Electric Endocut and Autocut Resection for Endoscopic Papillectomy: A Systematic Review

The Significance of Histopathological Findings on Clinical Outcomes in Endoscopic Papillectomy with Endocut

This study aimed to evaluate primary clinical outcomes in patients who underwent endoscopic papillectomy (EP) using the Endocut mode while examining the pathological characteristics of the margin of the resected specimen. To this end, 70 patients who underwent Endocut EP were included. Resection margins were classified according to pathological findings as "negative", "positive", or "uncertain (difficult pathological evaluation)". The effect of pathological resection margins on residual tumor recurrence rates was evaluated. The median follow-up was 47 months (range, 22-84). Eleven patients (15.7%) were diagnosed with residual tumors, ten of whom were diagnosed within 6 months after EP. The resection margins were pathologically negative in 27 patients, positive in 15, and uncertain in 28; residual tumors occurred in 5 patients (33.3%) in the positive group, 5 (17.9%) in the uncertain group, and 1 (3.7%) in the negative group. The patient in the negative group had familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). Female sex, FAP, and uncertain or positive resection margins were significantly more common in residual patients (p = 0.009, 0.044, and 0.041, respectively). Pathological resection margins can be used to infer the residual tumor incidence, leading to early post-treatment of residual tumors.

Outcomes of cold snare piecemeal EMR for nonampullary small-bowel adenomas larger than 1 cm: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Nonampullary small-bowel adenomas ≥10 mm are typically resected using cautery-based polypectomy, which is associated with significant adverse events. Studies have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of piecemeal cold snare EMR for removing large colon polyps. Our aim was to assess the safety and efficacy of cold snare EMR for removal of large adenomas in the small bowel.

METHODS

A retrospective study of patients who underwent lift and piecemeal cold snare EMR of small-bowel adenomas ≥1 cm between January 2014 and March 2019 was conducted at a tertiary care medical center. Polyp characteristics at the time of index and surveillance endoscopy were collected. Primary outcomes were residual or recurrent adenoma (RRA) seen on surveillance endoscopy, polyp eradication rate, and number of endoscopic procedures required for eradication. Adverse events including immediate and delayed bleeding, perforation, stricture, pancreatitis, and postpolypectomy syndrome were assessed.

RESULTS

Of 43 patients who underwent piecemeal cold snare EMR, 39 had follow-up endoscopy. Polyps ranged in size from 10 to 70 mm (mean, 26.5 mm). RRA was found in 18 patients (46%), with increased polyp size correlating with higher recurrence (P < .001). Polyp eradication was observed in 35 patients (89%), requiring a median of 2 (range, 1-6) endoscopic procedures. Only 1 patient (2.3%) had immediate postprocedural bleeding. No cases of perforation or postpolypectomy syndrome were seen.

CONCLUSIONS

Piecemeal cold snare EMR may be a feasible, safe, and efficacious technique for small-bowel polyps >10 mm. Prospective, randomized studies are needed to assess how outcomes compare with traditional cautery-based polypectomy.

Expert consensus on endoscopic papillectomy using a Delphi process

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Consensus regarding an optimal algorithm for endoscopic treatment of papillary adenomas has not been established. We aimed to assess the existing degree of consensus among international experts and develop further concordance by means of a Delphi process.

METHODS

Fifty-two international experts in the field of endoscopic papillectomy were invited to participate. Data were collected between August and December 2019 using an online survey platform. Three rounds were conducted. Consensus was defined as ≥70% agreement.

RESULTS

Sixteen experts (31%) completed the full process, and consensus was achieved on 47 of the final 79 statements (59%). Diagnostic workup should include at least an upper endoscopy using a duodenoscope (100%) and biopsy sampling (94%). There should be selected use of additional abdominal imaging (75%-81%). Patients with (suspected) papillary malignancy or over 1 cm intraductal extension should be referred for surgical resection (76%). To prevent pancreatitis, rectal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs should be administered before resection (82%) and a pancreatic stent should be placed (100%). A biliary stent is indicated in case of ongoing bleeding from the papillary region (76%) or concerns for a (micro)perforation after resection (88%). Follow-up should be started 3 to 6 months after initial papillectomy and repeated every 6 to 12 months for at least 5 years (75%).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first step in developing an international consensus-based algorithm for endoscopic management of papillary adenomas. Surprisingly, in many areas consensus could not be achieved. These aspects should be the focus of future studies.

External drainage of bile and pancreatic juice after endoscopic submucosal dissection for duodenal neoplasm: Feasibility study (with video)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for superficial duodenal epithelial tumors (SDETs) is technically difficult and has a high risk of adverse events. Endoscopic nasobiliary and nasopancreatic duct drainage (ENBPD) may reduce the risk of delayed adverse events by preventing exposure of the post-ESD mucosal defect to bile and pancreatic juice. This study was performed to evaluate the safety and feasibility of ENBPD after duodenal ESD.

METHODS

Patients who underwent ESD for SDETs from July 2010 to March 2020 were included. We collected data on the success rate of ENBPD, adverse events due to insertion of a side-viewing endoscope, and pancreatitis after ENBPD. We also collected the clinical outcomes of duodenal ESD, including the incidence rate of delayed adverse events (defined as bleeding or perforation found after the endoscopic procedure).

RESULTS

Among 70 patients without complete closure of the post-ESD mucosal defect, ENBPD was successfully performed in all 25 patients including 21 cases inserted immediately after ESD and four cases inserted later. There were no adverse events associated with ENBPD procedure intraoperatively, while pancreatitis after ENBPD occurred in four patients (16.0%). No patients who underwent immediate ENBPD required intervention for an intra-abdominal abscess or delayed perforation, whereas 3 of 49 patients (6.1%) who did not undergo immediate ENBPD required surgery or drainage of an abscess.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic nasobiliary and nasopancreatic duct drainage is technically feasible and might provide effective prophylaxis for delayed adverse events, even if a large mucosal defect is present after ESD.

Endoscopic management of ampullary tumors: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline

1: ESGE recommends against diagnostic/therapeutic papillectomy when adenoma is not proven.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 2: ESGE recommends endoscopic ultrasound and abdominal magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) for staging of ampullary tumors.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends endoscopic papillectomy in patients with ampullary adenoma without intraductal extension, because of good results regarding outcome (technical and clinical success, morbidity, and recurrence).Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 4: ESGE recommends en bloc resection of ampullary adenomas up to 20-30 mm in diameter to achieve R0 resection, for optimizing the complete resection rate, providing optimal histopathology, and reduction of the recurrence rate after endoscopic papillectomy.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 5: ESGE suggests considering surgical treatment of ampullary adenomas when endoscopic resection is not feasible for technical reasons (e. g. diverticulum, size > 4 cm), and in the case of intraductal involvement (of > 20 mm). Surveillance thereafter is still mandatory.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 6: ESGE recommends direct snare resection without submucosal injection for endoscopic papillectomy.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 7: ESGE recommends prophylactic pancreatic duct stenting to reduce the risk of pancreatitis after endoscopic papillectomy.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 8: ESGE recommends long-term monitoring of patients after endoscopic papillectomy or surgical ampullectomy, based on duodenoscopy with biopsies of the scar and of any abnormal area, within the first 3 months, at 6 and 12 months, and thereafter yearly for at least 5 years.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.