Effect of prophylactic endoscopic closure for an artificial ulceration after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: a randomized controlled trial

Impact of prophylactic wound closure in colorectal ESD on postoperative wound complications: A meta-analysis

Endoscopic submucosa dissection (ESD) has been applied extensively in the treatment of large intestine tumours due to its high total excision ratio. Nevertheless, there is a high incidence of adverse reactions in colon ESD, and the efficacy of prophylactic ESD following ESD in prevention of postoperative haemorrhage is still disputed. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the effectiveness of prophylaxis of wound closure in large intestine ESD after operation. For eligibility, we looked through three databases: PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library. Heterogenity was measured by means of a chi-square method of Q-statistic and an I2 test. Fixed or random effects models were used for data processing. Based on the retrieval policy, we found a total of 1286 papers, and then we collected nine papers to extract the data. Regarding postoperative haemorrhage, there was a significant reduction in the risk of wound haemorrhage in the wound closure group than in the control group (OR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.19-0.44 p < 0.0001). No statistical significance was found in the incidence of perforation in the wound closure and the control group (OR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.19-1.03 p = 0.06). There was a significant reduction in the incidence of postoperation fever among those in the wound closure group than in the control group (OR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.15-0.93 p = 0.04). Preventive endoscopic closure decreased the rate of ESD in colon disease, but did not significantly decrease the rate of postoperation perforation and postoperative fever. Future research will be required to clarify the risk factors and classify high-risk individuals in order to formulate a cost-effective prevention strategy.

Does Prophylactic Closure Improve Outcomes After Colorectal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Several studies have described prophylactic closure after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) of colorectal lesions for improving postoperative outcomes. We reviewed the evidence on the impact of prophylactic closure after ESD.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted on PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, and Web of Science by 2 reviewers independently for studies published up to July 9, 2023. All types of comparative studies were eligible.

RESULTS

Ten studies compared 939 patients undergoing prophylactic closure with 1074 controls. Three were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) while the rest were observational. Pooled data from all included studies showed that prophylactic closure resulted in reduced incidence of delayed bleeding after ESD [odds ratio (OR): 0.30; 95% CI: 0.15, 0.72; I2 =0%]. These results were significant only for observational studies but not for RCTs. Meta-analysis showed no significant difference in the risk of delayed perforation (OR: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.18, 1.70; I2 =0%) or post-ESD coagulation syndrome (PECS) (OR: 1.15; 95% CI: 0.41, 3.19; I2 =63%) between closure and nonclosure groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Observational data suggest that prophylactic closure of colorectal mucosal defects after ESD may reduce the risk of delayed bleeding. However, the results are not concurred by RCTs. Furthermore, there seems to be no impact of prophylactic closure on the risk of delayed perforation and PECS.

Prophylactic clipping using the over-the-scope clip (OTSC) system after complex ESD and EMR of large colon polyps

BACKGROUND

Delayed bleeding is the most frequent complication after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of large colon polyps. Today, prophylactic clipping with through-the-scope clips (TTSCs) is commonly used to reduce the risk of bleeding. However, the over-the-scope clip (OTSC) system might be superior to TTSCs in achieving hemostasis. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of prophylactic clipping using the OTSC system after ESD or EMR of large colon polyps.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of a prospective collected database from 2009 until 2021 of three endoscopic centers. Patients with large (≥ 20 mm) colon polyps were enrolled. All polyps were removed by either ESD or EMR. After the resection, OTSCs were prophylactically applied on parts of the mucosal defect with a high risk of delayed bleeding or/and perforation. The main outcome measurement was delayed bleeding.

RESULTS

A total of 75 patients underwent ESD (67%, 50/75) or EMR (33%, 25/75) in the colorectum. The mean resected specimen diameter was 57 mm ± 24.1 (range 22-98 mm). The mean number of OTSCs placed on the mucosal defect was 2 (range 1-5). None of the mucosal defects were completely closed. Intraprocedural bleeding occurred in 5.3% (ESD 2.0% vs. EMR 12.0%; P = 0.105), and intraprocedural perforation occurred in 6.7% (ESD 8% vs. EMR 4%; P = 0.659) of the patients. Hemostasis was achieved in 100% of cases of intraprocedural bleeding, whereas two patients required surgical conversion due to intraprocedural perforation. Among the remaining 73 patients who received prosphylactic clipping, delayed bleeding occurred in 1.4% (ESD 0% vs. EMR 4.2%; P = 0.329), and delayed perforation occurred in 0%.

CONCLUSIONS

The prophylactic partial closure of large post-ESD/EMR mucosal defects using OTSCs could serve as an effective strategy to reduce the risk of delayed bleeding and perforation. The prophylactic partial closure of large complex post-ESD/EMR mucosal defects using OTSCs could serve as an effective strategy to reduce the risk of delayed bleeding and perforation.

Management of complications related to colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection

Compared to endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), colonoscopic endoscopic submucosal dissection (C-ESD) has the advantages of higher en bloc resection rates and lower recurrence rates of colorectal neoplasms. Therefore, C-ESD is considered an effective treatment method for laterally spread tumors and early colorectal cancer. However, C-ESD is technically more difficult and requires a longer procedure time than EMR. In addition to therapeutic efficacy and procedural difficulty, safety concerns should always be considered when performing C-ESD in clinical practice. Bleeding and perforation are the main adverse events associated with C-ESD and can occur during C-ESD or after the completion of the procedure. Most bleeding associated with C-ESD can be managed endoscopically, even if it occurs during or after the procedure. More recently, most perforations identified during C-ESD can also be managed endoscopically, unless the mural defect is too large to be sutured with endoscopic devices or the patient is hemodynamically unstable. Delayed perforations are quite rare, but they require surgical treatment more frequently than endoscopically identified intraprocedural perforations or radiologically identified immediate postprocedural perforations. Post-ESD coagulation syndrome is a relatively underestimated adverse event, which can mimic localized peritonitis from perforation. Here, we classify and characterize the complications associated with C-ESD and recommend management options for them.

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

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

Clinical and technical outcomes of endoscopic closure of postendoscopic submucosal dissection defects: Literature review over one decade

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), which enables curative en bloc resection of early gastrointestinal neoplasms, has been an attractive minimally invasive surgery during the past two decades. Large post-ESD defects must be carefully managed to prevent adverse events (AEs). The major AEs comprise delayed bleeding (DB) and delayed perforation (DP), and overall AEs comprise DB plus DP. This review aimed to clarify the clinical efficacy and technical outcomes of endoscopic prophylactic closure for post-ESD defects. We identified studies involving ≥10 patients up to March 2022 in which endoscopic closure was applied for gastric, duodenal, and colorectal post-ESD defects. In the stomach, total rates of overall AEs and DB were significantly lower in the closure than non-closure group. In the duodenum, total rates of overall AEs, DB, and DP were significantly lower in the closure group. In the colorectum, total rates of overall AEs and DB were significantly lower in the closure group. Closure techniques, categorized into three groups (clip-based techniques, mechanical clipping, and surgical stitch-based techniques), were illustrated. Endoscopic closure demonstrated a certain ability to reduce DB after gastric, duodenal, and colorectal ESD as well as DP after duodenal ESD. Considering closure-associated costs, the indications and limitations of closure techniques should be further investigated.

Factors Related to Delayed Adverse Events of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection in the Duodenum

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic submucosal dissection for duodenal neoplasms (D-ESD) is considered a technically demanding procedure regarding the high risk of delayed adverse events. Data regarding optimal managements of ulcers after D-ESD are lacking.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on consecutive 145 cases of D-ESD for superficial nonampullary duodenal epithelial tumors at a single referral center. Factors related to delayed adverse events and the healing process of ulcers after D-ESD were analyzed.

RESULTS

Complete ulcer suture after D-ESD was performed in 128 cases (88%). Two delayed perforation occurred among cases with incomplete suture. Delayed bleeding occurred in 8 cases (6%) within 3 weeks. The ulcer closure rate at second-look endoscopy (SLE) was significantly low among cases with delayed bleeding (12.5% vs. 75%, p = 0.001). The bleeding rate before SLE was significantly high among patients who did not have complete ulcer closure after D-ESD (0.8% vs. 12%, p = 0.036). The ratio of lesions located in the second oral-Vater was significantly low among ulcers re-opened at SLE (38% vs. 14%, p = 0.044). Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) were administered for a median of 7 weeks (range 1-8 weeks). At 3 weeks, active ulcer stages were observed in a few cases, and healing or scarring was observed in most cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Complete ulcer suture was related to decreased risk of delayed adverse events after D-ESD. From the bleeding period and healing process of D-ESD ulcers, the minimum required length of PPI may be 3 weeks after D-ESD.

The efficacy of prophylactic clip closure of mucosal defects after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection on delayed bleeding

OBJECTIVE

Although prophylactic clip closure after endoscopic mucosal resection may prevent delayed bleeding, information regarding colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (CR-ESD) is lacking. Therefore, this study evaluated the effect of prophylactic clip closure on delayed bleeding rate after CR-ESD.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 614 CR-ESD procedures performed in 561 patients were retrospectively reviewed. The primary outcome, which was delayed bleeding rate, was analyzed between the prophylactic clip closure and non-closure groups. Furthermore, the predictors of delayed bleeding were also evaluated.

RESULTS

The patients were divided into the clip closure group (n = 275) and non-closure group (n = 339). Delayed bleeding rate was significantly lower in the closure group than in non-closure group (6 cases [2.2%] vs. 20 cases [5.9%], p = .026). The univariate logistic regression analyses revealed that delayed bleeding was significantly associated with laterally spreading tumor-granular-nodular mixed type (LST-G-Mix; odds ratio [OR], 3.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.70-8.34; p = .001). By contrast, prophylactic clip closure was significantly associated with low delayed bleeding rate (OR, 0.36; 95%CI, 0.14-0.90; p = .029). The multivariate logistic regression analyses revealed LST-G-Mix as a significant independent delayed bleeding predictor (OR, 3.25; 95%CI, 1.45-7.32; p = .004), whereas, prophylactic clip closure was identified as a significant independent preventive factor of delayed bleeding (OR, 0.39; 95%CI, 0.15-1.00; p = .049).

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic clip closure after CR-ESD is associated with low delayed bleeding rate. LST-G-Mix promotes delayed bleeding, and performing prophylactic clip closure may be advisable.

Safety and efficacy of water pressure endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal tumors with submucosal fibrosis (with video)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Colorectal neoplasms with submucosal fibrosis are the most challenging targets of endoscopic resection. Water pressure endoscopic submucosal dissection (WP-ESD) is a recently introduced procedure that has several advantages over conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection (C-ESD). This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of WP-ESD for fibrotic colorectal neoplasms.

METHODS

This retrospective observational study investigated 133 colorectal neoplasms expected to have submucosal fibrosis that were resected by WP-ESD or C-ESD between April 2012 and April 2020. Eighty-seven lesions after endoscopic or surgical treatment, 18 with biopsy scar with fold convergence and 28 in patients with ulcerative colitis, were included. The differences in treatment outcomes, including procedure time and adverse event proportions, between the WP-ESD and C-ESD groups were analyzed. The clinical course after perforation using WP-ESD was also evaluated, including postprocedural multidetector CT findings obtained immediately after WP-ESD.

RESULTS

Severe submucosal fibrosis was observed in 96 lesions (72.2%). The median procedure time was significantly shorter in the WP-ESD group than in the C-ESD group (43.5 minutes [interquartile range {IQR}, 32.8-73] vs 72 minutes [IQR, 45-105]; P = .0041). The multivariate analysis revealed WP-ESD as an independent factor for a short procedure time (odds ratio, 2.90; 95% confidence interval, 1.28-6.55). The proportions of post-ESD electrocoagulation syndrome (11.6% vs 13.1%) and perforation (20.4% vs 22.8%) were similar between the groups. Four of 11 patients with perforation who underwent WP-ESD showed fluid collection on postprocedural multidetector CT images.

CONCLUSIONS

WP-ESD can shorten procedure time for treating fibrotic colorectal neoplasms.

Hazardous repeat bleeding after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection in a patient with immune thrombocytopenia: complete hemostasis using an over-the-scope clip

A 76-year-old man diagnosed with early-stage colorectal cancer was referred to our hospital for endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). The patient had a low platelet count (31,000/µL) due to immune thrombocytopenia (ITP). The cancerous lesion was completely resected without any adverse events. A blood test performed 1 day post-ESD showed no progression of anemia and the initial postoperative course was uneventful. However, 7 days after ESD, dark red stools were observed, and we performed an emergency colonoscopy. We stopped the bleeding twice using hemoclips and hemostatic forceps. Since the patient's platelet count remained below 50,000/µL, we started thrombopoietin receptor agonist treatment with eltrombopag (12.5 mg/day) for thrombocytopenia. Although the platelet count increased, the patient experienced rebleeding for the fourth time and underwent an emergency colonoscopy, during which we used an over-the-scope clip (OTSC) to achieve hemostasis. No rebleeding occurred after OTSC intervention, and the platelet count stabilized at approximately 50,000/µL. We discharged the patient on Day 34 after ESD. Although the guidelines do not specify a target platelet count for performing ESD, a platelet count < 50,000/µL should be considered low. Furthermore, an OTSC may be useful for treating intractable bleeding.

Effect of prophylactic closure on adverse events after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has a high en bloc resection rate and is widely performed for large colorectal lesions. However, colorectal ESD is associated with a high frequency of adverse events (AEs), and the efficacy of prophylactic endoscopic closure after ESD for preventing AEs is still controversial. This meta-analysis was conducted to assess the efficacy of closure on AEs following colorectal ESD.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for eligible studies. The chi-square-based Q statistics and the I² test were used to test for heterogeneity. Pooling was conducted using a fixed or random effects model.

RESULTS

We identified eight eligible studies that compared the effects of closure vs non-closure with respect to delayed bleeding, delayed perforation, and post-ESD coagulation syndrome. Compared with non-closure (5.2%), closure was associated with a lower incidence (0.9%) of delayed bleeding (pooled odd ratios [ORs]:0.19, 95% CI: 0.08-0.49) following ESD. The pooled ORs showed no significant differences in incidence of delayed perforation (pooled OR: 0.22; 95% CI: 0.05-1.03) or post-ESD coagulation syndrome (pooled OR:0.75; 95% CI: 0.26-2.18) between the closure and non-closure groups.

CONCLUSION

Prophylactic endoscopic closure may reduce the incidence of delayed bleeding following ESD of colorectal lesions. Future studies are needed to further illuminate risk factors and stratify high risk subjects for a cost-effective preventive strategy.

Predicting and managing complications following colonoscopy: risk factors and management of advanced interventional endoscopy with a focus on colorectal ESD

INTRODUCTION

Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been introduced widely in Western and Asian countries. The management of the perforation during ESD is crucial.

AREAS COVERED

The rate of intraprocedural perforation, risk factors, prevention, and management of perforation during ESD and EMR were discussed in this review. The perforation rate in ESD and EMR depending on the lesion size is also discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

The knowledge regarding the risk factor and techniques to manage perforation is important during colorectal ESD and EMR. The development of novel suturing techniques devices is key for colorectal ESD in the future.

A novel endoscopic hand-suturing technique for defect closure after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: a pilot study

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to demonstrate the feasibility of endoscopic hand-suturing (EHS) and attainability of sustained closure after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD).

METHODS

EHS was defined as uninterrupted endoscopic suturing of the mucosal defect after colorectal ESD using an absorbable barbed suture and a through-the-scope needle holder. Following individual EHS training using an ex vivo porcine colonic model, two experienced endoscopists performed EHS. Repeat colonoscopy was performed on the third or fourth day after ESD to examine the EHS site. The primary end point was the complete EHS closure rate, and secondary end points were sustained closure and post-ESD bleeding rates.

RESULTS

11 lesions were included. Median size of the mucosal defect was 38 mm (range 25 - 55 mm) and the lesion characteristics were as follows: lower rectum/upper rectum/ascending colon/cecum = 3/3/2/3, and 0-IIa/0-Is + IIa/others = 5/4/2. EHS was not attempted in two patients owing to difficulty in colonoscope reinsertion after ESD and intraoperative perforation, respectively. EHS was performed for nine lesions, and the complete EHS closure rate was 73 %. Median procedure time for suturing was 56 minutes (range 30 - 120 minutes) and median number of stitches was 8 (range 6 - 12). Sustained closure and post-ESD bleeding rates were 64 % and 9 %, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

EHS achieved complete and sustained closure in the colorectum. However, EHS is not currently clinically applicable given the long procedure time. Further modifications of the technique and devices are desirable.