EMR and ESD: Indications, techniques and results

Efficacy and safety of salvage endoscopy in the treatment of residual or recurrent colorectal neoplasia after endoscopic resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review and meta-analyze the efficacy and safety of salvage endoscopy for residual or recurrence of colorectal tumors after endoscopic resection.

METHODS

Multiple databases including PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library were searched to screen for eligible studies and perform data extraction and pooled analysis.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies on salvage endoscopy for residual or recurrent colorectal cancer after endoscopic resection were included, covering approximately 994 patients. The results of the meta-analysis demonstrated that salvage endoscopic therapy for residual or recurrent colorectal tumors following endoscopic resection achieved an en bloc resection rate of 92% (95% CI 0.85-0.97; I2 = 91%) and an R0 resection rate of 82% (95% CI 0.75-0.87; I2 = 78%). The rates of intraoperative or postoperative bleeding and perforation were 10%/1% and 5%/2%, and the recurrence rate was 2%.

CONCLUSIONS

Salvage endoscopic resection is an effective and safe treatment strategy for residual or recurrent colorectal tumors after endoscopic resection.

Application of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection (ESD) in Treatment of Gastrointestinal Lesions-Single Center Experience

Background and Objectives: Endoscopic resection of gastrointestinal (GI) tract lesions, originating from Japan, is becoming more frequently used in European countries. Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) ensure minimally invasive removal of benign, premalignant, and early neoplastic tumors of esophagus, stomach, and intestine in selected group of patients. Aim of this study was to determine the outcomes, radical resection rate (R0), and complication rate of ESD procedures performed in our department. Methods: The data from 100 ESD procedures of esophageal, gastric, duodenal, and colorectal lesions performed in out unit between 02.01.2020 and 30.06.2023 were collected and analyzed retrospectively. Results: A total of 42 male and 58 female patients in the median age of 64 years (range, 31-89 years) underwent ESD. Mean duration of the procedure was 66 minutes (ranging 25-185 minutes). Tumors were located in the esophagus in 8 cases (8%), stomach in 25 cases (25%), duodenum in 1 case (1%), and colon in 66 cases (66%). Radical resection was achieved in 98 cases (98%); 2 patients were qualified for surgical treatment. Average size of dissection lesions was 26 × 19 mm. The biggest one was 60 × 60 mm (sigmoid adenoma), and the smallest one was 5 × 5 mm (gastrointestinal neuroectodermal tumors). Complication occurred in 10 patients (10%)-9 perforations of the wall of intestine (9%) and 1 hemorrhage, which required endoscopic intervention (1%). Conclusions: Implementation of ESD to clinical practice gives the opportunity for minimally invasive, radical treatment of benign, premalignant, and early neoplastic lesions of gastrointestinal tract in selected group of patients. Experienced endoscopists, following current guidelines and standardized process of qualification, are crucial to minimize the risk of severe complications.

Efficacy, safety, and advantages of magnetic anchor-guided endoscopic submucosal dissection vs conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection: A retrospective paired cohort study

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been recommended as the first-line treatment for early gastric cancer (EGC). However, poor visualization of the operative field increases both the procedure time and the risk of complications, especially for large and difficult lesions. We introduced a novel technique, magnetic anchor-guided ESD (MAG-ESD) and compared it with conventional ESD (C-ESD) for the treatment of large EGCs in terms of efficacy, safety, and advantages.

METHODS

Patients with large EGCs who underwent MAG-ESD or C-ESD at the First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University from March 2020 to March 2022 were retrospectively enrolled in this study. The patients in the MAG-ESD cohort were matched to those in the C-ESD cohort using propensity score-based matching. The operation time, submucosal dissection time, complete resection status, magnetic anchor, adverse event rate, and tumor recurrence rate were evaluated.

RESULTS

Twenty-two patients who underwent MAG-ESD were ultimately matched to those who underwent C-ESD. The median operation time of MAG-ESD and C-ESD was 43 minutes (IQR, 35.2-49.5) and 50.5 minutes (IQR, 42.0-76.0), respectively, among which the submucosal dissection time was 7.6 minutes (IQR, 5.2-10.4) and 14.8 minutes (IQR, 10.8-19.6), respectively. The operation time of MAG-ESD was shorter than that of C-ESD, especially the submucosal dissection time (P < .05). There was a lower incidence of adverse events associated with MAG-ESD (P < .05) when magnetic anchors were successfully placed and retrieved.

CONCLUSION

MAG-ESD is feasible, effective, safe, and simple for the treatment of large EGCs at different sites and has a high anchor success rate, which could shorten the operation time and reduce the adverse event rate.

Comparing efficacy and factors of postoperative bleeding in endoscopic mucosal resection vs coagulation for intestinal polyps

This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of Endoscopic Mucosal Resection (EMR) and Argon Plasma Coagulation (APC) as therapeutic approaches for intestinal polyps in patients, and to examine the factors associated with postoperative bleeding. This study included 132 patients diagnosed with colorectal polyps (188 polyps) who underwent endoscopic surgery at our hospital between January 2022 and December 2022. Based on the surgical method employed, the patients were divided into 2 groups: EMR (68 cases, 97 polyps) and APC (64 cases, 91 polyps). Comparative analyses were conducted to assess the clinical efficacy, surgery-related indicators, and quality of life the 2 groups. Furthermore, an investigation was carried out to identify the factors associated with postoperative bleeding. The analysis revealed no statistically significant difference in the cure rate of flat and superficial raised polyps between the EMR group and the APC (P > .05). However, it was found that the EMR group exhibited a significantly higher cure rate for subpedunculated and raised-pedunculated polyps compared to the APC group (P < .05). The results of logistics analysis showed that patients with hypertension (OR = 2.876, 95% CI: 1.119-7.393), patients with diabetes (OR = 5.278, 95% CI: 1.388-20.064), patients with hyperlipidemia (OR = 2.594, 95% CI: 1.054-6.380), the polyps of right hemicolon (OR = 2.743, 95% CI: 1.003-7.504), rectal polyps (OR = 5.143, 95% CI: 1.728-7.504), pedunculated polyps (OR = 4.758, 95% CI: 1.322-17.129), adenomatous polyps (OR = 3.152, 95% CI: 1.018-9.757) were independent risk factors for postoperative bleeding in patients with colorectal polyps (P < .05). The findings suggest that for subpedunculated and pedunculated-raised polyps, EMR can be a suitable treatment approach. On the other hand, flat and superficial-raised polyps can be effectively managed with either EMR or APC. The presence of hypertension, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, polyps of the right hemicolon, rectal polyps, pedunculated polyps, and adenomatous polyps has been established as independent risk factors for postoperative bleeding in patients with colorectal polyps.

Is colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection safe and effective for 15-19-mm tumors?

PURPOSE

The outcomes of colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in 15-19-mm tumors are unclear. This study compared the effectiveness and safety of colorectal ESD for 15-19-mm tumors and tumors exceeding that size.

METHODS

From August 2018 to December 2020, 213 cases of colorectal tumors removed by colorectal ESD at a tertiary hospital were enrolled in this study. The cases were divided into two groups according to the pathologically measured size of the resected lesion: an intermediate group (15-19 mm, n = 62) and a large group (≥ 20 mm, n = 151). The en bloc resection rate, complete resection rate, and complications were investigated retrospectively.

RESULTS

The en bloc resection rate was significantly higher in the intermediate than large group (100% vs. 94%, p = 0.049), and the mean total procedure time was shorter in the intermediate than large group (29.2 [Formula: see text] 12.6 vs. 48.4 [Formula: see text] 28.8 min, p < 0.001). However, the mean procedure speed was significantly lower in the intermediate than large group (0.25 [Formula: see text] 0.10 vs. 0.28 [Formula: see text] 0.11 cm2/min, p = 0.031). The complete resection rate, post-procedural bleeding, and perforation rate were not significantly different between the two groups. In multivariate analyses, the total procedure time and mean procedure speed were significantly associated with lesion size.

CONCLUSION

Colorectal ESD of 15-19-mm lesions is effective, and has a shorter procedure time and higher en bloc resection rate than the same procedure for larger lesions.

Building the Toolbox of Devices to Optimize a Practice in Submucosal Endoscopy

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a technically complex and still evolving procedure. As a result, there are many advances in the technology and tools available to assist the endoscopist. This article delves into the various tools developed for ESD including electrosurgical knives, caps, injection agents, and traction devices. The authors discuss tools available as well as their respective pros, cons, and technical considerations for use. Overall, the choice of tools depends on a multitude of factors from availability, cost, lesion characteristics, and the endoscopist's familiarity and proficiency.