Endoscopic Treatment of Subepithelial Tumors

Present situation of minimally invasive surgical treatment for early gastric cancer

Minimally invasive surgery is a kind of surgical operation, which is performed by using professional surgical instruments and equipment to inactivate, resect, repair or reconstruct the pathological changes, deformities and wounds in human body through micro-trauma or micro-approach, in order to achieve the goal of treatment, its surgical effect is equivalent to the traditional open surgery, while avoiding the morbidity of conventional surgical wounds. In addition, it also has the advantages of less trauma, less blood loss during operation, less psychological burden and quick recovery on patients, and these minimally invasive techniques provide unique value for the examination and treatment of gastric cancer patients. Surgical minimally invasive surgical techniques have developed rapidly and offer numerous options for the treatment of early gastric cancer (EGC): endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), underwater EMR (UEMR), endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR), endoscopic submucosal excavation (ESE), submucosal tunnel endoscopic resection), laparoscopic and endoscopic cooperative surgery (LECS); Among them, EMR, EFTR and LECS technologies have a wide range of applications and different modifications have been derived from their respective surgical operations, such as band-assisted EMR (BA-EMR), conventional EMR (CEMR), over-the-scope clip-assisted EFTR, no-touch EFTR, the inverted LECS, closed LECS, and so on. These new and improved minimally invasive surgeries are more precise, specific and effective in treating different types of EGC.

Management of gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions: an answer to the conflicting opinions

Subepithelial lesions, formerly known as subepithelial tumors, are incidentally discovered protrusions throughout the gastrointestinal tract with normal overlying mucosa. Studies related to the diagnosis and therapy methods are limited due to the low incidence and malignant potential of these lesions. They commonly originating from the second, third, and fourth layers (muscularis mucosa, submucosa, and muscularis propria) of the gastrointestinal wall. They are reported to be more prevalent in the stomach and esophagus than small intestine and colon. Subepithelial lesions in the stomach and duodenum are more prone to malignancy than the lesions in the esophagus. Despite different strategies in the management of subepithelial lesions based on their size and location, there is still not a unique consensus on the issue. In this review, we have attempted to introduce the most practical approach to managing gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions based on current guidelines.

Risk stratification in patients with upper gastrointestinal submucosal tumors undergoing submucosal tunnel endoscopic resection

Background

A substantial heterogeneity exists in patients with upper gastrointestinal submucosal tumors (SMTs). This study aimed to identify predictors of long procedure time (≥60 min), occurrence of procedure-related complications, and long hospital stay (≥6 days) in patients with SMTs undergoing submucosal tunnel endoscopic resection (STER) and stratify risk based on the predictors.

Methods

Sixty-six consecutive patients with upper gastrointestinal SMTs undergoing STER between January 2013 and December 2018 were retrospectively included. Binary logistic regression models were developed to identify predictors of outcomes. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed to evaluate the discrimination of tumor size.

Results

Complete resection and en bloc resection of tumor were achieved in 66 (100%) and 64 patients (97%), respectively. Twenty-seven patients (41%) had a long procedure time, 10 (15%) developed STER-related complications, and 17 (26%) had a long hospital stay. On multivariable analysis, tumor size was an independent predictor of long procedure time (OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.13-1.67; p = 0.001), occurrence of complications (OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.01-1.10; p = 0.012), and long hospital stay (OR 1.05, 95% CI 1.01-1.09; p = 0.035). ROC curves identified a tumor of size 25 mm as the best cutoff; those who had a tumor above this value had a 76-fold risk of long procedure time, 8.56-fold risk of occurrence of complications, and 6.35-fold risk of long hospital stay.

Conclusion

Patients with a tumor size ≥25 mm had longer procedure time, higher risk of STER-related complications, and longer hospital stay; therefore, they should be classified as a high-risk group.

Natural History of Asymptomatic Esophageal Subepithelial Tumors of 30 mm or Less in Size

BACKGROUND

No definite guidelines for the management of small esophageal subepithelial tumors (SETs) have been established, because there are limited data and studies on their natural history. We aimed to assess the natural history and propose optimal management strategies for small esophageal SETs.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed as esophageal SETs ≤ 30 mm in size between 2003 and 2017 using endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) with a minimal follow-up of 3 months were enrolled, and their esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and EUS were retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS

Of 275 esophageal SETs in 262 patients, the initial size was < 10 mm, 10-20 mm, and 20-30 mm in 104 (37.8%), 105 (38.2%), and 66 (24.0%) lesions, respectively. Only 22 (8.0%) SETs showed significant changes in size and/or echogenicity and/or morphology at a median of 40 months (range, 4-120 months). Tissues of 6 SETs showing interval changes were obtained using EUS-guided fine needle aspiration biopsy; 1 was identified as a gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) and was surgically resected, while the other 5 were leiomyomas and were regularly observed. Eight SETs showing interval changes were resected surgically or endoscopically without pathological confirmation; 1 was a GIST, 2 were granular cell tumors, and the other 5 were leiomyomas.

CONCLUSION

Regular follow-up with EGD or EUS may be necessary for esophageal SETs ≤ 30 mm in size considering that small portion of them has a possibility of malignant potential. When esophageal SETs ≤ 30 mm show significant interval changes, pathological confirmation may precede treatment to avoid unnecessary resection.

Endoscopic Resection of Upper Gastrointestinal Subepithelial Tumours: Our Clinical Experience and Results

Upper gastrointestinal subepithelial tumours (SETs) are generally asymptomatic and clinically insignificant and have malign, borderline and benign variants. In advanced endoscopic procedures, histopathological diagnosis and endoscopic resection are possible and feasible. In this study, we examined our approach to upper gastrointestinal subepithelial tumours and our clinical results. Adult patients who applied to Surgical Endoscopy unit between January 2014 and January 2015 were included in the study. The patients' files and final histopathological diagnoses were recorded and analysed retrospectively for this single-center study. SET lesion lower than 30 mm and the lesion whose endoscopic submucosal dissection attemption was included in the study. The total of 8 patients were four female (50%) and four male (50%), aged 31-66 years (median, 53 years). The tumoral lesions were located 4 (50%) patients in esophagus, 3 (37.5%) patients in stomach and one (12.5%) patient in duodenum and their diameter ranged from 5 to 30 mm (median, 14 mm). Post-interventional no complications or abdominal symptoms were encountered. Also, in early follow-ups for six months, no recurrence was observed. Our experiences together with literature reported here, indicated endoscopic resection is a safe and effective method of treatment for most patients with upper gastrointestinal SETs.

An Atypical Presentation of a Colonic Lipoma: Avoiding Surgery with a Deeper Endoscopic Look

INTRODUCTION

Colonic lipomas are common mesenchymal tumours. They are usually asymptomatic and incidentally diagnosed during endoscopic or radiological examinations. Taking into account their typical endoscopic and radiological features and benign nature, tissue sampling, resection or follow-up are generally not required.

CASE REPORT

A 61-year-old woman with poor surgical fitness presented with colonic subocclusion and lower gastrointestinal bleeding. A colonoscopy performed 1 month earlier showed a large polypoid lesion with necrotic and ulcerated areas occupying the lumen of the proximal ascending colon with inconclusive histology. An abdominopelvic computed tomography scan with intravenous contrast was done revealing a cecal-colonic intussusception of a heterogeneous mass. The patient was successfully managed conservatively. A delayed revision colonoscopy showed a significantly smaller atypical subepithelial lesion with no necrosis or ulceration. A single, large and deep incision with a pre-cut needle-knife® allowed the direct collection of lesion tissue using standard biopsy forceps through the so-called single-incision needle-knife® (SINK) biopsy technique. Histological examination was compatible with submucosal lipoma. After 18 months of follow-up, the patient remains asymptomatic.

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

Colonic lipoma complications are rare and can lead to misdiagnosis; in general, they are surgically managed. A conservative approach and a minimally invasive endoscopic procedure allowed a definite diagnosis avoiding the morbidity and mortality of a major surgical intervention in a high-risk patient.

A modified endoscopic full thickness resection for gastric subepithelial tumors from muscularis propria layer: Novel method

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The removal of subepithelial tumors (SETs) is challenging, particularly in tumors originating from the muscularis propria (MP) in the upper gastrointestinal (GI) tract, owing to the high risk of perforation. We developed mechanical spray lumpectomy (MSL), which is a novel method to safely and easily remove the tumor. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of MSL as a novel endoscopic treatment for gastric subepithelial lesions.

METHODS

We performed MSL in a total of 13 patients with upper GI SETs originating from the MP layer. First, mucosectomy was performed using a conventional snare. Repeated injections were performed towards the subserosal layer. After injection, the lesion was mechanically pushed to separate the MP layer using an endoscopic cap. Finally, the mucosa, submucosa, and MP layer with SETs were completely dissected using the spray coagulation mode, and the remaining defect was closed with clipping.

RESULTS

All tumors were completely resected. The mean procedure time was 84.38 ± 41.73 min. There were four leiomyomas, six GI stromal tumors, one mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue lymphoma, and two ectopic pancreases. Although small perforation occurred in only one case, the defect was successfully closed using hemostatic clipping. Moreover, no serious complications related to MSL were encountered during or after the procedure. No residual lesion or recurrence was observed during the follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS

Mechanical spray lumpectomy can be a novel method that provides a safe and minimally invasive endoscopic treatment for upper GI SETs originating from the MP layer.

Endoscopic resection of esophageal and gastric submucosal tumors from the muscularis propria layer: submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection versus endoscopic submucosal excavation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection (STER) and endoscopic submucosal excavation (ESE) are less-invasive therapeutic alternatives to surgical resection for the removal of esophageal or gastric submucosal tumors (SMTs). This study aimed to comparing STER versus ESE for the resection of esophageal and gastric SMTs from the muscularis propria.

METHODS

This systematic review and meta-analysis was reported in accordance with PRISMA guidelines through December 2020. Pooled outcome measures included complete resection, en bloc resection, bleeding, perforation, adverse events, recurrence, procedure duration, and length of hospital stay. Risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD) was calculated as well as Peto time-to-event analyses to determine recurrence rate.

RESULTS

Five retrospective cohort studies (n = 269 STER versus n = 319 ESE) were included. There was no difference in rates of complete resection [RR: 1.01 (95% CI 0.94, 1.07)], en bloc resection [RR: 0.95 (95% CI 0.84, 1.08)], recurrence [OR: 1.18 (95% CI 0.33, 4.16)], and total adverse events [RR: 1.33 (95% CI 0.78, 2.27)]. Specific adverse events including rates of perforation [RR: 0.57 (95% CI 0.12, 2.74)] and bleeding [RR: 1.21 (95% CI 0.30, 4.88)] were not different between STER and ESE. There was a statistical difference when evaluating procedure time, with the STER group presenting significantly larger values [MD: 24.62 min (95% CI 20.04, 29.20)].

CONCLUSION

STER and ESE were associated with similar efficacy and safety; however, ESE was associated with a significantly decreased time to complete the procedure.

Outcomes of endoscopic ultrasound and endoscopic resection of gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions: a single-center retrospective cohort study

Background

Endoscopic resection (ER) is an emerging therapeutic alternative for subepithelial gastrointestinal lesions (SELs). We aimed to determine whether size, layer of origin, and histology based on endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and EUS-guided sampling (EUS-GS) influenced the outcomes and selection of patients for ER.

Methods

We performed a retrospective review of patients who underwent EUS, EUS-GS and resection of SELs from 2012-2019. Two pathologists reviewed the histology and layer of origin of all resected specimens, serving as the criterion for EUS accuracy.

Results

Seventy-three patients were included, of whom 59 (81%) were gastric SELs. Per EUS, median lesion size was 21 mm (interquartile range 15-32), and 63 (86%) originated from the 4th layer. The overall accuracy of EUS and EUS-GS in predicting the layer of origin and histology was 88% (95% confidence interval [CI] 77-94%) and 96% (95%CI 87-98%), respectively. Based on EUS, 18 (25%) patients were referred for ER, 5 (7%) to laparoscopic-endoscopic cooperative surgery, and 50 (68%) to surgery. Size >20 mm was associated with the type of resection approach (P=0.005), while layer of origin and histology were not (P=0.06 and P=0.09, respectively). When SELs were inaccurately classified (n=4) there were no adverse events or revision of the resection approach.

Conclusions

EUS plays an important role in the outcome of resection approach for SELs, with size significantly influencing the selection for ER. In patients undergoing ER, no revised resections were needed when EUS was inaccurate.

A Review of Endoscopic Full-thickness Resection, Submucosal Tunneling Endoscopic Resection, and Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Resection of Subepithelial Lesions

Gastrointestinal subepithelial tumors (SETs) are often found while performing routine endoscopy. Recently, there has been the development of new endoscopic techniques such as endoscopic submucosal dissection, submucosal tunnel endoscopic resection, and endoscopic full-thickness resection, all minimally invasive approaches which have made it possible to resect SETs that were previously resected with surgery. This review discusses the endoscopic treatment of patients with SETs, outcomes for endoscopic treatment, procedure-related complications, and advantages and disadvantages of these endoscopic techniques.

Endoscopic Full-Thickness Resection for Gastric Subepithelial Lesions Arising from the Muscularis Propria

Most cases of gastric subepithelial lesions follow a good clinical course; however, some lesions progress to malignant tumors, and treatment of tumors with a high risk of malignancy is essential. Surgical excision has been the primary treatment for tumors originating from the propria muscle layer, but it has the disadvantages of being invasive and causing postoperative functional abnormalities. With the development of endoscopic techniques and instruments, the role of endoscopic resection, which is a less invasive method for the removal of gastric subepithelial lesions, has been attracting attention. We performed an endoscopic full-thickness resection for 8 patients with gastric subepithelial lesions originating from the muscularis propria. No fatal complications occurred. Our findings suggest the need to develop various devices for resection and closure and to accumulate further experience through additional studies to prevent complications and specimen loss.

Ligation-assisted endoscopic mucosal resection for esophageal granular cell tumors is safe and effective

Given their malignant potential, resection of esophageal granular cell tumors (GCTs) is often undertaken, yet the optimal technique is unknown. We present a large series of dedicated endoscopic resection using band ligation (EMR-B) of esophageal GCTs. Patients diagnosed with esophageal GCTs between 2002 and 2019 were identified using a prospectively collected pathology database. Endoscopic reports were reviewed, and patients who underwent dedicated EMR-B of esophageal GCTs were included. Medical records were queried for demographics, findings, adverse events, and follow-up. We identified 21 patients who underwent dedicated EMR-B for previously identified esophageal GCT. Median age was 39 years; 16 (76%) were female. Eight (38%) had preceding signs or symptoms, potentially attributable to the GCT. Upon endoscopic evaluation, 12 (57%) were found in the distal esophagus. Endoscopic ultrasound was used in 15 cases (71%). Median lesion size was 7 mm, interquartile range 4 mm-8 mm. The largest lesion was 12 mm. A total of 20 (95%) had en bloc resection confirmed with pathologic examination. The only patient with tumor extending to the resection margin underwent surveillance endoscopy that showed no residual tumor. No patients experienced bleeding, perforation, or stricturing in our series. No patients have had known recurrence of their esophageal GCT. EMR-B of esophageal GCT achieves complete histopathologic resection with minimal adverse events. EMR-B is safe and effective and seems prudent compared with observation for what could be an aggressive and malignant tumor. EMR-B should be considered first-line therapy when resecting esophageal GCT up to 12 mm in diameter.

Endoscopic Full Thickness Resection for Gastrointestinal Tumors - Challenges and Solutions

Standard polypectomy, endoscopic mucosal resection, and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) are established techniques for the treatment of gastrointestinal tumors. However, resection of submucosal tumors via ESD often results in low rates of microscopically margin-negative (R0) resection and high rates of perforation. Endoscopic full thickness resection (EFTR) overcomes this adverse event and aids in the therapeutic management of complex tumors.

Multiple techniques for EFTR have been developed, each with its own advantages and disadvantages. Submucosal tunneling and non-exposed techniques are generally preferable, because the layer of overlying intact mucosa reduces the incidence of intraperitoneal contamination by the gastric fluid and dissemination of the tumor cells. However, adoption of EFTR by endoscopists in clinical practice remains low. The major challenge seems to be the technical difficulty in performing laparoscopic and/or endoscopic suturing using the currently available instruments.

We developed a novel robotic endoscopic platform with suturing capabilities to overcome the technical challenges of suturing. This platform allows easy maneuvering and triangulation of the instruments, thus facilitating endoscopic suturing using robotic arms. Our studies have demonstrated that this robotic endoscopic platform with suturing capabilities is an effective and safe method for performing EFTR with endoscopic suturing.

The retrospective comparison between submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection and endoscopic submucosal excavation for managing esophageal submucosal tumors originating from the muscularis propria layer

BACKGROUND

Submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection (STER) and endoscopic submucosal excavation (ESE) were recently introduced to cure submucosal tumors (SMTs) originating from the muscularis propria (MP) layer. This study aimed to compare clinical performance and safety of STER and ESE in treating esophageal SMTs originating from the MP layer.

METHODS

From January 2011 to December 2017, retrospective data collection and follow-up were applied for all STER or ESE cases with esophageal SMTs originating from the MP layer in our endoscopy center, including clinical characteristics, procedure success, efficacy, and adverse events. Subgroup analysis was further done based on tumor size and origin.

RESULTS

90 STER and 77 ESE were enrolled in this study. There were no significant difference for  patient characteristics, procedure performance, and complications for ESE and STER intervention (P > 0.05). STER was faster than ESE (3.90 mm²/min vs 2.82 mm²/min, P < 0.05). For large tumors (≥ 20 mm), both techniques had the similar performance (P > 0.05), while STER led to the shorter hospitalization (4.0d vs 7.0d, P < 0.05) and lower postoperative complication (16.3% vs 45.5%, P < 0.05). For small tumors (< 20 mm), STER achieved faster operation (STER vs ESE, 2.57 mm²/min vs 1.83 mm²/min, P < 0.05). Regardless of tumor origin, there were no significant difference for both techniques, but STER resulted in short hospitalization for SMTs from the deep MP layer (STER vs ESE, 5.0d vs 7.0d, P < 0.05). During the follow-up, 2 residual and 4 recurrence occurred in the STER group, as well as 1 residual and 2 recurrence in the ESE group.

CONCLUSIONS

Both STER and ESE were effective for treating esophageal SMTs originating from the MP layer. STER might be better due to its faster operation, less complications, and shorter hospitalization.

Submucosal Tunnel Endoscopic Resection for Esophageal Submucosal Tumors: A Multicenter Study

Background

Submucosal tumors (SMTs) are primarily benign tumors, but some may have a malignant potential. Endoscopic submucosal dissection that has been used for removing esophageal SMTs could cause perforation. Submucosal tunnel endoscopic resection (STER) is an improved and an effective technique for treating esophageal SMTs.

Aims

This study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of STER for treating esophageal SMTs.

Methods

A retrospective study design was adopted to analyze the baseline characteristics, clinical outcomes, and follow-up data of patients with esophageal SMTs, which originated from the muscularis propria layer and were treated with STER from September 2011 to May 2018.

Results

A total of 119 lesions were included from 115 patients who were successfully treated with STER. The mean age of the patients was 49.7 ± 10.7 years. The lesions were primarily located in the middle and lower esophagus. The mean size of the lesions was 19.4 ± 10.0 mm. The mean operation duration was 46.7 ± 25.6 min, and the mean duration of hospitalization was 5.9 ± 2.8 days. The total en bloc resection rate and the complete resection rate were 97.5% and 100%, respectively. Regarding complications, there were 9 (7.8%) cases of perforation, 2 (1.7%) cases of pneumothorax, and 9 (7.8%) cases of subcutaneous emphysema. Histopathological results revealed 113 (95.0%) cases of leiomyoma, 5 (4.2%) cases of gastrointestinal stromal tumors, and 1 (0.8%) case of a granular cell tumor. During the mean 15-month follow-up, there were no cases of recurrence and distant metastasis.

Conclusions

STER is a safe and feasible technique for treating esophageal SMTs originating from the muscularis propria layer.