Endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection for large esophageal neoplastic lesions

Two traction methods that can facilitate esophageal endoscopic submucosal dissection

Different traction devices that can provide a visual field and attain appropriate tension at the dissection plane during endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) have been developed. Clip-with-line (CWL) is a classic traction device that can offer per-oral traction toward the direction where the line is drawn. A multicenter randomized controlled trial (CONNECT-E trial) comparing the conventional ESD and CWL-assisted ESD (CWL-ESD) for large esophageal tumors was conducted in Japan. This study showed that CWL-ESD was associated with a shorter procedure time (defined as the time from initiating submucosal injection to completing tumor removal) without increasing the risk of adverse events. Multivariate analysis revealed that whole-circumferential lesion and abdominal esophageal lesion were independent risk factors for technical difficulties, which were defined as a procedure time of > 120 min, perforation, piecemeal resection, inadvertent incision (any accidental incision caused by the electrosurgical knife within the marked area), or handover to another operator. Therefore, techniques other than CWL should be considered for these lesions. Several studies have shown the usefulness of endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD) for such lesions. A randomized controlled trial conducted at five Chinese institutions showed that compared with the conventional ESD, ESTD had a significantly reduced median procedure time for lesions covering ≥ 1/2 of the esophageal circumference. In addition, a propensity score matching analysis conducted at a single Chinese institution showed that compared with the conventional ESD, ESTD had a shorter mean resection time for lesions at the esophagogastric junction. With the appropriate use of CWL-ESD and ESTD, esophageal ESD can be performed more efficiently and safely. Moreover, the combination of these two methods may be effective.

High proficiency of esophageal endoscopic submucosal dissection with a "tunnel + clip traction" strategy: a large French multicentric study

BACKGROUND

Esophageal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is the gold standard for the treatment of precancerous lesions or superficial esophageal cancers. This procedure is currently performed by expert endoscopists only, and poorly standardized. We aimed to assess the technical results and outcomes of a "tunnel + clip" strategy for esophageal ESD procedures performed by less experienced operators for the treatment of superficial neoplasms.

METHODS

All consecutive esophageal ESDs performed with the "tunnel + clip" technique for patients with early esophageal cancer in 3 centers were enrolled. Procedural characteristics, clinical outcomes, and complications were recorded.

RESULTS

Among 195 esophageal ESD procedures performed, early adenocarcinomas or high-grade dysplasia complicating Barrett's esophagus were predominant (132/195, 67.7%) compared with early squamous cell carcinomas (63/195, 32.3%). The en bloc, R0 and curative resection rates were 100% (195/195), 78.5% (153/195) and 67.2% (131/195), respectively. The mean rate of ESD was 29.7 mm²/min. One (0.5%) perprocedural perforation and 7 (3.6%) postprocedural bleedings occurred, all managed endoscopically. No delayed perforation occurred. Overall, 31 patients (31/195; 15.9%) of patients developed stenosis.

CONCLUSIONS

The "tunnel + clip" strategy is safe, and allows to achieve high en bloc, R0 and curative resection rates. This standardized procedure could be used by physicians with little experience and might help spreading esophageal ESD in Western countries.

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.

Whole circumferential endoscopic submucosal dissection of superficial adenocarcinoma in long-segment Barrett's esophagus: A case report

BACKGROUND

Esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) derived from long-segment Barrett’s esophagus (LSBE) is extremely rare in Asia. LSBE-related EAC is often difficult to diagnose in the horizontal extent. If the tumor has spread throughout the LSBE, whole circumferential endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) should be performed, which is difficult to complete safely. Additionally, whole circumferential ESD can bring refractory postoperative stenosis. We hereby report a case of EAC involving the whole circumference of the LSBE, achieving complete endoscopic removal without complications.

CASE SUMMARY

An 85-year-old man with the chief complaint of dysphagia underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy. We suspected a flat-type cancerous lesion that extended the whole circumference of the LSBE (C 3.5, M 4.0) using narrow-band imaging magnification endoscopy (NBI-M). We achieved circumferential en bloc resection of the lesion safely with special ESD techniques. Histology of the ESD specimens demonstrated that the superficial EAC extended the whole circumference of the LSBE, and papillary or well-differentiated tubular adenocarcinoma was confined in the lamina propria mucosa showing a vertical negative margin. To prevent post-ESD stenosis, we performed endoscopic local injection of steroids, followed by oral administration of steroids. There was no evidence of esophageal refractory stenosis or tumor recurrence 30 mo after ESD. In summary, we experienced a rare case of LSBE-related EAC. The horizontal tumor extent was accurately diagnosed by NBI-M. Additionally, we achieve whole circumferential ESD safely without postoperative refractory stenosis.

CONCLUSION

NBI-M, ESD, and steroid therapy enabled the curative resection of superficial full circumferential LSBE-related EAC without refractory postoperative stenosis.

Endoscopic Submucosal Tunnel Dissection as a Novel Therapeutic Technique in Patients With Barrett's Esophagus

With the ameliorated resectability prowess of endoscopic techniques, a myriad of diseases previously treated by major ablative surgeries are now endoscopically curable. Endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD) is a relatively new technique that has diversified endoscopic application. Although ESTD has frequently been used for the resection of esophageal neoplastic lesions, the clinical evidence pertaining to its efficacy in the treatment of circumferential Barrett’s esophagus remains sparse. In this study, we evaluated ESTD as a potential therapeutic technique in patients with Barrett’s esophagus-related high-grade dysplasia. The tunneling strategy helped achieve complete en bloc resection at an increased dissection speed, without any procedural complications. This article illustrates that ESTD can be a feasible, safe, and effective treatment for dysplastic Barrett’s esophagus. Future research should aim to stratify the potential risks and complications associated with this optimization of endoscopic submucosal dissection in patients with superficial esophageal lesions.

Efficacy of endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection versus endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial esophageal neoplastic lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the effectiveness of endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in superficial esophageal neoplastic lesions (SENL).

METHODS

A comprehensive search for studies investigating the efficacy of ESTD and ESD for SENL was conducted to search for relevant studies through PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, SinoMed, CNKI, and Wanfang. Weighted pooled rates were calculated for en bloc resection rate, R0 resection rate, operation time, dissection area, dissection speed, and adverse events. The 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) for effect size were used to calculate the pooled value using the fixed- or random-effects model.

RESULTS

A total of seventeen studies with 1161 patients were identified and included in the meta-analysis. The pooled analysis showed that ESTD had significantly higher en bloc resection (OR 3.98; 95% CI 1.74 to 9.12; p = 0.001) and R0 resection rates (OR 2.29; 95% CI 1.54 to 3.46; p < 0.001) than ESD. The operation time in the ESTD group was shorter than that in the ESD group (SMD = - 0.57; 95% CI - 0.95 to - 0.19; p = 0.003). The dissection area of the ESTD group was larger than that in the ESD group (SMD = 0.49; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.83; p = 0.004), and the dissection speed is faster than that in the ESD group (SMD = 1.52; 95%CI 1.09 to 0.83; p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in esophageal stenosis (p = 0.94) between the two techniques. However, ESTD was superior to ESD in other adverse events (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

ESTD has a significant advantage over ESD in the treatment of SENL. ESTD has significantly higher en bloc and R0 resection rates and reduced adverse events.

Endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection versus conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancers: outcomes of 799 consecutive cases in a single institution

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a standard treatment for early gastric cancers (EGCs), but because of the obscured view and difficulty in submucosal lifting it is time consuming and poses high risk of perforation and bleeding in large lesions. In endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD) technique, good visualization of the submucosal layer can be achieved in the tunnel, it is, therefore, easy to discern the muscularis propria and visualize the vessels in the submucosal area. This study aims to evaluate the technical feasibility, efficacy, and safety of ESTD in comparison with conventional ESD (cESD) technique for treatment of EGCs.

METHODS

This is a single-center retrospective study of 799 consecutive patients with EGCs who underwent ESD. ESTD (n = 141) were performed between 2015 and 2018 and cESD (n = 658) were performed between 2003 and 2015. Using propensity scores to strictly balance the significant variables, we compared treatment outcomes.

RESULTS

After matching, we enrolled 444 patients (n = 111 in ESTD group, n = 333 in cESD group). The resection speeds for lesions of the ESTD were faster than those of cESD (19.3 mm²/min versus 17.7 mm²/min, P = 0.009). There was no need to use additional countertraction by clip-with-line technique or snare for the submucosal dissection in the ESTD procedure. The incidence of perforation was significantly higher in the cESD group (6.0%) than in the ESTD group (0.9%) (P = 0.035). Among 799 patients, four patients who received non-curative ESD had recurrence of gastric cancer.

CONCLUSION

ESTD technique is a safe and feasible treatment procedure for EGCs. It presents many theoretical advantages and may have definite benefits over cESD. ESTD may, therefore, be considered as the standard endoscopic treatment for EGCs.

The outcomes of modified endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection for the treatment of rectal neuroendocrine tumors and the value of endoscopic morphology classification in endoscopic resection

BACKGROUND

To compare the outcomes of modified endoscopic mucosal resection (m-EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) and evaluate the value of endoscopic morphology classification in endoscopic resection (ER).

METHODS

Patients with rectal NET diameters less than 2 cm who were treated between April 2007 and January 2019 were enrolled. The endoscopic morphology of rectal NETs was classified based on the endoscopic views. Patients who underwent ESD and m-EMR were compared. Baseline characteristics as well as en bloc resection, complete resection, the procedure time, adverse events and the risk factors associated with incomplete resection were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 429 patients with 449 rectal NETs were enrolled for the classification of endoscopic morphology and were classified into four types (Ia, IIb, II, and III). There were 79 patients in the m-EMR group and 259 patients in the ESD group before matching. Propensity score matching created 77 pairs between the two groups that were well balanced. The mean procedure time was significantly shorter for m-EMR than for ESD (9.1 ± 4.4 min vs 16.0 ± 7.9 min, P = 0.000). The rates of en bloc resection (98.7% vs 100%; P = 1.000), complete resection (90.9% vs 93.5%, P = 0.548) and adverse events (2.6% vs 2.6%, P = 1.000) were similar between the two groups. Univariate and multivariate analyses showed that histopathological grade and endoscopic morphology were associated with incomplete resection.

CONCLUSION

Both ESD and m-EMR are effective and safe for the treatment of rectal NETs. Endoscopic morphology should be considered along with histopathological grade for ER.

Efficacy and safety of hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection compared with endoscopic submucosal dissection for rectal neuroendocrine tumors and risk factors associated with incomplete endoscopic resection

Background

Neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are rising in prevalence, particularly with the rectal area. This study evaluated and compared the safety and effectiveness of hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) with those of ESD for rectal NETs and risk factors associated with incomplete endoscopic resection.

Methods

A total of 272 consecutive patients who underwent ESD or hybrid ESD for rectal NETs at the Chinese PLA General Hospital in the period from February 2011 to September 2018 were involved in this study. Data were collected from clinical and endoscopic databases. The procedure time, en bloc resection, complete resection, complication, and recurrence rates were evaluated.

Results

In the hybrid ESD group were 111 patients (who had 119 lesions between them), with a further 161 patients (164 lesions) in the ESD group. No significance was found in baseline characteristics between the two groups. Hybrid ESD had a significantly shorter mean procedure time than ESD (13.2±8.3 vs. 18.1±9.7 min, P=0.000). Hybrid ESD showed similar en bloc resection (99.2% vs. 98.2%; P=0.373), complete resection (94.1% vs. 90.9%, P=0.641), and postprocedural bleeding (2.5% vs. 0.6%, P=0.313) rates to ESD. Univariate and multivariate analysis showed that higher histopathological grade was associated with incomplete resection.

Conclusions

For rectal NET, both ESD and hybrid ESD are effective and safe forms of treatment. Hybrid ESD provides an alternative option in the treatment of rectal NETs. Further developments are needed to improve the complete resection rate, especially concerning tumors with higher histopathological grade.

Efficacy and safety of endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection for superficial esophageal neoplastic lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Presently, endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD) has been a novel therapy for superficial esophageal neoplastic lesions (SENL), especially for circumferential neoplastic lesions. A number of studies have reported the clinical application of ESTD with promising outcomes. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluated the efficacy and safety of ESTD for SENL .

Methods

From 2013 to November 2018, Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane databases were searched to determine studies reporting ESTD treatment of SENL. Weighted pooled rates (WPR) were calculated for en bloc resection, R0 resection and complication of ESTD. Risk ratios (RR) were calculated and pooled to compare the clinical outcomes of ESTD with ESD for SENL.

Results

A total of 9 studies involving 494 patients with 518 esophageal neoplastic lesions were included in our study. WPR for en bloc resection and R0 resection of ESTD was 97.0% (95% CI: 94.7–98.3%) and 84.1% (95% CI: 80.5–87.1%), respectively. WPR for complication was 40.0% (95% CI: 25.8–56.1%). Two studies with 265 patients compared the performance of ESTD with ESD. Pooled RR for en bloc resection and R0 resection was 1.04 (95% CI: 0.95–1.14, P = 0.42) and 1.01 (95% CI: 0.93–1.10, P = 0.73), respectively. Pooled RR for complication was 0.68 (95% CI: 0.46–1.01, P = 0.05).

Conclusion

Our study showed that ESTD is effective for treating SENL with high en bloc resection rate and R0 resection rate, but accompanying by a relatively high complications.

Clinical outcomes of endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection compared with conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is the standard treatment for superficial esophageal cancer. However, it has limitations in case of large superficial esophageal squamous cell neoplasms (SESCNs), in which submucosal injection cannot attain satisfactory lifting effects. Thus, endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD) was introduced as a new treatment for SESCNs presenting satisfying results. Many studies have tried to verify the efficacy of ESTD, yet no meta-analysis has been published until now.

Methods

We searched the databases of PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, SinoMed, Wanfang, and CNKI dating up to February 1, 2019. Studies comparing the clinical outcomes of ESTD and ESD for superficial esophageal cancers were enrolled. The Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale was used to evaluate the quality of these studies. Eight articles were included that involved a total of 625 superficial esophageal cancer patients.

Results

Our analysis revealed that ESTD is superior to ESD as it has higher en bloc resection rate, shorter operation time, and lower recurrence rate 1 year after operation. The R0 resection rate and postoperative adverse event rate of ESTD group is comparable with ESD group.

Conclusions

Our study implicates that ESTD is a potentially superior treatment to ESD for superficial esophageal cancer.

Endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection for superficial esophageal neoplastic lesions: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The emerging endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD) is becoming an alternative method for superficial esophageal neoplastic lesions. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and feasibility of ESTD for superficial esophageal neoplastic lesions.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature review was conducted to search relevant studies through PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science before 1 December 2018. Studies relating to ESTD for superficial esophageal neoplastic lesions were included. Rates of effectiveness (en bloc resection rate, R0 resection rate, and curative resection rate), rates of feasibility (muscular damage rate, perforation rate, postprocedural bleeding rate, and emphysema rate), and rates of follow-up (recurrence rate and stricture rate) were pooled and analyzed. Forest plots were constructed based on the random-effects model. Sensitivity analyses were also performed if significant heterogeneity existed.

RESULTS

Six studies including 414 patients and 436 superficial esophageal neoplastic lesions that underwent ESTD were available for analysis. The pooled estimates of en bloc resection rate, R0 resection rate, and curative resection rate were 98% (95% CI 95.8-99.0%), 87.0% (95% CI 78.2-92.5%), and 87.6% (95% CI 67.4-96.0%), respectively. The pooled outcomes of muscular damage rate, perforation rate, postprocedural bleeding rate and emphysema rate were 19.1% (95% CI 9.8-33.8%), 2.2% (95% CI 1.1-4.1%), 1.6% (95% CI 0.7-3.5%), and 12.2% (95% CI 4.3-29.9%), respectively. Finally, the pooled results of recurrence and stricture were 4.7% (0.9-20.5%) and 20.9% (11.3-35.2%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

ESTD appears to be an effective and feasible approach for treating superficial esophageal neoplastic lesions. However, future research is needed for new and comprehensive methods to decrease the stricture rate after ESTD.

Strategies to prevent stricture after esophageal endoscopic submucosal dissection

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been widely applied as a less invasive and more effective method for treating early esophageal cancers such as squamous cell carcinoma and dysplasia of Barrett's esophagus. However, post-ESD esophageal stricture often occurs if patients suffer circumferential mucosal defects of more than three-quarters of the circumference of the esophagus, which makes it difficult for patients to swallow and greatly reduces their quality of life. Moreover, there is currently no standard method to treat post-ESD esophageal stricture, even though it is extraordinarily important to prevent its formation. In recent years, several strategies to prevent esophageal stricture have emerged. These strategies can be classified into pharmacological, mechanical, tissue engineering, and other novel strategies, with each strategy having its own strengths and weaknesses. Although the pharmacological prophylaxis and mechanical strategies are relatively mature, they still have their drawbacks like high time-consumption, the occurrence of re-stricture, and significant side effects. Tissue engineering strategies and other novel strategies have shown promising preliminary results, but more clinical trials are needed. In this review, we discuss these strategies, with a particular focus on tissue engineering strategies and other novel strategies. It is hoped that this discussion will aid in finding more effective and safer strategies to prevent esophageal stricture.

Endoscopic Submucosal Single- or Multi-tunnel Dissection for Near-Circumferential and Circumferential Superficial Esophageal Neoplastic Lesions

This study reports the outcomes of endoscopic submucosal single-tunnel dissection or endoscopic submucosal multi-tunnel dissection for the treatment of esophageal neoplastic lesions of at least three-quarters of the esophageal circumference, including circumferential superficial esophageal neoplastic lesions. From July 2014 to February 2018, a total of 124 lesions underwent endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection at our hospital. One to four submucosal tunnels were created in the oral to anal direction. Of the 124 lesions, there were 83 noncomplete circumferential lesions and 41 circumferential lesions. Endoscopic submucosal single-tunnel dissection was performed in 54 patients, two-tunnel dissection in 43 patients, three-tunnel dissection in 19 patients, and four-tunnel dissection in 8 patients. The mean dissection speed was 22.8 ± 12.7 mm²/min. En bloc dissection was achieved in all lesions, and the R0 resection rate was 70.2 percent. No matter how large the lesion area was, there were no significant differences in the dissection speed and the R0 resection rate when lesions were at least three-quarters of the esophageal circumference. Esophageal stricture was observed in 54 patients and was relieved by placement of a retrievable metal stent or by endoscopic water balloon dilation. No recurrence was noted after 19.1 ± 12.4 months of follow-up. Our large sample size study showed that endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection showed effectiveness and safety for the treatment of large superficial esophageal neoplastic lesions at least three-quarters of the esophageal circumference, including circumferential superficial esophageal neoplastic lesions.

Consensus on the digestive endoscopic tunnel technique

With the digestive endoscopic tunnel technique (DETT), many diseases that previously would have been treated by surgery are now endoscopically curable by establishing a submucosal tunnel between the mucosa and muscularis propria (MP). Through the tunnel, endoscopic diagnosis or treatment is performed for lesions in the mucosa, in the MP, and even outside the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. At present, the tunnel technique application range covers the following: (1) Treatment of lesions originating from the mucosal layer, e.g., endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection for oesophageal large or circular early-stage cancer or precancerosis; (2) treatment of lesions from the MP layer, per-oral endoscopic myotomy, submucosal tunnelling endoscopic resection, etc.; and (3) diagnosis and treatment of lesions outside the GI tract, such as resection of lymph nodes and benign tumour excision in the mediastinum or abdominal cavity. With the increasing number of DETTs performed worldwide, endoscopic tunnel therapeutics, which is based on DETT, has been gradually developed and optimized. However, there is not yet an expert consensus on DETT to regulate its indications, contraindications, surgical procedure, and postoperative treatment. The International DETT Alliance signed up this consensus to standardize the procedures of DETT. In this consensus, we describe the definition, mechanism, and significance of DETT, prevention of infection and concepts of DETT-associated complications, methods to establish a submucosal tunnel, and application of DETT for lesions in the mucosa, in the MP and outside the GI tract (indications and contraindications, procedures, pre- and postoperative treatments, effectiveness, complications and treatments, and a comparison between DETT and other operations).

Efficacy and safety of endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection for superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and precancerous lesions

AIM

To evaluate the clinical outcomes of patients who underwent endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD) for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) and precancerous lesions.

METHODS

ESTD was performed in 289 patients. The clinical outcomes of the patients and pathological features of the lesions were retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS

A total of 311 lesions were included in the analysis. The en bloc rate, complete resection rate, and curative resection rate were 99.04%, 81.28%, and 78.46%, respectively. The ESTD procedure time was 102.4 ± 35.1 min, the mean hospitalization time was 10.3 ± 2.8 d, and the average expenditure was 3766.5 ± 846.5 dollars. The intraoperative bleeding rate was 6.43%, the postoperative bleeding rate was 1.61%, the perforation rate was 1.93%, and the postoperative infection rate was 9.65%. Esophageal stricture and positive margin were severe adverse events, with an incidence rate of 14.79% and 15.76%, respectively. No tumor recurrence occurred during the follow-up period.

CONCLUSION

ESTD for ESCC and precancerous lesions is feasible and relatively safe, but for large mucosal lesions, the rate of esophageal stricture and positive margin is high.

Endoscopic Submucosal Tunnel Dissection for Large Gastric Neoplastic Lesions: A Case-Matched Controlled Study

Aim

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD) for resection of large superficial gastric lesions (SGLs).

Methods

The clinicopathological records of patients performed with ESTD or endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for SGLs between January 2012 and January 2014 were retrospectively reviewed. 7 cases undergoing ESTD were enrolled to form the ESTD group. The cases were individually matched at a 1 : 1 ratio to other patients performed with ESD according to lesion location, ulcer or scar findings, resected specimen area, operation time and operators, and the matched cases constituting the ESD group. The treatment outcomes were compared between the two groups.

Results

The mean specimen size was 46 mm. 10 lesions were located in the cardia and 4 lesions in the lesser curvature of the lower gastric body. En bloc resection was achieved for all lesions. The mean ESTD resection time was 69 minutes as against 87.7 minutes for the ESD (P = 0.01). The mean resection speed was faster for ESTD than for ESD (18.86 mm²/min versus 13.76 mm²/min, P = 0.03). There were no significant differences regarding the safety and curability during the endoscopic follow-up (mean 27 months).

Conclusions

ESTD is effective and safe for the removal of SGLs and appears to be an optimal option for patients with large SGLs at suitable sites.

Endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection using a novel bracing basket: An animal feasibility study

The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of a novel bracing basket for Endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD), which was developed for improved effectiveness and ease of use. This was a prospective randomized, comparative, experimental animal study carried out at a single center. The primary aim was to evaluate the efficacy of ESTD with a novel bracing basket, compared with conventional ESTD. The secondary aims were to assess the quality control of the procedures and adverse events. Twenty procedures (6 esophageal and 14 gastric) were performed in four pigs. All resections were completed as en bloc resections. The technical success rate was 100% for both techniques (bracing basket-assisted ESTD vs. conventional ESTD). The procedure times were similar, but the cutting speed was quicker with bracing basket-assisted ESTD in gastric (antrum:23.3 ± 2.2 mm²/min vs. 15.2 ± 3.2 mm²/min, body: 26.1 ± 1.3 mm²/min vs. 18.4 ± 2.0 mm²/min, p < 0.05). There was one bleeding in the bracing basket-assisted ESTD group and one perforation in the conventional ESTD group. Compared with conventional ESTD, the use of this basket has potential advantages. Comparison studies with larger gastric or colorectal lesions treated with conventional ESTD are needed.

Comparison of endoscopic submucosal tunneling dissection and thoracoscopic enucleation for the treatment of esophageal submucosal tumors

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic submucosal tunneling dissection (ESTD) has been proved to be safe and effective for removal of esophageal submucosal tumors (SMTs) and can maintain the mucosal integrity compared with other endoscopic methods. The aim of the study was to estimate the safety and efficacy of ESTD as well as compare its efficacy with thoracoscopic enucleation for esophageal SMTs, which is used increasingly as a minimally invasive approach.

METHODS

We retrospectively collected the clinical data of patients with esophageal SMTs <40 mm who underwent ESTD or thoracoscopic enucleation at Nanfang Hospital between January 2008 and August 2016. Epidemiologic data (sex, age), tumor location, tumor size, en bloc resection rate, adverse events, pathologic results, length of postoperative hospital stay, and cost were compared between ESTD and thoracoscopic enucleation.

RESULTS

A total of 126 patients were included. A total of 74 patients underwent ESTD, and the other 52 underwent thoracoscopic enucleation. There was no significant difference between the 2 groups in sex, age, tumor size, hospitalization expense, infection, adverse events, and en bloc resection rate (P < .05). However, patients in the ESTD group had a shorter operating time, less estimated blood loss, shorter length of postoperative hospital stay, and lower chest pain level (P < .05). Kaplan-Meier curves for disease-free survival also showed no statistically significant difference between ESTD and thoracoscopic enucleation groups during the median follow-up of 19.5 and 42 months, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The treatment efficacy was comparable between the ESTD and thoracoscopic enucleation for esophageal SMTs <40 mm. However, there was a significant advantage in the ESTD group for a shorter operating time, reduced postoperative chest pain, and shorter hospitalization.

The "tunnel + clip" strategy standardised and facilitates oesophageal ESD procedures: a prospective, consecutive bi-centric study

INTRODUCTION

ESD is the treatment of choice for superficial neoplasms of the oesophagus; ESD is oncologically efficient and associated with less morbidity than the surgical alternative. ESD requires a high level of skill, being both technically challenging and time consuming. Therefore, ESD is often reserved for experts. A combination of a tunnel technique with clip-line traction may enable optimisation of oesophageal ESD.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From January 2015 to December 2016, we performed a prospective two-centre case study of consecutive "tunnel + clip" oesophageal ESD. Four young operators (each of whom had performed fewer than 50 ESDs and fewer than five oesophageal ESDs) treated patients requiring ESD using the tunnel + clip method. This involves generation of a classic tunnel beneath the lesion, with constant traction being applied by a clip with a line placed at the oral side of the tunnel.

RESULTS

Sixty-two lesions (25 SCCs and 34 ADK/HGDs complicating Barrett's oesophagus) were consecutively resected. The en bloc, R0, and curative resection rates were 100% (62/62), 88.7% (55/62), and 74.2% (46/62), respectively. No perforation was noted. The mean ESD velocity was 24.5 mm²/min for lesions of mean length 59.6 mm. The tunnel + clip approach greatly aided the procedure. No pathological damage caused by clipping was evident.

CONCLUSION

Use of the tunnel + clip strategy to treat oesophageal ESD is effective and safe, even when performed by physicians with little prior experience. It is thus possible to standardise ESD of superficial oesophageal neoplasms and increase the velocity of dissection. Our procedure will encourage the use of oesophageal ESD in Western countries.

Traction using a clip-with-line is a preferred method for trainees in performing esophageal endoscopic submucosal dissection: an animal model study

BACKGROUND

The optimal operative process of esophageal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), especially for the beginners, is not established. In this study, the clip-with-line method, the tunneling method and the conventional method for esophageal ESD were compared in a training course on live pigs.

METHODS

15 trainee endoscopists were randomized into three groups, the clip-with-line method group, the tunneling method group, and the conventional method group. Each trainee performed four esophageal ESDs on live pigs with one of the specified methods, assisted by a senior endoscopist. The procedural time and speed, the en bloc resection rates, adverse events, and self-completion rates were recorded, and learning curves were drawn.

RESULTS

The procedural time in the clip-with-line group was significantly shorter than those in the tunneling and the conventional method group (47.4 ± 9.0 min versus 67.0 ± 15.1 min and 67.0 ± 11.8 min, p = 0.000). The clip-with-line method had the lowest rates of perforation and muscle layer injury among the three methods. The en bloc resection rates and self-completion rates were similar among the three groups. Learning curves analysis showed the clip-with-line method was the easiest one for the trainees to master.

CONCLUSIONS

The clip-with-line method shortened procedural time for trainees, and was associated with lower rates of adverse events. This method is preferred for endoscopists in their learning periods for esophageal ESD.

Efficacy and safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection under general anesthesia

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) under general anesthesia.

METHODS: From January 2011 to July 2014, 206 consecutive patients had undergone ESD under general anesthesia for neoplasms of the stomach, esophagus, and colorectum were enrolled in this retrospective study. The efficacy and safety of ESD under general anesthesia were assessed.

RESULTS: The en bloc resection rate of esophageal, gastric, and colorectal lesions was 100.0%, 98.3%, and 96.1%, respectively. The complication rate of perforation and bleeding were 0.0% and 0.0% in esophageal ESD, 1.7% and 1.7% in gastric ESD, and 3.9% and 2.0% in colorectal ESD, respectively. No cases of aspiration pneumonia were observed. All complications were managed by conservative treatment, with no surgical intervention required.

CONCLUSION: With the cooperation of an anesthesiologist, ESD under general anesthesia appears to be a useful method, decreasing the risk of complications.

POEM and Submucosal Tunneling

OPINION STATEMENT

Submucosal endoscopy has introduced new and important aspects into gastrointestinal endoscopic therapeutics by opening the way to interventions even outside of the GI tract. At present, innovative techniques for submucosal endoscopy in different esophageal diseases include peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for idiopathic achalasia and related motility disorders, submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection (STER) for submucosal tumors arising from the muscularis propria, and endoscopic submucosal tunneling dissection (ESTD) for superficial esophageal neoplastic lesions. POEM for achalasia-still a rare disease-is currently evaluated in comparison to endoscopic and surgical standard therapies, while this procedure enabling a long thoracic myotomy might constitute an advantage over the laparoscopic approach in treatments of spastic esophageal diseases. Removal of smaller submucosal esophageal tumors may appear tempting, but the clinical indications are limited by the facts that the vast majority of such smaller tumors are asymptomatic and benign.For all these innovative and technically demanding techniques, learning curves have to be taken into account, not only with regard to technical competence but also to clinical assessment, ranging from proper indication and patient selection to the management of (potential) complications and logistics/back-up. Although preliminary results from high-skilled endoscopic centers have been very encouraging, long-term data as well as prospective randomized controlled trials are needed to validate the efficacy and safety of the modalities.

Early Gastric Cancer: Current Advances of Endoscopic Diagnosis and Treatment

Endoscopy is a major method for early gastric cancer screening because of its high detection rate, but its diagnostic accuracy depends heavily on the availability of endoscopic instruments. Many novel endoscopic techniques have been shown to increase the diagnostic yield of early gastric cancer. With the improved detection rate of EGC, the endoscopic treatment has become widespread due to advances in the instruments available and endoscopist's experience. The aim of this review is to summarize frequently-used endoscopic diagnosis and treatment in early gastric cancer (EGC).

Endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection for large superficial esophageal squamous cell neoplasms

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a well-established treatment for superficial esophageal squamous cell neoplasms (SESCNs) with no risk of lymphatic metastasis. However, for large SESCNs, especially when exceeding two-thirds of the esophageal circumference, conventional ESD is time-consuming and has an increased risk of adverse events. Based on the submucosal tunnel conception, endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD) was first introduced by us to remove large SESCNs, with excellent results. Studies from different centers also reported favorable results. Compared with conventional ESD, ESTD has a more rapid dissection speed and R0 resection rate. Currently in China, ESTD for large SESCNs is an important part of the digestive endoscopic tunnel technique, as is peroral endoscopic myotomy for achalasia and submucosal tunnel endoscopic resection for submucosal tumors of the muscularis propria. However, not all patients with SESCNs are candidates for ESTD, and postoperative esophageal strictures should also be taken into consideration, especially for lesions with a circumference greater than three-quarters. In this article, we describe our experience, review the literature of ESTD, and provide detailed information on indications, standard procedures, outcomes, and complications of ESTD.

Prospective randomized comparison of endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection and conventional submucosal dissection in the resection of superficial esophageal/gastric lesions in a living porcine model

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

To assess experimentally endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD) as an alternative technique of endoscopic submucosal resection.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a prospective, randomized, comparative experimental animal study carried out over a period of 9 months at the surgical research and teaching center of Aix-Marseille University, France. Virtual esophageal and gastric lesions measuring 3 cm in diameter were resected in pigs weighing 25 to 30 kg. The primary aim was to evaluate ESTD's efficacy compared with endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). The secondary aims were to determine complication rates as well as to assess procedure time and procedure speed, histologic quality of the resected specimen, and procedure cost.

RESULTS

Eighteen procedures (9 ESD and 9 ESTD) were performed in nine pigs. The technical success rate was 88.9 % for both techniques, with one single failure in each. The en bloc resection rate was 100 % for ESTD and 88.9 % for ESD (one failure). The complication rate (22 %) and median procedure time were similar but dissection speed was quicker with ESTD in the esophagus (P = 0.03). Median procedure cost (728 Euros for ESD and ESTD) did not differ. On histologic examination, the lateral margins were healthy in 100 % of ESTD and in 88.9 % of ESD (P = 0.49). Deep resection margins were of better quality in ESTD (median submucosal thickness: 1307.1 µm vs. 884.7 µm; P = 0.039).

CONCLUSIONS

ESTD is feasible and safe but not superior in the treatment of superficial esophageal/gastric lesions in porcine models compared with ESD. Nevertheless it provides a better quality histologic specimen.

Submucosal tunnel endoscopy for treatment of upper gastrointestinal diseases

AIM: To evalute the efficacy and safety of peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for esophageal achalasia (AC), submucosal tunnel endoscopic resection (STER) for esophageal submucosal tumors (SMT) originating from muscularis propria layer and endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD) for large esophageal superficial neoplasms.

METHODS: A retrospective study was performed of the clinical data of 10 patients with esophageal achalasia treated by POEM, 18 patients with esophageal submucosal tumors originating from muscularis propria layer treated by STER, and 22 patients with large esophageal superficial neoplasms treated by ESTD at Department of Gastroenterology, Subei People's Hospital of Jiangsu Province from September 2012 to January 2015. Intraoperative and postoperative complications and clinical efficacy were recorded.

RESULTS: The surgeries were successful in all patients. Subcutaneous emphysema occurred in three patients treated by POEM and eight patients by STER, and mediastinal emphysema occurred in one patient treated by POEM. In the 10 cases of POEM,the mean submucosal tunnel length was 10.1 cm ± 2.7 cm, the average length of endoscopic myotomy was 8.4 cm ± 1.9 cm, and the mean operation time was 72.5 min ± 29.1 min. Dysphagia symptom was improved significantly during 6 mo of the follow-up. In the 18 cases of STER, the average lesion size was 1.5 cm ± 0.6 cm, the average operation time was 52.3 min ± 21.4 min, and postoperative pathological examination revealed that all were leiomyomas. Postoperative follow-up duration ranged from 3 to 6 mo and no residual lesion or recurrence was found. In the 22 cases of ESTD, the length of lesions ranged from 2.5 cm to 6.0 cm and the width from 1/3 to 4/5 of the esophageal circumference. The average operation time was 82.9 min ± 26.5 min. Postoperative pathology was suggestive of 16 cases of high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia and 6 cases of intramucosal carcinoma. During 6 mo of follow-up there was no recurrence. Four patients had postoperative esophageal strictures and were alleviated by pneumatic balloon dilatation and retrievable esophageal stent implantation.

CONCLUSION: Submucosal tunnel endoscopy is a safe and effective method for rectal esophageal achalasia, esophageal submucosal tumors originating from the muscularis propria layer and large esophageal superficial neoplasms.

Esophageal diverticulum exposed during endoscopic submucosal dissection of superficial cancer

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is now widely accepted as a strategy to treat superficial esophageal neoplasms. The rate of adverse events, such as perforation, has been decreasing with the improvement of devices and techniques. In this paper, we report a case of esophageal cancer that had a diverticulum under cancerous epithelium. The diverticulum was not detected during preoperative examination, and led to perforation during the ESD procedure. Our case shows that, although rare, some diverticula can exist underneath the mucosal surface without obvious depression. If there is any sign of hidden diverticula during ESD, surgeons should proceed with caution or, depending on the case, the procedure should be discontinued to avoid adverse events.

Per-oral endoscopic myotomy: Major advance in achalasia treatment and in endoscopic surgery

Per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) represents a natural orifice endoscopic surgery (NOTES) approach to laparoscopy Heller myotomy (LHM). POEM is arguably the most successful clinical application of NOTES. The growth of POEM from a single center in 2008 to approximately 60 centers worldwide in 2014 with several thousand procedures having been performed attests to the success of POEM. Initial efficacy, safety and acid reflux data suggest at least equivalence of POEM to LHM, the previous gold standard for achalasia therapy. Adjunctive techniques used in the West include impedance planimetry for real-time intraprocedural luminal assessment and endoscopic suturing for challenging mucosal defect closures during POEM. The impact of POEM extends beyond the realm of esophageal motility disorders as it is rapidly popularizing endoscopic submucosal dissection in the West and spawning offshoots that use the submucosal tunnel technique for a host of new indications ranging from resection of tumors to pyloromyotomy for gastroparesis.

Submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection for esophageal submucosal tumors

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection (STER) in the management of esophageal submucosal tumors (SMTs) originating from the muscularis propria (MP) layer.

METHODS: Twenty-three patients with esophageal SMTs originating from the MP layer were treated by STER after endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) and computed tomography (CT) examinations. Tumor size, tumor origin, operative time, complications, hospital stay and recurrence were recorded and analyzed.

RESULTS: Of the 23 esophageal SMTs, 15 originated from the superficial MP layer and 8 from the deep MP layer. All lesions were successfully resected by STER with an en bloc resection rate of 100%. The average lesion size was 1.0 cm ± 0.4 cm (range 0.6-1.8 cm). A mean number of 6.2 ± 2.4 (range 4-8) hemostatic clips were used to close the mucosal incision site. Mean operative duration was 62 min ± 24.5 min (range 32-115 min). All operative specimens were examined pathologically, including 19 leiomyomas and 4 stromal tumors. Both lateral and vertical margins were negative in all the cases. Two patients developed perforation and three developed subcutaneous emphysema. All of them recovered uneventfully after conservative treatment. No heavy or delayed bleeding was noticed. The average hospital stay after the procedure was 5.8 ± 3.4 (range 4-11) days. No tumor residual or recurrence was found during the follow-up.

CONCLUSION: STER is a safe, efficacious and feasible new method for esophageal SMTs from the MP layer.

Endosonography-assisted diagnosis and therapy of gastrointestinal submucosal tumors

Submucosal tumors (SMTs) are usually discovered fortuitously during routine endoscopy, including various non-neoplastic and neoplastic conditions. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is considered to be the best imaging procedure to characterize SMTs and to determine the need for further treatment. In this review, the following issues will be addressed: The role of EUS in diagnosis for SMTs, tissue diagnosis for SMTs and the influence of EUS on endoscopic resection techniques for SMTs.

Endosonography-assisted diagnosis and therapy of gastrointestinal submucosal tumors

Submucosal tumors (SMTs) are usually discovered fortuitously during routine endoscopy, including various non-neoplastic and neoplastic conditions. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is considered to be the best imaging procedure to characterize SMTs and to determine the need for further treatment. In this review, the following issues will be addressed: The role of EUS in diagnosis for SMTs, tissue diagnosis for SMTs and the influence of EUS on endoscopic resection techniques for SMTs.

Submucosal endoscopy with mucosal resection (SEMR): a new hybrid technique of endoscopic submucosal balloon dissection in the porcine rectosigmoid colon

BACKGROUND

We developed a technique, submucosal endoscopy with mucosal resection (SEMR) intended to make endoscopic submucosal dissection easier and safer. With this technique, the submucosal layer is balloon dissected in lieu of electrosurgical knife dissection. The aim of this study was to further evaluate SEMR in the porcine rectum and colon.

METHODS

Targeted sites in the rectum and the distal colon were marked by spot coagulation. Submucosal fluid cushions (SFC) were created followed by a circumferential mucosal incision. After isolation of the targeted mucosa, balloon dissection was initiated. The balloon catheter was inserted deep into SFC and the inflated balloon repeatedly pulled back toward the endoscope tip to disrupt the submucosa. Residual strands of submucosa were cut. Dissection difficulty scores (DDS) were used using a visual analogue scale ranging from 0 to 5 (failed). The entire study period was divided into three periods (first period, pigs 1-10; second period, pigs 11-20; third period, pigs 21-30).

RESULTS

Sixty lesions in 30 pigs were resected using SEMR. The en block resection rate was 95%. There were three incomplete resections, two as a result of an errant site location and one as a result of a floppy prototype balloon catheter tip. The median resected size, procedure time, and DDS were 6.0 cm, 25 min, and 1. All three failed cases occurred in first period. The procedure time in third period was significantly shorter than the second period (P = 0.0017). The DDS in first period was significantly higher than the second (P = 0.0024) and third (P = 0.0155) periods. Two perforations, one muscularis propria catheter perforation, and one mucosal perforation were observed (3.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

Large mucosal target sites in the rectum and distal colon could be safely removed en bloc by means of a hybrid technique, SEMR, with blunt submucosal balloon dissection.

Submucosal endoscopy with mucosal resection (SEMR): a new hybrid technique of endoscopic submucosal balloon dissection in the porcine rectosigmoid colon

BACKGROUND

We developed a technique, submucosal endoscopy with mucosal resection (SEMR) intended to make endoscopic submucosal dissection easier and safer. With this technique, the submucosal layer is balloon dissected in lieu of electrosurgical knife dissection. The aim of this study was to further evaluate SEMR in the porcine rectum and colon.

METHODS

Targeted sites in the rectum and the distal colon were marked by spot coagulation. Submucosal fluid cushions (SFC) were created followed by a circumferential mucosal incision. After isolation of the targeted mucosa, balloon dissection was initiated. The balloon catheter was inserted deep into SFC and the inflated balloon repeatedly pulled back toward the endoscope tip to disrupt the submucosa. Residual strands of submucosa were cut. Dissection difficulty scores (DDS) were used using a visual analogue scale ranging from 0 to 5 (failed). The entire study period was divided into three periods (first period, pigs 1-10; second period, pigs 11-20; third period, pigs 21-30).

RESULTS

Sixty lesions in 30 pigs were resected using SEMR. The en block resection rate was 95%. There were three incomplete resections, two as a result of an errant site location and one as a result of a floppy prototype balloon catheter tip. The median resected size, procedure time, and DDS were 6.0 cm, 25 min, and 1. All three failed cases occurred in first period. The procedure time in third period was significantly shorter than the second period (P = 0.0017). The DDS in first period was significantly higher than the second (P = 0.0024) and third (P = 0.0155) periods. Two perforations, one muscularis propria catheter perforation, and one mucosal perforation were observed (3.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

Large mucosal target sites in the rectum and distal colon could be safely removed en bloc by means of a hybrid technique, SEMR, with blunt submucosal balloon dissection.