreatitis (27% vs. 30%, P = 0.77) were similar between both groups. The rate of crush artifacts was higher in the Endocut than in the Autocut group (27% vs. 3.3%, P = 0.03). Immediate bleeding when resecting tumors greater than 14 mm in diameter was more common in the Autocut than in the Endocut group (88% vs. 46%, P = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

The Autocut and Endocut modes have similar efficacy and safety for endoscopic papillectomy. The Endocut mode may prevent immediate bleeding in cases with large tumor sizes, although it causes more frequent crush artifacts.

REGISTRY AND THE REGISTRATION NUMBER

The Japanese UMIN Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN-CTR: 000021382).

Short- and long-term outcomes of endoscopically treated superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors

BACKGROUND

It is widely recognized that endoscopic resection (ER) of superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors (SNADETs) is technically challenging and may carry high risks of intraoperative and delayed bleeding and perforation. These adverse events could be more critical than those occurring in other levels of the gastrointestinal tract. Because of the low prevalence of the disease and the high risks of severe adverse events, the curability including short- and long-term outcomes have not been standardized yet.

AIM

To investigate the curability including short- and long-term outcomes of ER for SNADETs in a large case series.

METHODS

This retrospective study included cases that underwent ER for SNADETs at our university hospital between March 2004 and July 2017. Short-term outcomes of ER were measured based on en bloc and R0 resection rates as well as adverse events. Long-term outcomes included local recurrence detected on endoscopic surveillance and disease-specific mortality in patients followed up for ≥ 12 mo after ER.

RESULTS

In the study, 131 patients with 147 SNADETs were analyzed. The 147 ERs consisted of 136 endoscopic mucosal resections (EMRs) (93%) and 11 endoscopic submucosal dissections (ESDs) (7%). The median tumor diameter was 10 mm. The pathology diagnosis was adenocarcinoma (56/147, 38%), high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia (44/147, 30%), or low-grade intraepithelial neoplasia (47/147, 32%). The R0 resection rate was 68% (93/136) in the EMR group and 73% (8/11) in the ESD group, respectively. Cap-assisted EMR (known as EMR-C) showed a higher rate of R0 resection compared to the conventional method of EMR using a snare (78% vs 62%, P = 0.06). No adverse event was observed in the EMR group, whereas delayed bleeding, intraoperative perforation, and delayed perforation in 3, 3, and 5 patients occurred in the ESD group, respectively. One patient with perforation required emergency surgery. In the 43 mo median follow-up period, local recurrence was found in four EMR cases and all cases were treated endoscopically. No patient died due to tumor recurrence.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that ER provides good long-term outcomes in the patients with SNADETs. EMR is likely to become the safe and reliable treatment for small SNADETs.

Haemostasis and prevention of bleeding related to ER: The role of a novel self-assembling peptide

Background

Endoscopic resection is now commonly used for removal of early gastrointestinal lesions. However, the risk of the procedure may be heightened by intraprocedural or delayed bleeding. A novel, self-assembling peptide (PuraStat®) was recently licensed for use as a haemostat.

Objective

The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of this haemostat when used to control intraprocedural bleeding or to prevent delayed bleeding in endoscopic resection.

Methods

PuraStat® was used on 100 patients undergoing endoscopic resection in a tertiary referral centre. The efficacy, safety, feasibility of use and delayed bleeding rates were measured.

Results

Forty-eight oesophageal, 31 colorectal, 11 gastric and 10 duodenal procedures were included. The mean lesion size was 3.7 cm and 30% of the patients were on antithrombotic therapy. Intraprocedural bleeding occurred in 64%. PuraStat® was an effective haemostat in 75% of these cases. Only a small amount was required for haemostasis (mean = 1.76 ml) and it took on average 69.5 seconds to stop a bleed. The delayed bleeding rate was 3%.

Conclusions

PuraStat® is an effective haemostat for use in controlling bleeds during endoscopic resection. It is safe, easy to use and did not interfere with the procedure.

Comparative analysis of ESD versus EMR in a large European series of non-ampullary superficial duodenal tumors

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

The choice of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) or endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) in non-ampullary superficial duodenal tumors (NASDTs) is challenging and the benefits of ESD remain unclear. The aim was to comparatively analyze the feasibility, outcomes and safety of these techniques in these lesions.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

 This is an observational and retrospective study. All consecutive patients presenting with NASDTs who underwent EMR or ESD between 2005 and 2017 were included. The following main outcomes were comparatively evaluated: en-bloc and complete (R0) resection rates, and local recurrence. Secondary outcomes were perforation and delayed bleeding.

RESULTS

One hundred sixty-six tumors in 150 patients (age: 66 years, range: 31 - 83, 42.7 % males) were resected by ESD (n = 37) or EMR (n = 129) and included. The median procedure time (81 vs. 50 min, P  = 0.007) and tumor size (25 vs. 20 mm, P  = 0.01) were higher in the ESD group. The global malignancy rate was 50.3 %. There were no differences in en-bloc resection (29.7 % vs. 44.2 %, P  = 0.115), complete resection (19.4 % vs. 35.5 %, P  = 0.069), and local recurrence (14.7 % vs. 16.7 %, P  = 0.788) rates. Tumor size was associated with recurrence (28 vs. 20 mm, P  = 0.008), with a median follow-up of 6.5 months. Focal recurrence (n = 22, 13.3 %) was treated endoscopically in 86.4 %. En-bloc resection in the ESD group was comparable in large ( ≥ 20 mm) and small lesions (27.6 % vs. 37.5 %, P  = 0.587), while this outcome decreased significantly in large lesions resected by EMR (17.4 % vs. 75 %, P  < 0.001). Nine perforations were confirmed in 6 lesions (16.2 %) resected by ESD and 3 (2.3 %) by EMR ( P  = 0.001). Endoscopic therapy was successful in all but 1 patient (88.9 %) presenting with a delayed perforation.

CONCLUSIONS

ESD may be an alternative to EMR and surgery in selected NASDTs, such as large duodenal tumors where EMR achieves low en-bloc resection rates and the local recurrence may be higher. However, this technique may have a higher risk of perforations.