Risk factors of delayed bleeding after endoscopic resection of superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors and prevention by over-the-scope and conventional clipping

Risk factors for delayed bleeding after endoscopic resection of non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors and the effectiveness of complete mucosal closure in high-risk patients

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic resection (ER) of non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors (NADETs) is associated with a high incidence of delayed bleeding (DB). While previous reports have identified composite risk factors for delayed adverse events, including both DB and delayed perforation, the specific factors associated with DB remain unclear. This study aimed to identify factors associated with DB after ER of NADETs.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 335 consecutive patients who underwent ER for a NADET between January 2004 and December 2023. Participants were divided into the DB and non-DB groups. We compared baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes between the two groups to identify factors associated with DB. ER included endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) techniques. DB was defined as bleeding that required endoscopic hemostasis or transfusion after ER. Complete mucosal closure (CMC) was defined as the complete closure of the defect with no endoscopically visible exposure of the defect.

RESULTS

Overall, 128 ESD procedures and 207 non-ESD procedures were performed. DB occurred in 13 patients (3.9%) and its incidence was lower when CMC was achieved (1.1% vs. 13.9%, P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed the use of antithrombotic agents (odds ratio (OR) 3.8; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.0-14.6, P = 0.048) and a defect circumference ≥ 1/2 (OR 6.2; 95% CI 1.2-30.5, P = 0.029) as risk factors for DB, and CMC (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.038-0.95, P = 0.043) as a protective factor. Among the 66 patients with risk factors, including the use of antithrombotic agents and/or a defect circumference ≥ 1/2, CMC reduced the incidence of DB (4.5% [2/44], vs. 31.8% [7/22], P = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

We identified significant factors associated with DB after duodenal ER. Particularly, in patients with risk factors for DB, CMC can reduce the incidence of DB.

Challenges in Managing Rebleeding After Endoscopic Hemostasis With Over-the-Scope Clip for Colonic Diverticular Bleeding: A Case Series

Colonic diverticular bleeding is a leading cause of lower gastrointestinal bleeding, accounting for the increasing hospitalization rate in Japan. Although over-the-scope clips (OTSCs) have demonstrated favorable outcomes as an initial hemostatic method, their effectiveness as a rescue therapy after rebleeding from primary endoscopic hemostasis remains unclear. This study describes four patients with colonic diverticular bleeding who underwent an OTSC procedure after rebleeding from primary endoscopic hemostasis using standard methods. Immediate hemostasis was achieved in all cases; however, three patients experienced rebleeding during hospitalization, requiring interventional radiology or surgical intervention. Although immediate hemostasis can be achieved using OTSCs in cases of rebleeding after primary endoscopic hemostasis, their effectiveness in reducing short-term rebleeding might be limited. Further large-scale studies are warranted to evaluate OTSC efficacy in managing colonic diverticular bleeding after rebleeding from primary endoscopic hemostasis.

Free-Hand Endoscopic Full-Thickness Resection for Duodenal Subepithelial Lesions

BACKGROUND AND AIM

This work aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of free-hand endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) for duodenal subepithelial lesions (SELs).

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of 105 patients with duodenal SELs who underwent free-hand EFTR. Free-hand EFTR means no other devices (over-the-scope clip or full-thickness resection device) are required. The preoperative baseline data, procedure-related characteristics, and postoperative outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

The technical success rate was 99.0%, and the en bloc resection rate was 94.2%. A total of nine (8.7%) patients experienced major postoperative adverse events (AEs). The incidence of major AEs was significantly higher for lesions with a maximum diameter ≥ 2 cm (30.4%) than for lesions with a maximum diameter < 2 cm (2.6%) (p < 0.001). There were also significant differences in the incidence of major AEs for peri-ampullary lesions (37.5%), bulb lesions (4.8%), bulb-descending junction lesions (6.7%), and descending part lesions (12.5%) (p = 0.032). Multivariable regression analyses revealed that the maximum diameter ≥ 2 cm (OR = 18.108; 95% CI = 1.881-174.281; p = 0.012) and lesions located in peri-ampullary (OR = 18.950; 95% CI = 1.219-294.648; p = 0.036) were independent risk factors for major AEs. The mean duration of the follow-up period was 36.6 ± 21.3 months, and only one patient with gastrointestinal stromal tumors recurred.

CONCLUSIONS

Free-hand EFTR is a safe and effective technique for nonampullary duodenal SELs with a maximum diameter of < 2 cm. Given the complexity of the duodenal anatomy, this procedure should be performed by experienced endoscopists.

Endoscopic Resection for Superficial Non-Ampullary Duodenal Epithelial Tumors

An increasing number of superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors (SNADETs) have been detected recently owing to the development of endoscopic imaging technology and increased awareness of this disease. Endoscopic resection is the first-line treatment for SNADETs, with methods including cold snare polypectomy (CSP), conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (cEMR), underwater EMR (uEMR), and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). Here, we review the current status and recent advances in endoscopic resection for SNADETs. Endoscopic resection in the duodenum is more difficult and has a higher risk of adverse events than that in other organs owing to specific anatomical disadvantages. SNADETs ≤10 mm in size are candidates for CSP, cEMR, and uEMR. Among these lesions, suspected carcinoma lesions should not be treated using CSP because of their low curability. cEMR or uEMR is considered for lesions sized 10 to 20 mm, whereas piecemeal EMR or ESD is considered for tumors >20 mm in size. In particular, ESD or surgical resection should be considered for suspected carcinoma lesions >30 mm in size. The treatment plan should be selected on a case-to-case basis, considering the balance between the risk of adverse events and the necessity of en bloc resection.

Feasibility of modified double-layered suturing for a large mucosal defect after duodenal endoscopic submucosal dissection (origami method)

A modified double-layered suturing procedure (origami method; OGM) can achieve robust closure, even for large mucosal defects, by folding the muscle layer using through-the-scope clips. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of OGM in duodenal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD).This retrospective, observational study was conducted at a tertiary care hospital. We reviewed cases of OGM attempted after duodenal ESD between June 2022 and April 2023. We excluded lesions located in the duodenal bulb or involving the major papilla. We measured the clinical characteristics and outcomes.OGM was attempted in 28 cases after duodenal ESD. The median mucosal defect size was 38 mm (range 26-110). Complete closure was achieved in 27 cases (96%), including the largest lesion. The median closure time was 16 minutes. There were no perforations caused by clips. Delayed perforation and bleeding were not observed. Among 28 cases, 21 underwent follow-up endoscopy 3-5 days after ESD, and the muscle layer remained folded in all cases.OGM achieved a high rate of complete closure even after duodenal ESD. Closure with OGM was robust enough to maintain the folded muscle layer for at least 3 days postoperatively.

Association between prophylactic closure of mucosal defect and delayed adverse events after endoscopic resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the potential of prophylactic closure of mucosal defects to prevent adverse events following endoscopic resection of superficial layers of the gastrointestinal (GI) wall.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library for studies eligible for inclusion in our meta-analysis from inception to February 2022.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

We compared the effects of closure versus non-closure of mucosal defects with respect to adverse events including delayed bleeding, delayed perforation and postpolypectomy coagulation syndrome (PPCS). We used a random-effects model for all analyses. Subgroup analyses were performed based on gastrointestinal sites, surgical procedures and study designs.

RESULTS

In total, this study includes 11 383 patients from 28 studies. For delayed bleeding, closure group was associated with a lower incidence (Risk Ratio [RR]: 0.40, 95% Confidence interval [CI]: 0.30 to 0.53, p<0.001; I2=25%) and consistent results were observed in the subgroups. Also, for delayed perforation, a combined analysis of all sites and surgical methods showed a protective effect of prophylactic closure of mucosal defects (RR: 0.42, 95% CI: 0.22 to 0.82, p=0.01; I2=0%). Similar results were observed in the subgroup analyses, despite the wide CIs. Regarding the PPCS, neither the pooled RRs nor the subgroup analyses showed significant differences.

CONCLUSION

Prophylactic closure of mucosal defects is beneficial in reducing the incidence of delayed bleeding and delayed perforation after endoscopic resection, but there is no significant difference in reducing the incidence of PPCS.

Clinical outcomes of the over-the-scope clip closure after duodenal endoscopic submucosal dissection: A multicenter retrospective study

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Prophylactic closure with the over-the-scope clip (OTSC) after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) of superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors (SNADETs) has been reported to reduce postoperative adverse events (AEs). However, there are few evidences regarding AEs-associated factors and long-term outcomes of OTSCs.

METHODS

From January 2011 to December 2020, 139 consecutive patients with SNADETs who underwent ESD followed by OTSC closure in five institutions were extracted in this retrospective study. The primary endpoint was the rate of postoperative AEs after prophylactic OTSC closure. The secondary endpoints were the complete closure rate, residual rate, and long-term AEs associated with residual OTSCs.

RESULTS

The rate of complete closure of the mucosal defect was 97.3% (142) in 146 SNADETs, which were completely resected by ESD. Postoperative AEs, including delayed bleeding, delayed perforation, and localized peritonitis, occurred in 6.2%, 3.4%, and 2.1% of patients, respectively; however, all of the cases improved without surgical treatment. In the multivariate logistic regression analysis, the use of two or more OTSCs was a significant independent risk factor for postoperative AEs (odds ratio, 2.94; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-8.46; P = 0.046). The residual OTSC rate was 46.4% at 1 year postoperatively, and long-term AEs included duodenal erosions and ulcers associated with residual OTSCs.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic closure with OTSCs after duodenal ESD can provide acceptable short-and long-term outcomes for preventing postoperative AEs. However, multiple OTSCs were the independent risk factors of postoperative AEs due to the gaps between and near the OTSCs.

Salvage treatment for local recurrence after endoscopic resection for superficial nonampullary duodenal epithelial tumors

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Local recurrence is a significant concern in endoscopic resection of superficial nonampullary duodenal tumors (SNADTs). Our objective was to elucidate the clinical outcomes of salvage endoscopic treatment.

METHODS

This retrospective study included consecutive patients who underwent endoscopic resection of SNADTs between January 2013 and December 2021. Four hundred thirty-three patients were observed, excluding those with familial adenomatous polyposis and those who did not undergo surveillance endoscopy. Local recurrence was defined as histologically proven adenoma or adenocarcinoma in contact with a prior endoscopic resection scar. The clinicopathological characteristics of patients with local recurrence and outcomes of salvage endoscopic treatment were evaluated.

RESULTS

Local recurrence occurred in 33 (8%) of the 433 patients after endoscopic resection for SNADT. Multivariate analysis identified older age (≥63 years), larger lesion size (≥13 mm), and piecemeal resection as significant independent predictors of local recurrence. Among the 33 patients with 33 recurrent lesions, 10 lesions (30%) disappeared after forceps biopsy. Three patients (9%) remained untreated. Sixteen lesions (48%) disappeared after one session of salvage endoscopic treatment, and four lesions (12%) disappeared after two sessions of treatment. Among these 24 treatment sessions, underwater endoscopic mucosal resection was performed in 19 sessions. The median post-procedural hospitalization period was four days (interquartile range, 3-4.25 days). Delayed bleeding occurred in three sessions. No recurrences have been detected in the 30 salvaged patients. The median recurrence-free survival time was 24.5 months (interquartile range, 14-48.75 months).

CONCLUSIONS

Local recurrence after endoscopic resection of SNADT can be managed endoscopically.

Pancreas-sparing partial duodenectomy as an alternative to emergency pancreaticoduodenectomy for a major duodenal perforation: a case report

A 71-year-old woman underwent endoscopic submucosal dissection for early duodenal cancer at the second portion of the duodenum and developed acute peritonitis due to delayed duodenal perforation. Emergency laparotomy was performed. A huge perforation formed at the descending duodenum without ampulla involvement. Pancreas-sparing partial duodenectomy (PPD) with gastrojejunostomy was performed (250 min operative time) with 50 mL of intraoperative blood loss. She required intensive care for 3 days and was discharged on postoperative day 21 with no severe complications. Emergency treatment for a major duodenal injury or perforation remains challenging because of high morbidity and mortality. An appropriate treatment should be considered according to the nature of the defect. Although PPD is an acceptable procedure for patients with a duodenal neoplasm, its use in emergency surgery is rarely reported. PPD is more reliable than primary repair or anastomosis using a jejunal wall, and less invasive than pancreaticoduodenectomy, for emergency treatment. We performed PPD in this patient because the duodenal perforation was too large to reconstruct and did not involve the ampulla. PPD can be a safe and feasible alternative surgical procedure to pancreaticoduodenectomy for a major duodenal perforation, especially in patients with a duodenal perforation that does not involve the ampulla.

Efficacy and safety of cap-assisted endoscopic mucosal resection for superficial duodenal epithelial neoplasia ≤ 10 mm

Background and study aims Endoscopic treatment strategies for small superficial duodenal epithelial neoplasia (SDET) have not been established, and the R0 resection rates of all previously reported endoscopic techniques are somewhat low. Furthermore, no reports of cap-assisted endoscopic mucosal resection (EMRC), which is reportedly associated with a relatively high R0 resection rate, have been evaluated in sufficient numbers of patients. Therefore, we assessed the efficacy and safety of EMRC for SDETs ≤ 10 mm in a retrospective cohort study. Patients and methods We examined a prospectively maintained database and identified 248 consecutive patients (248 lesions) who had undergone endoscopic resection for SDETs ≤ 10 mm between January 2017 and June 2022. Our treatment strategy was consistent, with EMRC indicated for all SDETs ≤ 10 mm without non-lifting signs. The primary endpoint was the R0 resection rate. Results Overall, 20 lesions had non-lifting signs and were selected for endoscopic submucosal dissection, while the remaining 228 lesions were treated with EMRC. As a result of EMRC, the median tumor size was 5 mm, and the mean procedure time was 5 minutes. Most of the lesions (89.2%) were located in the descending part. The R0 resection rate was 97.4% (222/228 cases), and the en bloc resection rate was 99.6%. Only seven patients(3.1%) experienced adverse events (6 patients, delayed bleeding; 1 patient, acute pancreatitis), which were successfully managed without surgical intervention. Furthermore, no recurrences were observed. Conclusions We have demonstrated that EMRC is an effective and safe treatment for SDETs ≤ 10 mm that do not have non-lifting signs.

Endoscopic diagnosis and treatment of superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors: A review

The surface of the small bowel mucosa is covered more than any other section of the digestive canal; however, the overall prevalence of small bowel tumors of the whole gastrointestinal tract is evidently low. Owing to the improvement in endoscopic techniques, the prevalence of small bowel tumors has increased across multiple countries, which is mainly due to an increase in duodenal tumors. Superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors (SNADETs) are defined as tumors originating from the non-ampullary region in the duodenum that share similarities and discrepancies with their gastric and colorectal counterparts in the pathogenesis and clinicopathologic characteristics. To date, white light endoscopy (WLE) remains the cornerstone of endoscopic diagnosis for SNADETs. Besides, narrow-band imaging (NBI) techniques and magnifying endoscopy (ME) have been widely used in the clinic and endorsed by multiple guidelines and consensuses for SNADETs' evaluation. Confocal laser endomicroscopy (CLE), endocytoscopy (ECS), and artificial intelligence (AI) are also up-and-coming methods, showing an exceptional value in the diagnosis of SNADETs. Similar to the endoscopic treatment for colorectal polyps, the choices for SNADETs mainly include cold snare polypectomy (CSP), endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), and laparoscopic endoscopic cooperative surgery (LECS). However, owing to the narrow lumen, rich vascularity, weak muscle layer, abundant Brunner's gland, and the hardship of endoscope control, the duodenum ranks as one of the most dangerous operating areas in the digestive tract. Therefore, endoscopists must anticipate the difficulties in endoscopic maneuverability, remain aware of the increased risk of complications, and then select the appropriate treatment according to the advantages and disadvantages of each method.

Conventional Clips vs Over-the-Scope Clips for Mucosal Defects Closure After Duodenal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection

Background and Aims

Over-the-scope clips (OTSCs) are used for treating gastrointestinal perforations, postoperative anastomotic leakages, and mucosal defect closure after endoscopic resections. However, OTSCs are expensive and associated with fatal complications; therefore, proper OTSC usage is necessary. Criteria of OTSC use for mucosal defect closure after duodenal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) are scarce. We examined closure outcomes with OTSCs and conventional clips in patients undergoing duodenal ESD, analyzed the resected specimen area, estimated the preoperative size of tumors treated with each method, and attempted to clarify the criteria for the use of OTSCs vs conventional clips.

Methods

Endoscopic resection was performed for 133 superficial duodenal epithelial tumors from April 2017 to February 2022. Complete closure of mucosal defects after duodenal ESD was attempted for 82 superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors, divided into OTSC and control (conventional clips used) groups. Closure outcomes were analyzed.

Results

The overall rate of complete mucosal defect closure in both groups was 98.8%. Significant between-group differences existed in the median estimated tumor size and median resected specimen area.

Conclusion

Conventional clips work well for mucosal defects ≤18 mm after duodenal ESD, but for those >18 mm, a combination of OTSCs may be considered.

Effective and Secure Closure after Duodenal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection: Combination of Endoscopic Ligation with O-Ring Closure and Over-the-Scope Clip

Duodenal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is associated with high incidences of intraoperative complications and delayed adverse events (AEs). Delayed AEs can be reduced by closing the post-ESD defects. We developed a new method of closure after duodenal ESD, combining endoscopic ligation with O-ring closure (E-LOC) with an over-the-scope clip (OTSC) (Band OTSC; B-OTSC). Here, we conducted a single-center, retrospective, observational study to investigate the efficacy and safety of the B-OTSC method for preventing delayed AEs in patients undergoing duodenal ESD. The study included nine patients with superficial nonpapillary duodenal epithelial tumors who underwent ESD and were closed with B-OTSC from February 2021 to February 2023. There were no delayed AEs (0%), the mean (± standard deviation) closure time was 53 ± 21.6 min, the complete closure rate was 100%, and the mean hospital stay was 7.8 ± 1.8 days. The sustained closure rates at postoperative days 3 and 7 were 88.9% and 88.9%, respectively. The historical analysis indicated a significant difference in cost between B-OTSC and conventional OTSC (p < 0.01). In conclusion, B-OTSC was a safe, secure, and cost-effective method of closure after duodenal ESD, even in patients with post-ESD defects of more than half the circumference.

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.

Prophylactic Clipping to Prevent Delayed Bleeding and Perforation After Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection and Endoscopic Mucosal Resection: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

To help prevent delayed adverse events after endoscopic surgery, endoscopists often place clips at the site. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of prophylactic clipping in the prevention of delayed bleeding and perforation after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR).

METHODS

Multiple databases were searched from the inception dates to April 2021. And we included all relevant studies. Pooled odds ratio comparing the prophylactic clipped group versus nonprophylactic clipped group were calculated using the random effects model.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria, with a total size of 8693 participants. There was statistically significant difference in prophylactic clipping versus no prophylactic clipping for delayed bleeding and perforation found in all studies (odds ratio: 0.35, 95% confidence interval: 0.25-0.49, P <0.01; odds ratio: 0.42, 95% confidence interval: 0.21-0.83, P <0.05; respectively). Besides, statistically significant difference was also found in subgroup analyses based on patients with lesions larger than 20 mm. Prophylactic clipping was more protective for duodenal delayed adverse events than colorectum. The use of clip closure was more protective to ESD-related delayed adverse events than EMR.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic clipping after ESD and EMR was beneficial in preventing delayed bleeding and perforation.

A specimen collection technique to ensure that the resected specimen is safely retrieved after duodenal ESD

Video 1Collection technique for the resected specimen after duodenal endoscopic submucosal dissection using endo-devices. Large grasping forceps were used in Case 1, and a collecting net was used in Case 2.

Risk Factors of Non-en Bloc Resection and Non-R0 Resection During Endoscopic Resection in the Treatment of Superficial Duodenal Epithelial Lesions

Background

Superficial duodenal epithelial lesions are precancerous lesions of duodenal carcinoma. Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy has been widely used in the screening and treatment of this disease. This article will collect the data of patients who underwent endoscopic resection of superficial duodenal epithelial lesions in our hospital from 2010 to 2021, aiming to describe the efficacy and safety of endoscopic resection, as well as to explore the risk factors of non-en bloc resection and non-R0 resection.

Methods

Patients who underwent endoscopic resection for superficial duodenal epithelial lesions in our hospital from January 2010 to September 2021 were selected. The curative effect was expressed by the en bloc resection rate and R0 resection rate. The safety was expressed by intra- or postoperative complications, such as bleeding and perforation. The potential risk factors of curative effect were analyzed by logistic regression.

Results

A total of 137 patients were included. The en bloc resection rate was 95.62% (131/137), R0 resection rate was 91.97% (126/137), the postoperative bleeding rate was 2.19% (3/137), and no postoperative perforation was found. The histology result of ectopic gastric mucosa was the risk factor of non-en bloc resection (OR: 8.86, 95% CI: 1.38-56.92); the lesion size ≥2 cm was the risk factor of non-R0 resection (OR: 12.55, 95% CI: 2.95-53.38).

Conclusion

Endoscopic resection is a safe and effective method for the treatment of superficial duodenal epithelial lesions. The histology result of ectopic gastric mucosa was the risk factor of non-en bloc resection and the lesion size ≥2 cm was the risk factor of non-R0 resection.

Fecal incontinence and oral regurgitation during duodenal endoscopic submucosal dissection using the water pressure method

OBJECTIVES

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the duodenum is challenging. The water pressure method (WP-ESD) has been developed with a decreased rate of perforation. However, details of perioperative adverse events of WP-ESD are unknown. The purpose of this study was to clarify the frequency and related factors of fecal incontinence and oral regurgitation during WP-ESD.

METHODS

A chart-based retrospective analysis was performed on 43 patients who underwent duodenal WP-ESD. The saline volume given into the body was calculated in all cases. All adverse events during WP-ESD until 6 weeks were extracted, and factors related to intraoperative fecal incontinence or oral regurgitation were analyzed. The frequency of fecal incontinence and oral regurgitation was also compared to those of 83 conventional ESD cases.

RESULTS

In WP-ESD, intraoperative fecal incontinence occurred in 12 (28%), oral regurgitation in six (14%), and aspiration pneumonia in one patient. For fecal incontinence, the infusion speed (saline volume divided by resection time) around 17 mL/min was a significant factor in multivariable analysis. For oral regurgitation, only tumor size was a significant factor in univariate analysis (P = 0.027). Significant difference was observed in the frequency of fecal incontinence between WP-ESD and conventional ESD (28% vs. 0%, P < 0.001), but no difference was observed in oral regurgitation or aspiration pneumonia.

CONCLUSIONS

Intraoperative fecal incontinence is a unique adverse event of WP-ESD related to the infusion speed. WP-ESD did not pose a risk for oral regurgitation, but we should be aware of the risk in large tumor cases.

Endoscopic management of superficial nonampullary duodenal tumors: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline

1: ESGE recommends that all duodenal adenomas should be considered for endoscopic resection as progression to invasive carcinoma is highly likely.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 2: ESGE recommends performance of a colonoscopy, if that has not yet been done, in cases of duodenal adenoma.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends the use of the cap-assisted method when the location of the minor and/or major papilla and their relationship to a duodenal adenoma is not clearly established during forward-viewing endoscopy.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 4: ESGE recommends the routine use of a side-viewing endoscope when a laterally spreading adenoma with extension to the minor and/or major papilla is suspected.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 5: ESGE suggests cold snare polypectomy for small (< 6 mm in size) nonmalignant duodenal adenomas.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 6: ESGE recommends endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) as the first-line endoscopic resection technique for nonmalignant large nonampullary duodenal adenomas.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 7: ESGE recommends that endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for duodenal adenomas is an effective resection technique only in expert hands.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 8: ESGE recommends using techniques that minimize adverse events such as immediate or delayed bleeding or perforation. These may include piecemeal resection, defect closure techniques, noncontact hemostasis, and other emerging techniques, and these should be considered on a case-by-case basis.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 9: ESGE recommends endoscopic surveillance 3 months after the index treatment. In cases of no recurrence, a further follow-up endoscopy should be done 1 year later. Thereafter, surveillance intervals should be adapted to the lesion site, en bloc resection status, and initial histological result. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.