Risk factors for serious adverse events associated with multiband mucosectomy in Barrett's esophagus: an international multicenter analysis of 3827 endoscopic resection procedures

What can the Interventional Endoscopist Offer in the Management of Upper Gastrointestinal Malignancies?

The therapeutic possibilities of endoscopy have rapidly increased in the last decades and now allow organ-sparing treatment of early upper gastrointestinal malignancy as well as an increasing number of options for symptom palliation. This review contains an overview of the interventional endoscopic procedures in upper gastrointestinal malignancies. It describes endoscopic treatment of early oesophageal and gastric cancers, and the palliative options in managing dysphagia and gastric outlet obstruction. It also provides an overview of the therapeutic possibilities of biliary endoscopy, such as retrograde stenting and radiofrequency biliary ablation. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided therapeutic options are discussed, including biliary drainage, gastrojejunostomy and coeliac axis block. To aid in clinical decision making, the procedures are described in the context of their indication, efficacy, risks and limitations.

Extending treatment criteria for Barrett's neoplasia: results of a nationwide cohort of 138 endoscopic submucosal dissection procedures

BACKGROUND

The use of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is gradually expanding for treatment of neoplasia in Barrett's esophagus (BE). We aimed to report outcomes of all ESDs for BE neoplasia performed in the Netherlands.

METHODS

Retrospective assessment of outcomes, using treatment and follow-up data from a joint database.

RESULTS

130/138 patients had complete ESDs, with 126/130 (97 %) en bloc resections. Median (interquartile range (IQR)) procedure time was 121 minutes (90-180). Pathology findings were high grade dysplasia (HGD) (5 %) or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) T1a (43 %) or T1b (52 %; 19 % sm1, 33 % ≥ sm2). Among resections of HGD or T1a EAC lesions, 87 % (95 %CI 75 %-92 %) were both en bloc and R0; the corresponding value for T1b EAC lesions was 49 % (36 %-60 %). Among R1 resections, 10/34 (29 %) showed residual cancer, all detected at first endoscopic follow-up. The remaining 24 patients (71 %) showed no residual neoplasia. Six of these patients underwent surgery with no residual tumor; the remaining 18 underwent endoscopic follow-up during median 31 months with 1 local recurrence (annual recurrence rate 2 %). Among R0 resections, annual local recurrence rate during median 27 months was 0.5 %.

CONCLUSION

In expert hands, ESD allows safe removal of bulky intraluminal neoplasia and submucosal cancer. ESD of the latter showed R1 resection margins in 50 %, yet only one third had persisting neoplasia at follow-up. To better stratify R1 patients with an indication for additional surgery, repeat endoscopy after healing of the ESD might be a helpful possible prognostic factor for residual cancer.

Clinical Adverse Events and Device Failures Reported for the Captivator and Duette Endoscopic Mucosal Resection (EMR) Systems: A MAUDE Database Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is a widely used technique for the removal of precancerous or select cancerous mucosal-based lesions. Two systems used for EMR of upper gastrointestinal lesions are the Duette EMR kit and the Captivator EMR kit. The aim of this study is to analyze the reports submitted to the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database for patient-related adverse events and device failures associated with these EMR kits.

METHODS

We analyzed postmarketing data from the FDA MAUDE from August 2004 to August 2021.

RESULTS

Eighty-four MAUDE reports were found in the study period from August 2004 to August 2021. In total, device issues comprised 36.9% of the reports (n=31) and patient adverse events comprised 63.09% of the reports (n=53). Device issues that were reported included, but were not limited to, band placement/deployment failure (8.1%), suture breakage (7.31%), and snare breakage (4.94%). Patient adverse events that were reported included, but were not limited to, bleeding (25.9%), perforation (7.31%), and snare breakage (4.94%).

CONCLUSION

Captivator EMR and Duette EMR have similar patterns of technical failure and clinical adverse events. More MAUDE reports exist for Duette EMR, possibly due to its longer duration of commercial availability.

Long-term outcomes after endoscopic treatment for Barrett's neoplasia with radiofrequency ablation ± endoscopic resection: results from the national Dutch database in a 10-year period

OBJECTIVE

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA)±endoscopic resection (ER) is the preferred treatment for early neoplasia in Barrett's oesophagus (BE). We aimed to report short-term and long-term outcomes for all 1384 patients treated in the Netherlands (NL) from 2008 to 2018, with uniform treatment and follow-up (FU) in a centralised setting.

DESIGN

Endoscopic therapy for early BE neoplasia in NL is centralised in nine expert centres with specifically trained endoscopists and pathologists that adhere to a joint protocol. Prospectively collected data are registered in a uniform database. Patients with low/high-grade dysplasia or low-risk cancer, were treated by ER of visible lesions followed by trimonthly RFA sessions of any residual BE until complete eradication of BE (CE-BE). Patients with ER alone were not included.

RESULTS

After ER (62% of cases; 43% low-risk cancers) and median 1 circumferential and 2 focal RFA (p25-p75 0-1; 1-2) per patient, CE-BE was achieved in 94% (1270/1348). Adverse events occurred in 21% (268/1386), most commonly oesophageal stenosis (15%), all were managed endoscopically. A total of 1154 patients with CE-BE were analysed for long-term outcomes. During median 43 months (22-69) and 4 endoscopies (1-5), 38 patients developed dysplastic recurrence (3%, annual recurrence risk 1%), all were detected as endoscopically visible abnormalities. Random biopsies from a normal appearing cardia showed intestinal metaplasia (IM) in 14% and neoplasia in 0%. A finding of IM in the cardia was reproduced during further FU in only 33%, none progressed to neoplasia. Frequent FU visits in the first year of FU were not associated with recurrence risk.

CONCLUSION

In a setting of centralised care, RFA±ER is effective for eradication of Barrett's related neoplasia and has remarkably low rates of dysplastic recurrence. Our data support more lenient FU intervals, with emphasis on careful endoscopic inspection. Random biopsies from neosquamous epithelium and cardia are of questionable value.

NETHERLANDS TRIAL REGISTER NUMBER

NL7039.

Endoscopic Resection Without Subsequent Ablation Therapy for Early Barrett's Neoplasia: Endoscopic Findings and Long-Term Mortality

INTRODUCTION

After endoscopic resection (ER) of neoplasia in Barrett's esophagus (BE), it is recommended to ablate the remaining BE to minimize the risk for metachronous disease. However, we report long-term outcomes for a nationwide cohort of all patients who did not undergo ablation of the remaining BE after ER for early BE neoplasia, due to clinical reasons or performance status.

METHODS

Endoscopic therapy for BE neoplasia in the Netherlands is centralized in 8 expert centers with specifically trained endoscopists and pathologists. Uniformity is ensured by a joint protocol and regular group meetings. We report all patients who underwent ER for a neoplastic lesion between 2008 and 2018, without further ablation therapy. Outcomes include progression during endoscopic FU and all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

Ninety-four patients were included with mean age 74 (± 10) years. ER was performed for low-grade dysplasia (LGD) (10%), high-grade dysplasia (HGD) (25%), or low-risk esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) (65%). No additional ablation was performed for several reasons; in 73 patients (78%), the main argument was expected limited life expectancy. Median C2M5 BE persisted after ER, and during median 21 months (IQR 11-51) with 4 endoscopies per patient, no patient progressed to advanced cancer. Seventeen patients (18%) developed HGD/EAC: all were curatively treated endoscopically. In total, 29/73 patients (40%) with expected limited life expectancy died due to unrelated causes during FU, none of EAC.

CONCLUSION

In selected patients, ER monotherapy with endoscopic surveillance of the residual BE is a valid alternative to eradication therapy with ablation.