Endoscopic mucosal resection in the colon: A practical guide

Curriculum for training in endoscopic mucosal resection in the colon: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Position Statement

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is the standard of care for the complete removal of large (≥ 10 mm) nonpedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs). Increased detection of LNPCPs owing to screening colonoscopy, plus high observed rates of incomplete resection and need for surgery call for a standardized approach to training in EMR. 1 : Trainees in EMR should have achieved basic competence in diagnostic colonoscopy, < 10-mm polypectomy, pedunculated polypectomy, and common methods of gastrointestinal endoscopic hemostasis. The role of formal training courses is emphasized. Training may then commence in vivo under the direct supervision of a trainer. 2 : Endoscopy units training endoscopists in EMR should have specific processes in place to support and facilitate training. 3: A trained EMR practitioner should have mastered theoretical knowledge including how to assess an LNPCP for risk of submucosal invasion, how to interpret the potential difficulty of a particular EMR procedure, how to decide whether to remove a particular LNPCP en bloc or piecemeal, whether the risks of electrosurgical energy can be avoided for a particular LNPCP, the different devices required for EMR, management of adverse events, and interpretation of reports provided by histopathologists. 4: Trained EMR practitioners should be familiar with the patient consent process for EMR. 5: The development of endoscopic non-technical skills (ENTS) and team interaction are important for trainees in EMR. 6: Differences in recommended technique exist between EMR performed with and without electrosurgical energy. Common to both is a standardized technique based upon dynamic injection, controlled and precise snare placement, safety checks prior to the application of tissue transection (cold snare) or electrosurgical energy (hot snare), and interpretation of the post-EMR resection defect. 7: A trained EMR practitioner must be able to manage adverse events associated with EMR including intraprocedural bleeding and perforation, and post-procedural bleeding. Delayed perforation should be avoided by correct interpretation of the post-EMR defect and treatment of deep mural injury. 8: A trained EMR practitioner must be able to communicate EMR procedural findings to patients and provide them with a plan in case of adverse events after discharge and a follow-up plan. 9: A trained EMR practitioner must be able to detect and interrogate a post-endoscopic resection scar for residual or recurrent adenoma and apply treatment if necessary. 10: Prior to independent practice, a minimum of 30 EMR procedures should be performed, culminating in a trainer-guided assessment of competency using a validated assessment tool, taking account of procedural difficulty (e. g. using the SMSA polyp score). 11: Trained practitioners should log their key performance indicators (KPIs) of polypectomy during independent practice. A guide for target KPIs is provided in this document.

The Surface Morphology of Large Nonpedunculated Colonic Polyps Predicts Synchronous Large Lesions

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Large (≥20 mm) nonpedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs) may have synchronous LNPCPs in up to 18% of cases. The nature of this relationship has not been investigated. We aimed to examine the relationship between individual LNPCP characteristics and synchronous colonic LNPCPs.

METHODS

Consecutive patients referred for resection of LNPCPs over 130 months until March 2022 were enrolled. Serrated lesions and mixed granularity LNPCPs were excluded from analysis. Patients with multiple LNPCPs resected were identified, and the largest was labelled as dominant. The primary outcome was the identification of individual lesion characteristics associated with the presence of synchronous LNPCPs.

RESULTS

There were 3149 of 3381 patients (93.1%) who had a single LNPCP. In 232 (6.9%) a synchronous lesion was detected. Solitary lesions had a median size of 35 mm with a predominant Paris 0-IIa morphology (42.9%) and right colon location (59.5%). In patients with ≥2 LNPCPs, the dominant lesion had a median size of 40 mm, Paris 0-IIa (47.6%) morphology, and right colon location (65.9%). In this group, 35.8% of dominant LNPCPs were non-granular compared with 18.7% in the solitary LNPCP cohort. Non-granular (NG)-LNPCPs were more likely to demonstrate synchronous disease, with left colon NG-LNPCPs demonstrating greater risk (odds ratio, 4.78; 95% confidence interval, 2.95-7.73) than right colon NG-LNPCPs (odds ratio, 1.99; 95% confidence interval, 1.39-2.86).

CONCLUSIONS

We found that 6.9% of LNPCPs have synchronous disease, with NG-LNPCPs demonstrating a greater than 4-fold increased risk. With post-colonoscopy interval cancers exceeding 5%, endoscopists must be cognizant of an individual's LNPCP phenotype when examining the colon at both index procedure and surveillance.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov, NCT01368289; NCT02000141; NCT02198729.

Impact of including epinephrine in the submucosal injectate for colorectal EMR on postprocedural pain: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EMR is first-line therapy for colorectal laterally spreading lesions. Some colonoscopists include epinephrine in the submucosal injectate, which we observed increased postprocedure discomfort. Our aim was to determine whether inclusion of epinephrine in the submucosal injectate increases postprocedure pain after EMR.

METHODS

We performed a randomized, controlled, double-blind trial comparing epinephrine in submucosal injectate versus injectate alone for abdominal pain at 30 and 60 minutes after EMR.

RESULTS

Mean polyp diameter in both arms was >40 mm. There were no differences in procedure times or amounts of fluid injected. Mean pain was higher on a visual analog scale in the epinephrine group at 30 minutes (47 vs 14, P = .022) and at 60 minutes (44 vs 13, P = .035). Recovery room stay was longer in the epinephrine group (68 vs 53 minutes, P = .034).

CONCLUSIONS

Epinephrine in the submucosal injectate for EMR increases postprocedural pain, which could cause diagnostic confusion and prolong observation time in the recovery area. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT04065451.).

Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for Colonic Mucosal Neoplasia and Evaluation of Long-Term Recurrence: A Single-Center Experience of 500 Cases

OBJECTIVES

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is an alternative to surgery for the treatment of large laterally spreading lesions. Residual or recurrent adenoma is a major limitation. This study aimed to quantify early and late recurrences and to assess its associated risk factors.

METHODS

The study was a single-center, multiendoscopist, longitudinal study conducted between January 1, 2013 and April 26, 2017. A total of 480 patients with 500 polyps who underwent an endoscopic resection were included. Surveillance colonoscopy (SC) was performed at 4 to 6 months (SC1) and 16 to 18 months (SC2).

RESULTS

At SC1, early recurrence was noted in 77 of 354 (21.8%) lesions; 76 (98.7%) were treated endoscopically. The remaining 277 of 354 (78.2%) lesions had no recurrence at SC1; only 41 lesions (15%) were followed up at SC2. Recurrence at SC2 was found in 4 lesions (9.8%), all of which were treated endoscopically. Lesion size >40 mm was associated with recurrence. Recurrence at both SC1 and SC2 was successfully treated endoscopically in 78 of 81 lesions (96.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

EMR is an effective, minimally invasive technique for the treatment of large laterally spreading lesions. Although recurrence is a concern, its risk is low (21.8% on SC1 and 9.8% on SC2) and was managed endoscopically in 96.3% cases on follow-up endoscopy.

Clip placement to prevent delayed bleeding after colonic endoscopic mucosal resection (CLIPPER): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for large colorectal polyps is in most cases the preferred treatment to prevent progression to colorectal carcinoma. The most common complication after EMR is delayed bleeding, occurring in 7% overall and in approximately 10% of polyps ≥ 2 cm in the proximal colon. Previous research has suggested that prophylactic clipping of the mucosal defect after EMR may reduce the incidence of delayed bleeding in polyps with a high bleeding risk.

METHODS

The CLIPPER trial is a multicenter, parallel-group, single blinded, randomized controlled superiority study. A total of 356 patients undergoing EMR for large (≥ 2 cm) non-pedunculated polyps in the proximal colon will be included and randomized to the clip group or the control group. Prophylactic clipping will be performed in the intervention group to close the resection defect after the EMR with a distance of < 1 cm between the clips. Primary outcome is delayed bleeding within 30 days after EMR. Secondary outcomes are recurrent or residual polyps and clip artifacts during surveillance colonoscopy after 6 months, as well as cost-effectiveness of prophylactic clipping and severity of delayed bleeding.

DISCUSSION

The CLIPPER trial is a pragmatic study performed in the Netherlands and is powered to determine the real-time efficacy and cost-effectiveness of prophylactic clipping after EMR of proximal colon polyps ≥ 2 cm in the Netherlands. This study will also generate new data on the achievability of complete closure and the effects of clip placement on scar surveillance after EMR, in order to further promote the debate on the role of prophylactic clipping in everyday clinical practice.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03309683 . Registered on 13 October 2017. Start recruitment: 05 March 2018. Planned completion of recruitment: 31 August 2021.

Cold snare piecemeal EMR of large sessile colonic polyps ≥20 mm (with video)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Conventional EMR using a hot snare is the standard of care for resection of large (≥20 mm) nonmalignant sessile colonic polyps. Serious adverse events are predominantly because of electrocautery. This could potentially be avoided by cold snare piecemeal EMR (CSP-EMR). This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of CSP-EMR of sessile colonic polyps sized ≥20 mm.

METHODS

All cases of CSP-EMR at 5 Australian academic hospitals for sessile polyps ≥20 mm over a 2-year period, from January 2016 to December 2017, were identified retrospectively. Efficacy was defined as the absence of residual or recurrent polyp tissue during the first surveillance colonoscopy (SC1) and second surveillance colonoscopy (SC2). Clinically significant intraprocedural or delayed adverse events and surveillance colonoscopy findings were assessed by reviewing medical records.

RESULTS

CSP-EMR was performed on 204 polyps sized ≥20 mm in 186 patients (men, 33.8%; median age, 68 years). SC1 for 164 polyps (80.4%) at a median interval of 150 days showed residual or recurrent polyp in 9 cases (5.5%; 95% confidence interval, 3%-11%). SC2 for 113 polyps (72.9%) at a median interval of 18 months showed late residual or recurrent polyp in 4 cases (3.5%; 95% confidence interval, .9%-8.5%) after a normal SC1. Intraprocedural bleeding was successfully treated in 4 patients (2.2%), whereas 7 patients (3.8%) experienced self-limited clinically significant post-EMR bleeding and 1 patient (.5%) required overnight observation for nonspecific abdominal pain that resolved spontaneously. None experienced other adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

CSP-EMR of sessile colonic polyps ≥20 mm is technically feasible, effective, and safe. The adverse event rate and polyp recurrence rate were low. Randomized or large prospective trials are required to confirm the noninferiority and improved safety of CSP-EMR compared with conventional EMR and to further determine the polyp morphologies that are best suited for CSP-EMR.

Clinical validation of risk scoring systems to predict risk of delayed bleeding after EMR of large colorectal lesions

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The Endoscopic Resection Group of the Spanish Society of Endoscopy (GSEED-RE) model and the Australian Colonic Endoscopic Resection (ACER) model were proposed to predict delayed bleeding (DB) after EMR of large superficial colorectal lesions, but neither has been validated. We validated and updated these models.

METHODS

A multicenter cohort study was performed in patients with nonpedunculated lesions ≥20 mm removed by EMR. We assessed the discrimination and calibration of the GSEED-RE and ACER models. Difficulty performing EMR was subjectively categorized as low, medium, or high. We created a new model, including factors associated with DB in 3 cohort studies.

RESULTS

DB occurred in 45 of 1034 EMRs (4.5%); it was associated with proximal location (odds ratio [OR], 2.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.31-6.16), antiplatelet agents (OR, 2.51; 95% CI, .99-6.34) or anticoagulants (OR, 4.54; 95% CI, 2.14-9.63), difficulty of EMR (OR, 3.23; 95% CI, 1.41-7.40), and comorbidity (OR, 2.11; 95% CI, .99-4.47). The GSEED-RE and ACER models did not accurately predict DB. Re-estimation and recalibration yielded acceptable results (GSEED-RE area under the curve [AUC], .64 [95% CI, .54-.74]; ACER AUC, .65 [95% CI, .57-.73]). We used lesion size, proximal location, comorbidity, and antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy to generate a new model, the GSEED-RE2, which achieved higher AUC values (.69-.73; 95% CI, .59-.80) and exhibited lower susceptibility to changes among datasets.

CONCLUSIONS

The updated GSEED-RE and ACER models achieved acceptable prediction levels of DB. The GSEED-RE2 model may achieve better prediction results and could be used to guide the management of patients after validation by other external groups. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03050333.).

How to Perform Wide-Field Endoscopic Mucosal Resection and Follow-up Examinations

Wide-field endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is the primary management option for noninvasive laterally spreading colorectal lesions. It has been proved to be safe, highly effective, efficient, and cost-effective. Careful lesion interrogation before resection is essential because it provides essential information, including the risk of submucosal invasive disease. Adjuvant thermal ablation to the post-EMR defect margin has recently been shown to substantially reduce adenoma recurrence. Adenoma recurrence is predictable using the Sydney EMR Recurrence Tool. Adenoma recurrence can be accurately detected using standardized imaging of the post-EMR scar, and can be effectively treated.

Clips for managing perforation and bleeding after colorectal endoscopic mucosal resection

INTRODUCTION

The most commonly used treatment for advanced colorectal adenomas is endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). The increased number of EMRs since the introduction of the screening program for colorectal cancer has resulted in an increase in EMR-related complications. This review summarizes the current knowledge for the use of clips for the treatment and prevention of complications after EMR.

AREAS COVERED

The historical development of clips is summarized and their properties are evaluated. An overview is presented of the evidence for therapeutic and prophylactic clipping for bleeding or perforation after EMR in the colon. Several clipping techniques are discussed in relation to the efficacy of wound closure. Furthermore, new techniques that will likely influence the use of clips in the future endoscopic practice, such as endoscopic full-thickness resection (eFTR) are also highlighted.

EXPERT COMMENTARY

Most research focuses on prophylactic clipping for delayed bleeding after EMR of large adenomas. We advocate a distance of 0.5-1.0 cm between aligning clips. This focus may likely shift from bleeding to perforation. Here, endoscopic treatment with through-the-scope clips and large-diameter clips may well replace surgery. The future role of clips will also depend on the further development of new endoscopic technologies, such as eFTR.

Incidence and risk factors of advanced neoplasia after endoscopic mucosal resection of colonic laterally spreading lesions

PURPOSE

To investigate advanced neoplasia (AN) after endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of colonic laterally spreading lesions (LSLs).

METHODS

A retrospective study of patients who underwent injection-assisted EMR of colonic LSLs ≥ 10 mm was performed. Primary outcome was overall rate of AN at initial surveillance colonoscopy. Secondary outcomes were the rates of residual AN (rAN) at the EMR site and metachronous AN (mAN), and analysis of risk factors for AN, including effect of surveillance guidance.

RESULTS

Three hundred seventy-four patients underwent successful EMR for 388 LSLs. AN occurred in 66/374 (17.6%) patients on initial surveillance colonoscopy at median follow-up of 364.5 days. Two patients had both rAN and mAN, for a total of 68 instances of AN, including 30/374 (8.0%) cases of rAN and 38/374 (10.2%) cases of mAN. On multivariate analysis, use of piecemeal resection was associated with increased likelihood of residual AN (P = 0.003, OR 9.2, 95% CI 2.1-33.3). Twenty-nine out of thirty cases (96.7%) of rAN were successfully endoscopically managed at surveillance colonoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

AN occurred in 17.6% of all patients at initial surveillance colonoscopy at a median of 1 year after EMR. Roughly half of the instances of AN were metachronous lesions. Our data support a 1-year surveillance interval after EMR of LSLs ≥ 10 mm with careful inspection of the entire colon, not just the prior resection site.

EMR of laterally spreading lesions around or involving the appendiceal orifice: technique, risk factors for failure, and outcomes of a tertiary referral cohort (with video)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EMR of sessile periappendiceal laterally spreading lesions (PA-LSLs) is technically demanding because of poor endoscopic access to the appendiceal lumen and the thin colonic wall at the base of the cecum. We aimed to assess the feasibility and safety of EMR for PA-LSLs.

METHODS

Consecutive LSLs ≥20 mm and PA-LSLs ≥10 mm detected at 3 academic endoscopy centers from September 2008 until January 2017 were eligible. Prospective patient, procedural, and lesion data were collected. PA-LSLs were compared with LSLs in other colonic locations.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight PA-LSLs were compared with 1721 LSLs. Referral for surgery without an attempt at EMR was more likely with PA-LSLs (28.9% vs 5.1%, P < .001), and those that involved a greater percentage of the appendiceal orifice (AO) were less likely to be attempted (P = .038). Most PA-LSLs (10/11) were not attempted because of deep extension into the appendiceal lumen; 2 of 11 of these surgical specimens contained invasive cancer. Once attempted, complete clearance of visible adenoma (92.6% PA-LSLs vs 97.6% LSLs, P = .14), adverse events, and rates of adenoma recurrence did not vary significantly between PA-LSLs and LSLs. All 7 patients with prior appendicectomy achieved complete adenoma clearance. There were no cases of post-EMR appendicitis. Twenty of 22 PA-LSLs (91%) eligible for surveillance avoided surgery to longest follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

EMR is a safe, effective, and durable treatment for PA-LSLs when specific criteria are fulfilled. If the distal margin of the PA-LSL within the AO cannot be visualized or if more than 50% of the circumference of the orifice is involved, surgery should be considered. (Clinical trial registration number: NTC01368289.).

[Submucosal chromoendoscopy. A technique that highlights epithelia and differentiates histological components, and renders colon polypectomy easier and safer]

Submucosal chromoendoscopy involves the injection of a solution containing a vital stain, usually indigo carmine, into the intestinal wall submucosal layer. This allows to: Better delimit and characterize the various epithelia present (colonic mucosa, adenoma, hyperplastic polyp, serrated polyp, small bowel mucosa); expose and delimit lesion implantation areas; cooperate in the lifting of resectable lesions; ensure section across the submucosal plane; identify intestinal wall structures; render complex polypectomy feasible; and facilitate the identification of perforations.The present paper offers information on the endoscopic technique for submucosal injection, solution preparation and concentration, and on the potential benefits it may provide for polypectomy or endocopic mucosal resection whether en block or piecemeal. This endoscopic technique simultaneously combines a diagnostic and a therapeutic aspect, since lesion lifting in association with better delimited contours may improve not only accuracy but also endoscopic resection safety and feasibility.

Endoscopic mucosal resection of large and giant lateral spreading lesions of the duodenum: success, adverse events, and long-term outcomes

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Large sporadic duodenal adenomas are uncommon but they harbor malignant potential, which requires consideration of definitive treatment. EMR is gaining acceptance as an effective and safe alternative to high-risk surgical procedures, but data on long-term outcomes are limited. Herein we describe the short- and long-term outcomes of these lesions in a tertiary referral center.

METHODS

Prospectively collected data were analyzed to identify risk factors for adverse events and outcomes. Patient demographics, lesion characteristics, and procedural technical data were collected.

RESULTS

From 2007 to 2015, 106 adenomas ≥10 mm were resected (mean patient age, 69 years; 54% male; median size, 25 mm; interquartile range [IQR], 19-40). Complete endoscopic resection was achieved in 96%. Intraprocedural bleeding occurred in 43% of cases and was associated with lesion size (P < .001), number of resected specimens (P = .003), and longer procedures (P = .001). Delayed bleeding occurred in 15% (56% did not require active intervention) and was associated with lesion size (P = .03). Perforation occurred in 3 patients. The 30-day mortality was 0%. Median follow-up was 22 months (IQR, 7-45). Histologically proven adenoma recurrence was identified and treated in 12 of 83 patients (14.4%) on first surveillance endoscopy. For the 53 patients for whom follow-up ≥12 months was available (median follow-up, 36 months; IQR, 24-51), 48 patients (90.6%) were free of adenoma and considered cured.

CONCLUSIONS

In a tertiary referral center, endoscopic resection of duodenal adenomas is a safe and effective alternative to surgery. Lesion size is strongly associated with adverse events, particularly intraprocedural bleeding and delayed bleeding. Good long-term outcomes are demonstrated.

Prediction of Clinically Significant Bleeding Following Wide-Field Endoscopic Resection of Large Sessile and Laterally Spreading Colorectal Lesions: A Clinical Risk Score

OBJECTIVES

Clinically significant bleeding (CSPEB) is the most frequent adverse event following wide-field endoscopic mucosal resection (WF-EMR) of large sessile and laterally spreading colorectal lesions (LSL). There is limited knowledge regarding accurate prediction of CSPEB. We aimed to derive a score to predict the risk of CSPEB.

METHODS

Data on patient and lesion characteristics and outcomes from WF-EMRs of LSL ≥20 mm at 8 referral hospitals were analyzed. The cohort was divided at random into equal sized training and test groups. Independent predictors of CSPEB in the training cohort were identified by multiple logistic regression analysis and used to develop a risk score. The performance of this score was assessed in the independent test cohort.

RESULTS

Over 80 months to June 2015, 2,128 patients with 2,424 LSL were referred for WF-EMR. Two thousand and twelve patients were eligible for analysis. There were 135 cases of CSPEB (6.7%). In the training cohort of 1,006 patients, the independent predictors of CSPEB were lesion size >30 mm (odds ratio (OR) 2.5), proximal colonic location (OR 2.3), presence of a major comorbidity (OR 1.5), and epinephrine in injection solution (OR 0.57). The derived risk score comprised lesion size >30 mm (2 points), proximal colon (2 points), presence of major comorbidity (1 point), and absence of epinephrine use (1 point). The probabilities of CSPEB for scores of 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, and ≥5 in the training cohort were 1.5, 2.0, 5.6, 7.8, 9.1, and 17.5% and were 0.9, 6.7, 4.9, 6.2, 9.0, and 15.7% in the test cohort. The probabilities of CSPEB in those with low (score 0-1), medium (score 2-4), and elevated (score 5-6) risk levels were 1.7, 7.1, and 17.5% in the training cohort and 3.4, 6.2, and 15.7% in the test cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients at elevated risk of CSPEB can be identified using four readily available variables. This knowledge may improve the management of those undergoing WF-EMR and assist in designing studies evaluating CSPEB.

A Scoring System to Determine Risk of Delayed Bleeding After Endoscopic Mucosal Resection of Large Colorectal Lesions

BACKGROUND & AIMS

After endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of colorectal lesions, delayed bleeding is the most common serious complication, but there are no guidelines for its prevention. We aimed to identify risk factors associated with delayed bleeding that required medical attention after discharge until day 15 and develop a scoring system to identify patients at risk.

METHODS

We performed a prospective study of 1214 consecutive patients with nonpedunculated colorectal lesions 20 mm or larger treated by EMR (n = 1255) at 23 hospitals in Spain, from February 2013 through February 2015. Patients were examined 15 days after the procedure, and medical data were collected. We used the data to create a delayed bleeding scoring system, and assigned a weight to each risk factor based on the β parameter from multivariate logistic regression analysis. Patients were classified as being at low, average, or high risk for delayed bleeding.

RESULTS

Delayed bleeding occurred in 46 cases (3.7%, 95% confidence interval, 2.7%-4.9%). In multivariate analysis, factors associated with delayed bleeding included age ≥75 years (odds ratio [OR], 2.36; P < .01), American Society of Anesthesiologist classification scores of III or IV (OR, 1.90; P ≤ .05), aspirin use during EMR (OR, 3.16; P < .05), right-sided lesions (OR, 4.86; P < .01), lesion size ≥40 mm (OR, 1.91; P ≤ .05), and a mucosal gap not closed by hemoclips (OR, 3.63; P ≤ .01). We developed a risk scoring system based on these 6 variables that assigned patients to the low-risk (score, 0-3), average-risk (score, 4-7), or high-risk (score, 8-10) categories with a receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.77 (95% confidence interval, 0.70-0.83). In these groups, the probabilities of delayed bleeding were 0.6%, 5.5%, and 40%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of delayed bleeding after EMR of large colorectal lesions is 3.7%. We developed a risk scoring system based on 6 factors that determined the risk for delayed bleeding (receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.77). The factors most strongly associated with delayed bleeding were right-sided lesions, aspirin use, and mucosal defects not closed by hemoclips. Patients considered to be high risk (score, 8-10) had a 40% probability of delayed bleeding.

Clinical and endoscopic predictors of cytological dysplasia or cancer in a prospective multicentre study of large sessile serrated adenomas/polyps

OBJECTIVE

The serrated neoplasia pathway accounts for up to 30% of all sporadic colorectal cancers (CRCs). Sessile serrated adenomas/polyps (SSA/Ps) with cytological dysplasia (SSA/P-D) are a high-risk serrated CRC precursor with little existing data. We aimed to describe the clinical and endoscopic predictors of SSA/P-D and high grade dysplasia (HGD) or cancer.

DESIGN

Prospective multicentre data of SSA/Ps ≥20 mm referred for treatment by endoscopic mucosal resection (September 2008-July 2013) were analysed. Imaging and lesion assessment was standardised. Histological findings were correlated with clinical and endoscopic findings.

RESULTS

268 SSA/Ps were found in 207/1546 patients (13.4%). SSA/P-D comprised 32.4% of SSA/Ps ≥20 mm. Cancer occurred in 3.9%. On multivariable analysis, SSA/P-D was associated with increasing age (OR=1.69 per decade; 95% CI (1.19 to 2.40), p0.004) and increasing lesion size (OR=1.90 per 10 mm; 95% CI (1.30 to 2.78), p0.001), an 'adenomatous' pit pattern (Kudo III, IV or V) (OR=3.98; 95% CI (1.94 to 8.15), p<0.001) and any 0-Is component within a SSA/P (OR=3.10; 95% CI (1.19 to 8.12) p0.021). Conventional type dysplasia was more likely to exhibit an adenomatous pit pattern than serrated dysplasia. HGD or cancer was present in 7.2% and on multivariable analysis, was associated with increasing age (OR=2.0 per decade; 95% CI 1.13 to 3.56) p0.017) and any Paris 0-Is component (OR=10.2; 95% CI 3.18 to 32.4, p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Simple assessment tools allow endoscopists to predict SSA/P-D or HGD/cancer in SSA/Ps ≥20 mm. Correct prediction is limited by failure to recognise SSA/P-D which may mimic conventional adenoma. Understanding the concept of SSA/P-D and the pitfalls of SSA/P assessment may improve detection, recognition and resection and potentially reduce interval cancer.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT01368289.

The influence of clips on scars after EMR: clip artifact

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Laterally spreading lesions ≥20 mm are conventionally removed by EMR. Endoscopic clips are increasingly used to mitigate the risk of delayed bleeding. Clips may alter the endoscopic appearance of the scar after EMR, interfering with the assessment of adenoma recurrence. We aimed to evaluate this.

METHODS

Prospective, single-center data from the Australian Colonic Endoscopic resection study (January 2011-May 2015) were analyzed. Patients undergoing EMR of laterally spreading lesions with endoscopic clips used at the EMR defect were eligible. Data included patient and lesion characteristics and procedural, clinical, and histologic outcomes.

RESULTS

Clips were used in 111 of 885 lesions (12.5%). A total of 62 of 111 clipped lesions had standardized, high-definition, white light, and narrow-band images of the scars after EMR at first surveillance colonoscopy, and the patients were enrolled. Analysis of the images showed 4 situations: a bland scar (N = 27), residual adenoma (N = 6), mucosal elevation with normal pit pattern (N = 14), or granulation tissue related to the presence of residual clips (N = 15). The latter 2 entities were termed post-EMR scar clip artifact (ESCA). Overall, 29 of 62 previously clipped EMR sites (46.8%) had ESCA at a median follow-up of 5.2 months. Twenty scars had residual clips, and 15 of 20 (75.0%) showed ESCA (P = .002). Lesions clipped for prophylaxis of bleeding were more likely to show ESCA than those clipped for deep mural injury or intraprocedural bleeding (65.5% vs 41.7%; P = .006). ESCA was associated with female sex (P = .010) and greater age (P = .011).

CONCLUSIONS

ESCA is characterized by a nodular elevation of the mucosa with a normal pit pattern and can occur with or without residual clips. Prophylactic clip closure and the presence of residual clips are associated with ESCA. (

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT01368289.).

Clip closure of defect after endoscopic resection in patients with larger colorectal tumors decreased the adverse events

BACKGROUND

Clip closure of large colorectal mucosal defects may reduce the rate of adverse events in a cost-effective manner.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the adverse events and outcomes of clip closure of defects after endoscopic resection in patients with large colorectal tumors.

DESIGN

Prospective, randomized, controlled study.

SETTING

Single tertiary referral center.

PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS

Patients with lesions measuring 1 to 4 cm who were scheduled for endoscopic resection between March 2012 and December 2014 were randomly assigned to a clip-closure group and a no-closure group. In the clip-closure group, the defect of the resection site was completely closed with an endoclip. In the no-closure group, the defect was left open. The following primary outcome measures were assessed: delayed postoperative bleeding, postpolypectomy coagulation syndrome, perforation, and abdominal pain. Secondary outcome measures of length of hospital stay, time required for procedure, and patient's satisfaction were also assessed.

RESULTS

Patients and lesions had similar characteristics across both groups. For patients who underwent clip closure (n = 174), the rates of delayed postoperative bleeding (1.1% [2/174]) and postpolypectomy coagulation syndrome (0.6% [1/174]) were lower than those in the no-closure group (6.9% [12/174], P = .01 and 4.6% [8/174], P = .03). Two patients experienced perforation, 1 in each group. In the clip-closure group, 4 patients reported abdominal pain as opposed to 26 in the no-closure group (2.8% vs 16.7%, P < .01). The procedure took longer in the closure group (38.1 minutes vs 30.9 minutes, P = .04). The length of hospitalization was shorter in the closure group (3.1 days vs 4.7 days, P = .03). Total medical expense was similar between the 2 groups. Patients who underwent closure reported greater satisfaction.

LIMITATION

This was a single-center analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Clip closure of endoscopic resection defects in patients with large colorectal tumors decreased the rate of procedure-related adverse events and did not increase the cost of hospitalization.

Advanced polypectomy and resection techniques

Most colorectal cancer arises from adenomatous polyps. This gradual process may be interrupted by screening and treatment using colonoscopy and polypectomy. Advances in imaging platforms have led to classification systems that facilitate prediction of histologic type and both stratification for and prediction of the risk of invasion. Endoscopic treatment should be the standard of care even for extensive advanced mucosal neoplasm. Technique selection is influenced by lesion features, location, patient factors, and local expertise. Postprocedural complications are more common following advanced resection and endoscopists should be familiar with risk factors, early detection methods, and management.

Prophylactic endoscopic coagulation to prevent bleeding after wide-field endoscopic mucosal resection of large sessile colon polyps

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Clinically significant postendoscopic mucosal resection bleeding (CSPEB) is the most frequent significant complication of wide-field endoscopic mucosal resection (WF-EMR) of advanced mucosal neoplasia (sessile or laterally spreading colorectal lesions > 20 mm). CSPEB requires resource-intensive management and there is no strategy for preventing it. We investigated whether prophylactic endoscopic coagulation (PEC) reduces the incidence of CSPEB.

METHODS

We performed a prospective randomized controlled trial of 347 patients (mean age, 67.1 y; 55.3% with proximal colonic lesions) undergoing WF-EMR for advanced mucosal neoplasia at 3 Australian tertiary referral centers. Patients were assigned randomly (1:1) to groups receiving PEC (n = 172) or no additional therapy (n = 175, controls). PEC was performed with coagulating forceps, applying low-power coagulation to nonbleeding vessels in the resection defect. CSPEB was defined as bleeding requiring admission to the hospital. The primary end point was the proportion of CSPEB.

RESULTS

Patients in each group were similar at baseline. CSPEB occurred in 9 patients receiving PEC (5.2%) and 14 controls (8.0%; P = .30). CSPEB was associated significantly with proximal colonic location on multivariate analysis (odds ratio, 3.08; P = .03). Compared with the proximal colon, there was a significantly greater number (3.8 vs 2.1; P = .002) and mean size (0.5-1 vs 0.3-0.5 mm; P = .04) of visible vessels in the distal colon.

CONCLUSIONS

PEC does not significantly decrease the incidence of CSPEB after WF-EMR. There were significantly more and larger vessels in the WF-EMR mucosal defect of distal colonic lesions, yet CSPEB was more frequent with proximal colonic lesions. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01368731.

Long-term adenoma recurrence following wide-field endoscopic mucosal resection (WF-EMR) for advanced colonic mucosal neoplasia is infrequent: results and risk factors in 1000 cases from the Australian Colonic EMR (ACE) study

OBJECTIVE

Wide-field endoscopic mucosal resection (WF-EMR) is an alternative to surgery for treatment of advanced colonic mucosal neoplasia up to 120 mm in size, but has been criticised for its potentially high recurrence rates. We aimed to quantify recurrence at 4 months (early) and 16 months (late) following successful WF-EMR and identify its risk factors and clinical significance.

DESIGN

Ongoing multicentre, prospective, intention-to-treat analysis of sessile or laterally spreading colonic lesions ≥20 mm in size referred for WF-EMR to seven academic endoscopy units. Surveillance colonoscopy (SC) was performed 4 months (SC1) and 16 months (SC2) after WF-EMR, with photographic documentation and biopsy of the scar.

RESULTS

1134 consecutive patients were enrolled when 1000 successful EMRs were achieved, of whom 799 have undergone SC1. 670 were normal. Early recurrent/residual adenoma was present in 128 (16.0%, 95% CI 13.6% to 18.7%). One case was unknown. The recurrent/residual adenoma was diminutive in 71.7% of cases. On multivariable analysis, risk factors were lesion size >40 mm, use of argon plasma coagulation and intraprocedural bleeding. Of 670 with normal SC1, 426 have undergone SC2, with late recurrence present in 17 cases (4.0%, 95% CI 2.4% to 6.2%). Overall, recurrent/residual adenoma was successfully treated endoscopically in 135 of 145 cases (93.1%, 95% CI 88.1% to 96.4%). If the initial EMR was deemed successful and did not contain submucosal invasion requiring surgery, 98.1% (95% CI 96.6% to 99.0%) were adenoma-free and had avoided surgery at 16 months following EMR.

CONCLUSIONS

Following colonic WF-EMR, early recurrent/residual adenoma occurs in 16%, and is usually unifocal and diminutive. Risk factors were identified. Late recurrence occurs in 4%. Overall, recurrence was managed endoscopically in 93% of cases. Recurrence is not a significant clinical problem following WF-EMR, as with strict colonoscopic surveillance, it can be managed endoscopically with high success rates.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT01368289.

Management of malignant colon polyps: Current status and controversies

Colon cancer remains a significant clinical problem worldwide and in the United States it is the third most common cancer diagnosed in men and women. It is generally accepted that most malignant neoplasms of the colon arise from precursor adenomatous polyps. This stepwise progression of normal epithelium to carcinoma, often with intervening dysplasia, occurs as a result of multiple sequential, genetic mutations-some are inherited while others are acquired. Malignant polyps are defined by the presence of cancer cells invading through the muscularis mucosa into the underlying submucosa (T1). They can appear benign endoscopically but the presence of malignant invasion histologically poses a difficult and often controversial clinical scenario. Emphasis should be initially focused on the endoscopic assessment of these lesions. Suitable polyps should be resected en-bloc, if possible, to facilitate thorough evaluation by pathology. In these cases, proper attention must be given to the risks of residual cancer in the bowel wall or in the surrounding lymph nodes. If resection is not feasible endoscopically, then these patients should be referred for surgical resection. This review will discuss the important prognostic features of malignant polyps that will most profoundly affect this risk profile. Additionally, we will discuss effective strategies for their overall management.

Prospective study of acute complication rates and associated risk factors in endoscopic therapy for duodenal adenomas

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic therapy for duodenal adenomas is becoming increasingly important. However, only a few studies have been published on the topic, mainly with retrospective data.

METHODS

This prospective study was carried out to determine complication rates and associated risk factors during and after endoscopic therapy for duodenal adenomas. Between May 2011 and October 2012, 50 patients (with 61 duodenal adenomas) were included. Sixty-one duodenal adenomas were resected endoscopically. Complications (e.g., bleeding, pain, fever, pancreatitis, and perforation) were recorded. Associations between bleeding and other factors--sex, age, anticoagulation, location and size of adenomas, etiology, lesion morphology, resection type, and argon plasma coagulation (APC) for bleeding prophylaxis--were then investigated.

RESULTS

Bleeding was the main complication. Major bleeding occurred in four cases (6.5%) and minor bleeding in 11 (18%). One occult perforation also occurred. There was a statistically significant association between bleeding and the size of the adenoma (P = 0.012). APC for bleeding prophylaxis showed a promising trend, with an odds ratio of 0.31, reducing the bleeding risk by two-thirds in this study. However, due to the small number of six patients that received bleeding prophylaxis with APC therapy, this result was not statistically significant (P = 0.31).

CONCLUSIONS

Bleeding is the main complication in endoscopic therapy for duodenal adenomas. The bleeding risk increases significantly with adenoma size. Prophylactic APC seems to reduce the bleeding rate--however, because of the relatively small number of patients treated with APC, this partial result was not statistically relevant. Due to the relevant rate of complications, endoscopic resection of duodenal adenomas is only recommended in an in-patient setting.

A management algorithm based on delayed bleeding after wide-field endoscopic mucosal resection of large colonic lesions

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Bleeding is the main complication of wide-field endoscopic mucosal resection (WF-EMR) for large colonic lesions. Few studies have examined bleeding outcomes after WF-EMR, and there are no evidence-based guidelines for management of bleeding in this group. We analyzed outcomes of patients with clinically significant post-EMR bleeding (CSPEB) and present a management algorithm based on our findings.

METHODS

In a prospective study, we collected data from WF-EMR of sessile colorectal polyps 20 mm or larger from 1039 patients who participated in the Australian Colonic Endoscopic resection multicenter study from July 2008 through May 2012. Data included patient and lesion characteristics and procedural, clinical, and histologic outcomes. Patients participated in a structured telephone interview 14 days after the procedure; independent predictors of a moderate or severe outcome by American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopists criteria, or any intervention for hemostasis, were identified.

RESULTS

Sixty-two patients had CSPEB (6.0%); 34 were managed conservatively (55%) and 27 underwent colonoscopy (44%). One patient had primary embolization. Endoscopic therapy was applied in 21 cases; 14 had active bleeding. Two of the conservatively managed cases underwent colonoscopy for rebleeding after discharge. On multivariable analysis, moderate or severe bleeding events were associated with hemodynamic instability (odds ratio, 12.3; P = .046) and low level of hemoglobin at presentation (odds ratio, 0.50 per 1.0 g/dL; P = .005). Intervention for hemostasis was associated with hourly or more frequent hematochezia (odds ratio, 36.7; P = .001), American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 2 or higher (odds ratio, 20.1; P < .001), and transfusion (odds ratio, 18.7; P = .003).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on a multicenter prospective study, CSPEB resolves spontaneously in 55% of patients. We developed a risk factor-based algorithm that might assist physicians in the management of bleeding. Patients responding to initial resuscitation can be observed, with a lower threshold for intervention in those with the identified risk factors.

A prospective comparative study of blended and pure coagulation current in endoscopic mucosal resection of large sessile colorectal polyps

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to compare pure coagulation and blended current in the resection of large colorectal sessile polyps (SPs).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between January 2009 and June 2012, 84 patients (45 men, 39 women; median age 66 y; range, 42 to 88 y) with large colorectal SPs (diameter ≥2 cm) were randomized in 1:1 ratio to undergo treatment by the "lift and cut" piecemeal resection technique. A total of 43 blended current subjects (group A) were well matched to 41 pure coagulation current subjects (group B), with a median lesion size of 3.9 cm (group A, 3.7 vs. group B, 4.2 cm; P=0.316), respectively. The rate of complications, the factors that predict complications, and the recurrence of adenoma were analyzed.

RESULTS

Complete macroscopic resection was achieved in 39 patients (90.7%) of group A and in 36 patients (87.6%) of group B (P=0.735). Argon plasma coagulation at resection's margins was performed in 10 patients (23.2%) of group A and in 14 patients (34.1%) of group B (P=0.269). Eight patients (9.5%) [group A, n=3 patients (7.1%) vs. group B, n=5 patients (12%); P=0.756] developed immediate (4) or delayed (4) bleeding. Four patients with bleeding were under treatment with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. All bleedings were successfully treated conservatively or with endoclipping and heater probe application. Perforation occurred in 1 patient of each group and was managed by clips closure and antibiotics and right hemicolectomy, respectively. Postpolypectomy syndrome was observed in 2 patients (4.6%) of group A and 3 patients (7.3%) of group B (P=0.834). In 3 patients, the histopathologic analysis of resected SPs revealed invasive carcinoma, and surgical resection was performed in 1 patient. Two patients refused operation. Among the patients who underwent follow-up surveillance colonoscopy, a total recurrence rate of 25.67% of adenomas with no difference was observed between the 2 groups [group A, n=8 patients (21.6%) vs. group B, n=11 patients (31.4%); P=0.345]. Recurrence of adenoma was observed in 12 patients (16.22%) without and in 7 patients (9.46%) with argon plasma coagulation treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

No difference was found in the rate of complications between the 2 types of current used in the resection of large colorectal SPs. However, an influence of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors on postpolypectomy bleeding was observed, which deserves further investigation.

Risk factors for intraprocedural and clinically significant delayed bleeding after wide-field endoscopic mucosal resection of large colonic lesions

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Wide-field endoscopic mucosal resection (WF-EMR) of large sessile colonic polyps is a safe and cost-effective outpatient treatment. Bleeding is the main complication. Few studies have examined risk factors for bleeding during the procedure (intraprocedural bleeding [IPB]) or after it (clinically significant post-endoscopic bleeding [CSPEB]). We investigated factors associated with IPB and CSPEB in a large prospective study.

METHODS

We analyzed data from WF-EMRs of sessile colorectal polyps ≥ 20 mm in size (mean size, 35.5 mm), which were performed on 1172 patients (mean age, 67.8 years) from June 2008-March 2013 at 7 tertiary hospitals as part of the Australian Colonic Endoscopic Resection Study. Data were collected on characteristics of patients and lesions, along with outcomes of procedures and clinical and histologic analyses. Independent predictors of IPB and CSPEB were identified by multiple logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Of the patients studied, 133 (11.3%) had IPB. Independent predictors included increasing lesion size (odds ratio, 1.24/10 mm; P < .001), Paris endoscopic classification of 0-IIa + Is (odds ratio, 2.12; P = .004), tubulovillous or villous histology (odds ratio, 1.84; P = .007), and study institutions that performed the procedure on fewer than 75 patients (odds ratio, 3.78; P < .001). All IPB was successfully controlled endoscopically. IPB prolonged procedures and was associated with early recurrence (relative risk, 1.68; P = .011). Seventy-three patients (6.2%) had CSPEB. On multivariable analysis, CSPEB was associated with proximal colon location (odds ratio, 3.72; P < .001), use of an electrosurgical current not controlled by a microprocessor (odds ratio, 2.03; P = .038), and IPB (odds ratio, 2.16; P = .016). Lesion size and comorbidities did not predict CSPEB.

CONCLUSIONS

In a prospective study of patients undergoing WF-EMR of large sessile colonic polyps, IPB is associated with larger lesions, lesion histology, and Paris endoscopic classification of type 0-IIa + Is. IPB prolongs the duration of the procedure, is a marker for recurrence, and is associated with CSPEB. CSPEB occurs most frequently in the proximal colon and less when current is controlled by a microprocessor.

Advanced endoscopic resection in the colon: recent innovations, current limitations and future directions

The major health burden of colorectal cancer is reduced by colonoscopic polypectomy. The majority of polyps encountered are diminutive in size and easily removed; however, endoscopic removal of lesions >20 mm in size is also effective and safe. Techniques have progressed, advancing the boundaries of endoscopic therapy to include resection of circumferential lesions and selected submucosal invasive cancers. While there are cost and safety advantages over surgical management, specific limitations of endoscopic resection remain, chiefly bleeding, perforation and recurrence. Recent studies highlight the utility of risk stratification and demonstrate the effectiveness of endoscopic treatment of complications; however, strategies for prevention remain elusive. Prediction of submucosal invasive cancers through systematic assessment of lesion morphology and surface pattern is now established. Harnessing submucosal invasive cancer prediction and risk stratification allows a shift toward lesion-specific therapy, the next paradigm in the management of advanced colonic lesions.

Advanced mucosal neoplasia of the anorectal junction: endoscopic resection technique and outcomes (with videos)

BACKGROUND

EMR at the anorectal junction (ARJ) is technically challenging. Issues of safety and procedural efficacy dictate that surgery is still performed as the primary management for noninvasive lesions in most centers. Modifications to the standard EMR technique may help to address the unique features and achieve safe and curative resection of most lesions.

OBJECTIVE

To describe an effective and safe, modified EMR technique to remove advanced mucosal neoplasia (AMN) of the ARJ.

DESIGN

Prospective, observational cohort study.

SETTING

Academic, tertiary care referral center.

PATIENTS

Patients undergoing EMR for AMN at the ARJ over 4.5 years, from June 2008 to December 2012.

INTERVENTIONS

Use of long-acting local anesthetic in the submucosal injectate, endoscopic resection over the dentate line and hemorrhoidal columns, prophylactic antibiotics for resection of lesions at high risk for bacteremia, and cap and gastroscope-assisted resection.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Procedural success and safety.

RESULTS

Twenty-six patients with lesions involving the ARJ were referred for EMR (males 53.8%, median age 63, median lesion size 40 mm). Two patients went directly to surgery because of an endoscopic diagnosis of adenocarcinoma. EMR was performed in 24 lesions with complete adenoma clearance achieved in 100%. Four patients were admitted to the hospital. Focal adenoma recurrence was seen in 4 of 18 patients (22%) at first surveillance colonoscopy and was managed by snare diathermy resection. No recurrences were found at the second follow-up colonoscopy. Procedural success, adenoma recurrence, and admission rates were similar between EMRs performed at the ARJ and proximal rectum on univariate analysis (all P > .05).

LIMITATIONS

Single tertiary center, nonrandomized study.

CONCLUSIONS

Simple modifications to the EMR technique allow safe and effective treatment of AMN at the ARJ on an outpatient basis and should be the first-line management when the risk of invasive disease is low.

Abdominal pain post endoscopic mucosal resection: Treat the patient not the CT scan

An 85-year-old female, with hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer syndrome, underwent a colonoscopy and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of a 25-mm proximal ascending colon polyp (Paris classification 0-Is). Post-procedure, the patient developed abdominal pain in the right iliac fossa which settled 1 h later. An urgent computed tomography (CT) scan of her abdomen was organised which happened 6 h post onset of abdominal pain. She had radiological evidence of perforation on the CT scan but clinically remained well and was managed conservatively. The exact aetiology of this patient’s symptoms is not known. We suspect the radiological findings are probably due to a combination of injectate within the colonic wall and leakage of insufflated air or CO₂ following transmural passage of the EMR needle. As EMR is becoming an increasingly effective treatment modality in the management of large sessile polyps, clinicians need to be aware of potential complications of treatment. It is also important to recognise that radiological features of perforation can be seen post EMR in the absence of an EMR associated perforation.

Snare tip soft coagulation achieves effective and safe endoscopic hemostasis during wide-field endoscopic resection of large colonic lesions (with videos)

BACKGROUND

Wide-field EMR (WF-EMR) of large colonic lesions exposes submucosal vessels, which may result in intraprocedural bleeding (IPB). Ongoing bleeding may obscure the endoscopic field, prolonging the procedure and reducing safety and accuracy. A number of potential interventions to control bleeding exist; however, they have inherent limitations. Safe, readily applicable, inexpensive, and effective therapy to control EMR-IPB has not yet been described.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of the snare tip soft coagulation (STSC) technique to control IPB after WF-EMR of large colonic lesions.

DESIGN

Single-center, prospective cohort study.

SETTING

Tertiary care referral center.

PATIENTS

A total of 196 patients undergoing wide-field colonic EMR for flat and sessile lesions 20 mm or larger.

INTERVENTIONS

A standard inject-and-resect EMR technique was applied. IPB was defined as bleeding obscuring the endoscopic field that persisted for 60 seconds or longer. STSC was performed by using the tip of the polypectomy snare to apply soft coagulation (80 W) to sites of IPB.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Immediate hemostasis, postprocedural bleeding, and other adverse events.

RESULTS

A total of 198 lesions (mean size 41.5 mm, 64% in the right colon) were removed in 196 patients (mean age 68 years, 52.5% male). STSC alone achieved effective hemostasis in 40 of 44 cases of IPB (91%). In the remaining 4 cases, additional treatment with coagulating forceps or clips was required to achieve hemostasis. There were no immediate STSC-related adverse events. There was no statistically significant difference between the IPB and non-IPB groups in relation to the use of antiplatelet (P = .2) or anticoagulation agents (P = .4), postprocedural bleeding (P = .8) and adverse event rates (P = .7).

LIMITATIONS

Nonrandomized study.

CONCLUSIONS

STSC is a simple and efficient first-line technique for achieving hemostasis of IPB during WF-EMR in the colon. It succeeds in the majority of cases and appears to be safe.

Topical submucosal chromoendoscopy defines the level of resection in colonic EMR and may improve procedural safety (with video)

BACKGROUND

Blue dyes such as indigo carmine have become a frequent component of the submucosal injectate for EMR. Confirmation of the correct resection plane and assessment of the resection defect are facilitated by the selective staining of the submucosal layer. Nonstained areas are more difficult to evaluate and may contain inadvertent muscularis propria (MP) injury. The use of topical submucosal chromoendoscopy (TSC) may allow rapid and accurate assessment of these unstained areas and visual recognition of MP injury.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the utility of a novel technique in the assessment of nonstained areas within the post-EMR defect.

DESIGN

Single-center prospective cohort study.

SETTING

Academic, tertiary care referral center.

PATIENTS

A total of 143 patients undergoing wide-field colonic EMR for sessile lesions 20 mm or larger.

INTERVENTIONS

A standard inject-and-resect EMR technique was applied with indigo carmine blue dye in the injectate. Defects with areas of nonstaining were recorded and examined, and then irrigated with the submucosal injectate by using the blunt tip of the injection catheter.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Detection of additional cases of MP injury by using TSC.

RESULTS

A total of 147 EMRs were performed. Focal areas of defect nonstaining were seen in 25 of cases (17%), with no MP injury identified on initial examination. After TSC, 2 additional cases of MP injury were identified, and these were successfully managed endoscopically. Intraprocedural recognition of deep resection increased from 4 cases (2.8%) to 6 cases (4.1%), thereby avoiding potential delayed perforation in 2 patients.

LIMITATIONS

Single-center, nonrandomized study.

CONCLUSIONS

TSC is simple and effective and rapidly confirms the plane of resection and may improve detection of intraprocedural perforation.

Carbon dioxide insufflation reduces number of postprocedure admissions after endoscopic resection of large colonic lesions: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic resection (ER) for large colonic lesions is a safe and effective outpatient treatment. Postprocedural pain creates concern for perforation and often results in postprocedure admission (PPA). Carbon dioxide (CO(2)) insufflation has been shown to reduce pain scores after routine colonoscopy, but an influence on more critical outcomes such as PPA has not been shown.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the outcomes of patients undergoing ER for large colonic lesions, comparing those having air versus those having CO(2) insufflation.

DESIGN

Prospective, observational, cohort study.

SETTING

Academic, high-volume, tertiary-care referral center.

PATIENTS

Consecutive patients referred for ER of sessile colorectal polyps ≥20 mm.

INTERVENTION

ER with air or CO(2).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Rates of PPA, technical outcomes, complication rates.

RESULTS

ER was performed on 575 lesions ≥20 mm, 228 with CO(2) insufflation. Mean lesion size was 36.5 mm. Lesion and patient characteristics were similar in both groups. The use of CO(2) was associated with a 62% decrease in the PPA rate from 8.9% to 3.4% (P = .01). This was mainly because of an 82% decrease in PPA for pain from 5.7% to 1.0% (P = .006). There were no significant difference in the rates of complications. Multiple logistical regression was performed. The adjusted odds ratio (OR) of PPA (OR 0.39; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.16-0.95; P = .04) and PPA for pain (OR 0.18; 95% CI, 0.04-0.78; P = .02) in the CO(2) group remained significant.

LIMITATIONS

Single center, nonrandomized study.

CONCLUSION

CO(2) insufflation significantly reduces PPA after ER of large colonic lesions, primarily because of reduced PPA for pain. CO(2) insufflation should be routinely used during ER of large colonic lesions.

Wide field endoscopic resection for advanced colonic mucosal neoplasia: current status and future directions

Most colonic adenomas are ≤ 10 mm and are routinely treated by colonoscopic polypectomy with long-term health benefits. Nonpolypoid lesions ≥ 20 mm, whether sessile or flat and laterally spreading, are forms of advanced mucosal neoplasia that cannot be managed by conventional polypectomy and are often referred for surgery. However, the majority of these lesions when carefully assessed are found to be noninvasive and can be safely and effectively treated by advanced endoscopic techniques including endoscopic mucosal resection or endoscopic submucosal dissection with resultant cost, morbidity, and mortality benefits. Lesion assessment is a critical component. Enhanced imaging methods provide the opportunity for accurate pathological characterization, informing treatment decisions, without the need for previous histologic confirmation. Techniques of advanced endoscopic resection are still in evolution and further improvements, including hybrid techniques, bringing less technically challenging and shorter procedures with superior safety can be reasonably expected in the next decade. Safety is a fundamental consideration. Methods of early recognition of complications, risk stratification, and management pathways are being developed and refined. Standardization, validation, and adoption of these technological developments will improve endoscopic interpretation and therapy and in combination with an increased understanding of adenoma molecular biology, will result in a progressively more individualized lesion-specific endoscopic approach. The future of advanced endoscopic resection in the colon is promising, and the next few years should see the boundaries of endoscopic resection expand well beyond the limits of what we know today.

[Endoscopic submucosal dissection in our practice -- new possibilities in the endoscopic treatment of neoplastic changes in the alimentary canal]

Endoscopic submucosal dissection is a promising new endoscopic technique for en block resection of early, superficial, flat, and laterally spreading gastrointestinal neoplasms. The primary aims of this prospective study were to summarize the first Hungarian experience with endoscopic submucosal dissection, and to compare the experimental in vivo procedures in pigs with the human application of this technique in two academic centers.

METHODS

The ex vivo Erlangen pig model was used until initial competence was achieved. Thereafter 15 endoscopic submucosal dissection procedures were performed in up to 5 sessions in living pigs under general anesthesia. After submucosal injection with saline Fujinone ball tip, a Flush knife was used with a transparent hood for circumferential incision and submucosal dissection. The following variables were analyzed: specimen size, complete and en bloc resection rate, total duration of the procedure, and complications. Furthermore, between 2009 and 2012, 14 endoscopic submucosal dissections were carried out in humans; 1 duodenal, 3 gastric and 10 colorectal interventions were performed due to large laterally spreading intramucosal neoplasms. The specimen size, en bloc resection rate, total duration of the procedure and complications were next analyzed.

RESULTS

87% complete resection rate, 29.4 ± 19.5 cm2 specimen size and 136.2 ± 26.8 min of procedure duration were achieved in the live pig models. Nontransmural damages of the muscular layer occurred in 3/15 (20%) cases which were successfully closed with hemoclips, except in one pig that died due to fatal esophageal perforation. All bleedings were easily managed with hot biopsy forceps coagulation and hemoclips without hemodynamic instability. In humans, endoscopic submucosal dissection was accomplished with an 11/14 (79%) en block resection rate, with average resected specimen size of 11.56 ± 4.9 cm2 and with 157 ± 55 min of operating time. Two cases of bleeding and 2 cases of perforation occurred (14%), all of which were managed endoscopically. After 1.5 year of average follow up, local recurrence occurred in one case only. In addition, due to the 3 incomplete resections and unsuccessful endoscopic submucosal dissection, surgical intervention was required in 4 cases altogether.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates the first Hungarian experience with endoscopic submucosal dissection. Training in live pig models could help endoscopists to overcome the learning curve and minimize the risk of complications before starting the procedure in humans. Reduction in the resection time and low risk of complications, especially bleeding, could be achieved by the application of a flush knife.

Giant laterally spreading tumors of the duodenum: endoscopic resection outcomes, limitations, and caveats

BACKGROUND

Giant hemicircumferential and greater nonampullary duodenal adenomas or laterally spreading tumors (LSTs) may be amenable to safe endoscopic resection, but little data exists on outcomes or risk stratification.

DESIGN

We interrogated a prospectively maintained database of all patients who underwent endoscopic resection between January 2008 and November 2010. The resection technique was standardized. Major complications were defined as perforation, bleeding requiring readmission with hemoglobin drop of more than 20 g/L, or other substantial deviations from the usual clinical course. Outcomes were analyzed in 2 groups: giant lesions (>30 mm) and conventional duodenal polyps (<30 mm in diameter). Statistical evaluation was performed by using a χ(2) test.

RESULTS

A total of 50 nonampullary duodenal polyps and LSTs were resected from 46 patients (23 men, mean age 59.4 years, range 35-83 years). Nineteen were giant hemicircumferential and greater LSTs (mean size 40.5 mm, range 30-80 mm), and 31 were less than 30 mm in diameter (mean size 14.5 mm, range 5-25 mm). Intraprocedural bleeding occurred more frequently in giant lesions (57.8% vs 19.3%, P = .005) and was treated with a combination of soft coagulation and endoscopic clips with hemostasis achieved in all cases. Major complications, mostly bleeding related, occurred in 5 patients (26.3%) with giant lesions and 1 patient (3.2%) with a smaller lesion (P = .014). There were no deaths.

LIMITATION

Retrospective observational study in a tertiary center.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic resection of giant nonampullary duodenal LSTs is a successful treatment. However, it is hazardous and associated with significantly higher complication rates, primarily bleeding, when compared with conventional duodenal polypectomy. Safer and more effective hemostatic tools are required in this high-risk location.

Endoscopic mucosal resection outcomes and prediction of submucosal cancer from advanced colonic mucosal neoplasia

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Large sessile colonic polyps usually are managed surgically, with significant morbidity and potential mortality. There have been few prospective, intention-to-treat, multicenter studies of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). We investigated whether endoscopic criteria can predict invasive disease and direct the optimal treatment strategy.

METHODS

The Australian Colonic Endoscopic (ACE) resection study group conducted a prospective, multicenter, observational study of all patients referred for EMR of sessile colorectal polyps that were 20 mm or greater in size (n=479, mean age, 68.5 y; mean lesion size, 35.6 mm). We analyzed data on lesion characteristics and procedural, clinical, and histologic outcomes. Multiple logistic regression analysis identified independent predictors of EMR efficacy and recurrence of adenoma, based on findings from follow-up colonoscopy examinations.

RESULTS

Risk factors for submucosal invasion were as follows: Paris classification 0-IIa+c morphology, nongranular surface, and Kudo pit pattern type V. The most commonly observed lesion (0-IIa granular) had a low rate of submucosal invasion (1.4%). EMR was effective at completely removing the polyp in a single session in 89.2% of patients; risk factors for lack of efficacy included a prior attempt at EMR (odds ratio [OR], 3.8; 95% confidence interval, 1.77-7.94; P=.001) and ileocecal valve involvement (OR, 3.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.20-9.52; P=.021). Independent predictors of recurrence after effective EMR were lesion size greater than 40 mm (OR, 4.37; 95% confidence interval, 2.43-7.88; P<.001) and use of argon plasma coagulation (OR, 3.51; 95% confidence interval, 1.69-7.27; P=.0017). There were no deaths from EMR; 83.7% of patients avoided surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Large sessile colonic polyps can be managed safely and effectively by endoscopy. Endoscopic assessment identifies lesions at increased risk of containing submucosal cancer. The first EMR is an important determinant of patient outcome-a previous attempt is a significant risk factor for lack of efficacy.