Reduction in the procedure time of hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric neoplasms: a multi-center retrospective propensity score-matched analysis

Hybrid and Conventional Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Early Gastric Neoplasms: A Multi-Center Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection (H-ESD), which incorporates endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) with endoscopic mucosal resection, has been developed to make ESD technically easier. This study aimed to determine if H-ESD is superior to conventional ESD (C-ESD) for small early gastric neoplasms (EGNs).

METHODS

We conducted a multi-center, prospective, open-label, randomized controlled trial to compare the treatment outcomes of H-ESD and C-ESD (Hybrid-G Trial). Patients with differentiated type intramucosal EGN ≤20 mm in diameter and without ulceration were randomly assigned (1:1) to groups that underwent H-ESD or C-ESD. A single multi-functional snare, SOUTEN (ST1850-20, Kaneka, Medix, Tokyo, Japan), was used for H-ESD. The primary outcome was procedure time. Secondary outcomes included mucosal incision time, time and speed of submucosal dissection, curability, and endoscopic procedural adverse events.

RESULTS

A total of 39 and 40 patients underwent H-ESD and C-ESD, respectively. The procedure time of H-ESD was significantly shorter than that of C-ESD (33.16 min vs 62.46 min; H-ESD/C-ESD ratio: 0.53; 95% confidence interval, 0.41-0.69; P < .0001). There was no significant difference in mucosal incision time between the 2 groups; the time and speed of submucosal dissection of H-ESD were significantly shorter than those of C-ESD. No difference was observed between the 2 groups in other outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

H-ESD has significantly shorter procedure time than C-ESD, with high and comparable curability and safety for both H-ESD and C-ESD. H-ESD can be a good option for the endoscopic treatment of small EGNs. (UMIN Clinical Trials Registry, Numbers: UMIN000041244).

Comparison of the procedure time differences between hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection and conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection in patients with early gastric neoplasms: a study protocol for a multi-center randomized controlled trial (Hybrid-G trial)

Background

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is widely accepted as a local treatment for gastrointestinal tract tumors. As a simplified endoscopic procedure, hybrid ESD (H-ESD) has been performed for colorectal neoplasms in recent times. However, whether H-ESD is superior to conventional ESD (C-ESD) for patients with early gastric neoplasms (EGN) remains unclear. In this trial, we will compare the treatment outcomes of H-ESD and C-ESD. We hypothesize that the procedure time for H-ESD is shorter than that for C-ESD.

Methods

This is an investigator-initiated, multi-center, prospective, randomized, open-label, parallel-group trial to be conducted beginning in August 2020 at nine institutions in Japan. We will determine if H-ESD is superior to C-ESD in terms of procedure time in patients with EGN diagnosed as macroscopically intramucosal (T1a) differentiated carcinoma ≤ 20 mm in diameter without ulcerative findings according to current Japanese gastric cancer treatment guidelines. A total of 82 patients will be recruited and randomly assigned to either the C-ESD or the H-ESD group. The primary outcome is ESD procedure time. Secondary outcomes include mucosal incision, time and speed of submucosal dissection, en bloc resection, complete resection, curability, adverse events related to the ESD procedure, extent of dissection before snaring, volume of injection solution, number and time of hemostasis, thickness of the submucosal layer in the resected specimen, and handover to another operator. The stated sample size was determined based on the primary outcome. According to a previous report comparing the procedure times of C-ESD and H-ESD, we hypothesized that H-ESD would provide a 0.2 reduction in logarithmically concerted procedure time (−37%). We estimated that a total of 82 participants were needed to reach a power of 80% for a t-test with a significance level of 0.05 and considering a 10% dropout.

Discussion

This trial will provide high-quality data on the benefits and risks of H-ESD for EGN patients. The results of this study could lead to improved outcomes in patients with EGN undergoing ESD. The results will be presented at national and international meetings and published in peer-reviewed journals.

Trial registration

UMIN-CTR UMIN000041244. Registered on July 29, 2020.

Endoscopic instruments and techniques in endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancer

Introduction: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a less invasive local treatment for early gastric cancer (EGC).Areas covered: Japanese guidelines have recently expanded the endoscopic treatment indications for EGC. ESD is sometimes performed for lesions with a relative indication that has not previously been considered for ESD. ESD procedures are technically difficult, especially for larger and more invasive lesions. Complete resection and accurate histological assessment of EGC lesions are essential to evaluate endoscopic curability. Various endoscopic instruments, including three types of endoscopic knives and specific hemostatic forceps, have been developed, and endoscopic techniques, including the traction method, have been modified to simplify the procedure.Expert opinion: An insulated-tip knife with large tissue contact allows us to perform faster incisions, while a needle-type knife with minimal tissue contact allows us to perform precise incisions. Furthermore, a scissor-type knife with grasping tissues allows us to perform more secure incision. The traction method enables the operator to proceed with submucosal dissection procedures. In cases with small lesions, snaring can be used, as well as knife dissection. Understanding the features of each endoscopic instrument and technique is essential because appropriate selection and usage contribute to successful and safe ESD procedures.

Efficacy of hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection with SOUTEN in gastric lesions: An ex vivo porcine model basic study

BACKGROUND

Hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) that comprises mucosal incision and partial submucosal dissection followed by snaring in a planned manner, has been developed for endoscopic resection of gastrointestinal neoplasms to overcome the technical barrier of ESD. Although the superiority of hybrid ESD with SOUTEN, a single multifunctional device, over conventional ESD has been indicated, the actual effect of snaring itself remains unclear since SOUTEN could be applied to hybrid ESD group, but not to the conventional ESD group, due to ethical issue in clinical practice.

AIM

To determine whether and how hybrid ESD was superior to conventional ESD in the endoscopic treatment of gastric lesions in an ex vivo porcine model basic study.

METHODS

Sixteen endoscopists participated in this basic study in August 2020 at Kyushu University, performing 32 procedures each for hybrid ESD and conventional ESD. Mock lesions (10-15 mm, diameter) were created in the porcine stomach. The primary outcome was total procedure time and secondary outcomes were en bloc or complete resection, perforation, procedure time/speed for both, mucosal incision, and submucosal dissection. Factors associated with difficulty in ESD including longer procedure time, incomplete resection, and perforation, were also investigated. Categorical and continuous data were analyzed using the chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test and the Mann-Whitney U test, respectively.

RESULTS

The median total procedure time of hybrid ESD was significantly shorter than that of conventional ESD (median: 8.3 min vs 16.2 min, P < 0.001). Time, speed, and the amount of hyaluronic acid during submucosal dissection were more favorable in hybrid ESD than conventional ESD (time, 5.2 min vs 10.4 min, P < 0.001; speed, 43.7 mm²/min vs 23.8 mm²/min, P < 0.00; injection volume, 1.5 mL vs 3.0 mL, P < 0.001), although no significant differences in those factors were observed between both groups during mucosal incision. There was also no significant difference between both groups in the en bloc/complete resection rate and perforation rate (complete resection, 93.8% vs 87.5%, P = 0.67; perforation, 0% vs 3.1%, P = 1). Selection of conventional ESD as the treatment method was significantly associated with difficulties during ESD (odds ratio = 10.2; highest among factors).

CONCLUSION

Hybrid ESD with SOUTEN improves the treatment outcomes of gastric lesions. It also has the potential to reduce medical costs since SOUTEN is a single multifunctional device that is inexpensive.