Pocket-creation method versus conventional method of endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial colorectal neoplasms: a meta-analysis

The Derivation and External Validation of a Fibrosis Risk Model for Colorectal Tumours Undergoing Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection

Background: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is an advanced technique that can become more challenging in the presence of submucosal fibrosis. Predicting the grade of fibrosis is important in order to identify technically difficult ESD. Aims and Methods: Our study aimed to derive and validate a prediction model to determine the preoperative degree of submucosal fibrosis in colorectal tumours undergoing ESD. A predictive model was developed to derive the probability of an increasing submucosal fibrosis in the derivation cohort and then externally validated. Results: 309 patients (age: 68 ± 10.9 years) underwent colorectal ESD between January 2016 and June 2020. F0, F1, and F2 fibroses were reported in 196 (63.4%), 70 (22.6%), and 43 (13.9%) cases, respectively. R0 resection was found in 266 (87%) lesions. At multivariable analysis in the derivation cohort, lesion morphology (OR = 0.37 and CI = 0.14-0.97 for LST-NG vs. 0-Is; OR = 0.29 and CI = 0.1-0.87 for the LST mixed type vs. 0-Is; and OR = 0.32 and CI = 0.1-1.03 for LST-G vs. 0-Is) and increasing size (OR = 1.02 and CI = 1.01-1.04 for a 1 mm increase) were significantly associated with an increasing degree of fibrosis. The model had fair discriminating ability in the derivation group (AUROC = 0.61 and CI = 0.52-0.69 for F1-F2 vs. F0 fibroses; AUROC = 0.61 and CI = 0.45-0.77 for F2 vs. F0-F1 fibroses) and in the validation group (AUROC = 0.71 and CI = 0.59-0.83 for F1-F2 vs. F0 fibroses; AUROC = 0.65 and CI = 0.52-0.77 for F2 vs. F0-F1 fibroses). Conclusions: Our findings introduce a new tool for the stratification of ESD technical difficulty based on lesion size and morphological characteristics which could become crucial during the procedure's planning process.

Multicenter prospective randomized controlled clinical trial comparing the pocket-creation method with and without single-clip traction of colonic endoscopic submucosal dissection

BACKGROUND

The pocket-creation method (PCM) was developed to overcome the technical difficulties of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), although opening the pocket remains challenging. We developed a novel technique of PCM with single-clip traction (PCM-CT), which uses a reopenable clip as a traction device to maintain stability during the procedure. No prospective study has compared the efficacy of PCM-CT and PCM. This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of PCM-CT vs. PCM in a randomized controlled trial.

METHODS

This randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted at four Japanese institutions. Patients with superficial colorectal neoplastic lesions were included following Japanese guidelines for colorectal cancer. Seven moderately experienced endoscopists performed the ESD procedures using either PCM-CT or PCM.

RESULTS

100 patients were enrolled in the study. Compared with PCM, PCM-CT achieved significantly faster mean (SD) dissection speed (21.4 [10.8] vs. 27.0 [14.5] mm2/min [95%CI 0.5 to 10.7], P = 0.03), and reduced the mean procedure time (81.8 [57.9] vs. 64.8 [47.6] minutes [95%CI -38.2 to 4.3], P = 0.12) and pocket-opening time (37.8 [33.0] vs. 30.0 [28.9] minutes [95%CI -20.2 to 4.6], P = 0.22). En bloc and R0 resection rates were not significantly different between the two groups (100% vs. 100%, P >0.99; 100% vs. 96%, P = 0.50, respectively). No significant differences were observed in adverse events between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

ESD facilitated by the novel PCM-CT method appeared to be significantly faster than PCM. Both methods achieved high R0 resection rates.

Is there a best choice of equipment for colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection?

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a widely used technique to remove early neoplastic lesions. It was primarily used in the initial days to treat gastric lesions, but recently, the horizon of this endoscopic procedure has expanded, which has allowed us to manage other technically more complex locations, such as the colorectum.

AREAS COVERED

There has been an exponential growth regarding the wide range of devices available in the market for performing colorectal ESD. As a result, the aim of this review is to highlight the indication of this endoscopic technique, which device is best suited for which indication, as well as future trajectories in this field.

EXPERT OPINION

Although some devices have proven to be more advantageous than others in this area, very often the choice is still subjective, which is commonly attributed to individual preferences and experience. However, an accurate knowledge of the available tools and their functioning, with their pros and cons, is fundamental for any endoscopist venturing into the field of third space endoscopy. In this way, one can choose which device best suits a particular situation, along with simultaneously having the wealth of knowledge related to therapeutic armamentarium at our disposal in the endoscopy suite.

The role of cap-assisted endoscopy and its future implications

Cap-assisted endoscopy refers to a procedure in which a short tube made of a polymer (mostly transparent) is attached to the distal tip of the endoscope to enhance its diagnostic and therapeutic capabilities. It is reported to be particularly useful in: (1) minimizing blind spots during screening colonoscopy, (2) providing a constant distance from a lesion for clear visualization during magnifying endoscopy, (3) accurately assessing the size of various gastrointestinal lesions, (4) preventing mucosal injury during foreign body removal, (5) securing adequate workspace in the submucosal space during endoscopic submucosal dissection or third space endoscopy, (6) providing an optimal approach angle to a target, and (7) suctioning mucosal and submucosal tissue with negative pressure for resection or approximation. Here, we review various applications of attachable caps in diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopy and their future implications.

Removal of a large rectal polyp with endoscopic submucosal dissection-trans-anal rectoscopic assisted minimally invasive surgery hybrid technique: A case report

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) can be used for the en-bloc removal of superficial rectal lesions; however, the lack of a traction system makes the procedure long and difficult in the presence of extensive lesions.

CASE SUMMARY

A large polyp occupying 2/3 of the rectal circumference and extending 5 cm in length was removed by ESD with the help of laparoscopic forceps introduced via trans-anal rectoscopic assisted minimally invasive surgery, a disposable platform designed to aid in transanal minimally invasive surgery. Traction of the polyp by forceps during the operation was dynamic, and applied at various points and in various directions. The polyp was removed en-bloc without complications in 1 h and 55 min. A sigmoidoscopy performed 50 d later showed normal healing without polyp recurrence.

CONCLUSION

The technique presented here could overcome the issues caused by lack of traction during ESD for rectal lesions.

Initial multicenter experience using a novel articulating through-the-scope traction device for endoscopic submucosal dissection

Background and study aims A single-operator, articulating, through-the-scope (TTS) traction device was recently developed to facilitate endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). Clinical data on the performance of this device are limited. We report an initial multicenter experience with ESD using this articulating TTS traction device. Patients and methods Retrospective analysis on all consecutive patients who underwent ESD using this traction device (T-ESD) at five centers between August 2021 and December 2022. Endpoints included: rates of en-bloc resection, R0 resection, curative resection, and adverse events. Results Thirty-six patients (median age 64.8 years; 47.2% women) underwent ESD (median lesion size 40 mm; interquartile range [IRQ]: 27.5-67.5) for lesions in the esophagus (n=2), stomach (n=8), sigmoid colon (n=6), and rectum (n=20). Submucosal fibrosis was encountered in one-third of the lesions (33.3%). Median ESD time was 104.6 minutes (IQR: 65-122). En-bloc, R0 and curative resection were achieved in 94.4%, 91.6%, and 97.2%, respectively. The single patient with non-curative resection of an invasive rectal adenocarcinoma underwent surgery. There were no cases of delayed bleeding or perforation. There was no recurrence on surveillance endoscopy (n=20) at a median of 6 months (IQR: 3.75-6). Conclusions This initial multicenter experience demonstrates high resection rates and excellent safety profile when performing ESD with this novel articulating TTS device. Dynamic real-time traction may lower the technical difficulty of ESD. Additional studies are needed to assess its cost-effectiveness and compare its usefulness with other traction devices and techniques during ESD.

[Interventional endoscopy in gastroenterology]

Essential innovations in interventional endoscopy have significantly broadened the treatment armamentarium in gastroenterology. The treatment and complication management of intraepithelial neoplasms and early forms of cancer are increasingly being primarily addressed endoscopically. In cases of endoluminal lesions with no risk of lymph node or distant metastases, endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection have become established as standards. For broad-based adenomas, coagulation of the resection margins should be performed in the case of a piecemeal resection. Submucosal lesions can be reached and resected by tunneling techniques. Peroral endoscopic myotomy in cases of achalasia is a new treatment option for hypertensive and hypercontractile motility disorders. In addition, endoscopic myotomy for gastroparesis has shown very promising results. In this article, new resection techniques and so-called third space endoscopy are presented and critically discussed.

Effectiveness of water pressure method in colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection by novice endoscopists

Background and study aims Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) remains challenging for novice endoscopists. Not only the underwater conditions but also active use of water pressure with the water pressure method (WPM) can help widen the submucosal layer. This study aimed to clarify the usefulness of WPM in colorectal ESD, especially for novice endoscopists. Methods This study was ex vivo and enrolled three novices. Each endoscopist performed conventional ESD (C-ESD) and ESD with WPM (WPM-ESD) 10 times on an excised bovine rectum. The treatment outcomes were compared between the two groups. Results Median procedure time was significantly shorter in the WPM-ESD group than in the C-ESD group (54 minutes, interquartile range [IQR] 42-67 vs. 45 minutes, IQR 34-55, P  = 0.035). Although no significant difference in the activation time of electrical surgical unit (ESU) during the procedure was noted, the interval time during the procedure at which the ESU was not activated was significantly shorter in the WPM-ESD group (52 minutes, IQR 40-65 vs. 42 minutes, IQR 32-52, P  = 0.030) than in the C-ESD group. Moreover, the time required for the endoscope to enter the submucosa was significantly shorter in the WPM-ESD group than in the C-ESD group (8.0 minutes, IQR 6.0-10 vs. 5.0 minutes, IQR 3.0-6.0, P  < 0.001). Conclusions The present study reveals that the WPM method significantly shortens the procedure times for novices in colorectal ESD, especially the interval time, which refers to the time spent creating the field of view, and the time required for the endoscope to enter the submucosa.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection techniques and technology: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Technical Review

ESGE suggests conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD; marking and mucosal incision followed by circumferential incision and stepwise submucosal dissection) for most esophageal and gastric lesions. ESGE suggests tunneling ESD for esophageal lesions involving more than two-thirds of the esophageal circumference. ESGE recommends the pocket-creation method for colorectal ESD, at least if traction devices are not used. The use of dedicated ESD knives with size adequate to the location/thickness of the gastrointestinal wall is recommended. It is suggested that isotonic saline or viscous solutions can be used for submucosal injection. ESGE recommends traction methods in esophageal and colorectal ESD and in selected gastric lesions. After gastric ESD, coagulation of visible vessels is recommended, and post-procedural high dose proton pump inhibitor (PPI) (or vonoprazan). ESGE recommends against routine closure of the ESD defect, except in duodenal ESD. ESGE recommends corticosteroids after resection of  > 50 % of the esophageal circumference. The use of carbon dioxide when performing ESD is recommended. ESGE recommends against the performance of second-look endoscopy after ESD. ESGE recommends endoscopy/colonoscopy in the case of significant bleeding (hemodynamic instability, drop in hemoglobin > 2 g/dL, severe ongoing bleeding) to perform endoscopic hemostasis with thermal methods or clipping; hemostatic powders represent rescue therapies. ESGE recommends closure of immediate perforations with clips (through-the-scope or cap-mounted, depending on the size and shape of the perforation), as soon as possible but ideally after securing a good plane for further dissection.

Efficacy and safety of pocket-creation method for early gastric cancers

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is the standard endoscopic treatment for early gastric cancers (EGCs). However, obscured view and difficulty in submucosal lifting during ESD have been demonstrated. Additionally, ESD is time-consuming and poses a high risk of perforation and bleeding when performed in challenging locations. The pocket-creation method (PCM) is a newly developed strategy for colorectal tumors, while the outcomes of application in the treatment of EGCs are rarely reported. In the present study, we aimed to compare the technical efficacy and safety of PCM-ESD and the conventional ESD (c-ESD) technique for the treatment of EGCs.

METHODS

This was a single-center retrospective study consisting of 162 patients with EGCs who underwent ESD between February 2019 and February 2021. One-to-one propensity score matching (PSM) was performed. In addition, clinicopathological characteristics and treatment outcomes were also compared.

RESULTS

PCM-ESD was more likely to be used in patients with larger lesions than c-ESD with/without traction. In addition, the resection speed for lesions of the PCM-ESD was faster compared with c-ESD without traction (median dissection speed: 19.6 mm²/min vs. 15 mm²/min; p < 0.001) and c-ESD with traction (median dissection speed after PSM: 19.9 mm²/min vs. 15 mm²/min; p = 0.001). In multiple linear regression analysis, significant factors related to a higher dissection speed were the treatment method of PCM-ESD (p = 0.034), the long diameter of the resected lesion (p = 0.001), and lesion location (p = 0.046).

CONCLUSIONS

Collectively, PCM-ESD appeared to be a safer and more effective treatment for EGCs than c-ESD. In addition, PCM-ESD could significantly improve the speed of tumor resection.

Low risk of local recurrence after a successful en bloc endoscopic submucosal dissection for noninvasive colorectal lesions with positive horizontal resection margins (R-ESD study)

BACKGROUND : During endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), the normal mucosa is cut under constant optical control. We studied whether a positive horizontal resection margin after a complete en bloc ESD predicts local recurrence.

METHODS

 In this European multicenter cohort study, patients with a complete en bloc colorectal ESD were selected from prospective registries. Cases were defined by a horizontal resection margin that was positive or indeterminate for dysplasia (HM1), whereas controls had a free resection margin (HM0). Low risk lesions with submucosal invasion (T1) and margins free of carcinoma were analyzed separately. The main outcome was local recurrence.

RESULTS

 From 928 consecutive ESDs (2011-2020), 354 patients (40 % female; mean age 67 years, median follow-up 23.6 months), with 308 noninvasive lesions and 46 T1 lesions, were included. The recurrence rate for noninvasive lesions was 1/212 (0.5 %; 95 %CI 0.02 %-2.6 %) for HM0 vs. 2/96 (2.1 %; 95 %CI 0.57 %-7.3 %) for HM1. The recurrence rate for T1 lesions was 1/38 (2.6 %; 95 %CI 0.14 %-13.5 %) for HM0 vs. 2/8 (25 %; 95 %CI 7.2 %-59.1 %) for HM1.

CONCLUSION

 A positive horizontal resection margin after an en bloc ESD for noninvasive lesions is associated with a marginal nonsignificant increase in the local recurrence rate, equal to an ESD with clear horizontal margins. This could not be confirmed for T1 lesions.

Training in Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection in the United States: The Current Paradigm

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) training in Japan is pursued through a designated master-apprentice, organ-based stepwise training model. However, applying a similar program to the United States is not a practical strategy due to the significant differences in the training system and disease prevalence. To incorporate the ESD training into the current advanced endoscopy fellowship program, the use of recently developed techniques and technologies to improve the efficiency of ESD is ideal. The ESD training program in the United States should be prevalence-based, with increased involvement of trainees depending on their objectively assessed competency levels.

GIE Editorial Board Top 10: advances in GI endoscopy in 2021

The 9-member Editorial Board of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy performed a systematic literature search of original articles published during 2021 in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and 10 other high-impact medical and gastroenterology journals on endoscopy-related topics. Votes from each editorial board member were tallied to identify a consensus list of the 10 most significant topic areas in GI endoscopy over the calendar year of study, with a focus on 3 criteria: significance, novelty, and global impact on clinical practice. The 10 areas identified collectively represent advances in the following endoscopic topics: colonoscopy optimization, bariatric endoscopy, endoscopic needle sampling and drainage, peroral endoscopic myotomy, endoscopic defect closure, meeting systemic challenges in endoscopic training and practice, endohepatology, FNA versus fine-needle biopsy sampling, endoscopic mucosal and submucosal procedures, and cold snare polypectomy. Each board member contributed a summary of important articles relevant to 1 to 2 of the consensus topic areas, leading to a collective summary that is presented in this document of the "top 10" endoscopic advances of 2021.

Technical feasibility of salvage endoscopic submucosal dissection after chemoradiation for locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The standard treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer is chemoradiation (CRT) followed by proctectomy and adjuvant chemotherapy. However, there is an emerging role for nonsurgical management after CRT or total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) consisting of CRT and neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) after CRT or TNT for rectal cancer, termed "salvage ESD," may be a viable nonsurgical option for carefully selected patients. We aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of salvage ESD.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of cases of salvage ESD for locally advanced rectal cancer and standard ESD for rectal tumors without prior CRT from July 2018 to August 2020 at our institution was performed. Clinical factors and imaging, procedural, and pathology results were collected and compared.

RESULTS

Twelve salvage ESD cases were compared with 27 standard ESD cases. Before CRT, 83.3% of lesions in the salvage ESD group were initially clinically staged as T3. The en-bloc resection rates were 92.7% and 91.7% (P = 1.00) and R0 resection rates 66.7% and 75.0% (P = .55) for the standard and salvage groups, respectively. In the salvage ESD group, no adverse events were observed, and 75.0% of the adenocarcinomas in the salvage ESD group had morphologically changed to hyperplasia or adenoma after CRT, with no identifiable lesions greater than T1 tumor depth.

CONCLUSIONS

Salvage ESD for locally advanced rectal cancer is technically feasible with low adverse event rates. There may be a diagnostic role in salvage ESD in assessing pathologic response to CRT and a possible therapeutic role in resection of residual lesions with the potential to avoid surgery.

Effectiveness and safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection using the pocket creation method in the Japanese population: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and study aims  Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a standard method for minimally invasive resection of superficial gastrointestinal tumors. The pocket creation method (PCM) facilitates ESD regardless of location in the gastrointestinal tract. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of ESD for superficial neoplasms in the upper and lower gastrointestinal tract comparing the PCM to the non-PCM. Methods  Randomized controlled, prospective, and retrospective studies comparing the PCM with the non-PCM were included. Outcomes included en bloc resection, R0 resection, dissection speed, delayed bleeding and perforation. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) using the Mantel-Haenszel random effect model were documented. Results  Eight studies including gastric, duodenal, and colorectal ESD were included. The en bloc resection rate was significantly higher in the PCM group than the non-PCM group (OR 3.87, 95 %CI 1.24-12.10 P  = 0.020). The R0 resection rate was significantly higher in the PCM group than the non-PCM group (OR 2.46, 95 %CI 1.14-5.30, P  = 0.020). The dissection speed was significantly faster in the PCM group than the non-PCM group (mean difference 3.13, 95 % CI 1.35-4.91, P  < 0.001). The rate of delayed bleeding was similar in the two groups (OR 1.13, 95 %CI 0.60-2.15, P =  0.700). The rate of perforation was significantly lower in the PCM group than the non-PCM group (OR 0.34, 95 %CI 0.15-0.76, P =  0.009). Conclusions  The PCM facilitates high-quality, fast and safe colorectal ESD. Further studies are needed regarding the utility of PCM in ESD of the upper gastrointestinal tract.

Malaria and Helminthic Co-Infection during Pregnancy in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Malaria and helminthic co-infection during pregnancy causes fetomaternal haemorrhage and foetal growth retardation. This study determined the pooled burden of pregnancy malaria and helminthic co-infection in sub-Saharan Africa. CINAHL, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Scopus, PubMed, and Web of Science databases were used to retrieve data from the literature, without restricting language and publication year. The Joanna Briggs Institute's critical appraisal tool for prevalence studies was used for quality assessment. STATA Version 14.0 was used to conduct the meta-analysis. The I2 statistics and Egger's test were used to test heterogeneity and publication bias. The random-effects model was used to estimate the pooled prevalence at a 95% confidence interval (CI). The review protocol has been registered in PROSPERO, with the number CRD42019144812. In total, 24 studies (n = 14,087 participants) were identified in this study. The pooled analysis revealed that 20% of pregnant women were co-infected by malaria and helminths in sub-Saharan Africa. The pooled prevalence of malaria and helminths were 33% and 35%, respectively. The most prevalent helminths were Hookworm (48%), Ascaris lumbricoides (37%), and Trichuris trichiura (15%). Significantly higher malaria and helminthic co-infection during pregnancy were observed. Health systems in sub-Saharan Africa must implement home-grown innovative solutions to underpin context-specific policies for the early initiation of effective intermittent preventive therapy.

Advances in traction methods for endoscopic submucosal dissection: What is the best traction method and traction direction?

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been developed as a treatment for superficial gastrointestinal neoplasms, which can achieve en bloc resection regardless of the lesion size. However, ESD is technically difficult because endoscopists cannot bring their hand into the gastrointestinal tract, unlike surgeons in regular surgery. It is difficult to obtain sufficient tension in the dissection plane and a good field of vision. Therefore, ESD is associated with a long procedure time and a high risk of adverse events in comparison with endoscopic mucosal resection. Traction methods have been developed to provide sufficient tension for the dissection plane and a good field of vision during the ESD procedure. However, traction direction is limited in most traction methods, resulting in insufficient effect in some cases. Although traction direction is considered important, there have been few investigations of its effect. In the first half of this review, important traction methods are discussed, including traction direction. In second half, appropriate traction methods for each organ are considered. Other important considerations for traction method, such as ability to adjust traction strength, interference between traction device and endoscope, and the need for specialized devices are also discussed.

Advances in traction methods for endoscopic submucosal dissection: What is the best traction method and traction direction?

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been developed as a treatment for superficial gastrointestinal neoplasms, which can achieve en bloc resection regardless of the lesion size. However, ESD is technically difficult because endoscopists cannot bring their hand into the gastrointestinal tract, unlike surgeons in regular surgery. It is difficult to obtain sufficient tension in the dissection plane and a good field of vision. Therefore, ESD is associated with a long procedure time and a high risk of adverse events in comparison with endoscopic mucosal resection. Traction methods have been developed to provide sufficient tension for the dissection plane and a good field of vision during the ESD procedure. However, traction direction is limited in most traction methods, resulting in insufficient effect in some cases. Although traction direction is considered important, there have been few investigations of its effect. In the first half of this review, important traction methods are discussed, including traction direction. In second half, appropriate traction methods for each organ are considered. Other important considerations for traction method, such as ability to adjust traction strength, interference between traction device and endoscope, and the need for specialized devices are also discussed.