Normal Ileal Mucus Is Inadequate for Epithelial Protection in Ileal Pouch Mucosa

BACKGROUND

Clinical, nonspecific pouchitis is common after restorative proctocolectomy for ulcerative colitis, but its cause is unknown. A possible lack of protection for the ileal mucosa in its role as a reservoir for colonic-type bacteria may be the missing piece in defining the causes of pouchitis.

OBJECTIVE

The study aimed to review the causes of pouchitis and introduce the hypothesis that inadequate mucus protection in the pouch, combined with a predisposition to abnormal inflammation, is the most common cause of nonspecific pouchitis.

DATA SOURCES

Review of PubMed and MEDLINE for articles discussing pouchitis and intestinal mucus.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies published from 1960 to 2023. The main search terms were "pouchitis," and "intestinal mucus," whereas Boolean operators were used with multiple other terms to refine the search. Duplicates and case reports were excluded.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Current theories about the cause of pouchitis, descriptions of the role of mucus in the physiology of intestinal protection, and evidence of the effects of lack of mucus on mucosal inflammation.

RESULTS

The crossreference of "intestinal mucus" with "pouchitis" produced 9 references, none of which discussed the role of mucus in the development of pouchitis. Crossing "intestinal mucus" with "pouch" resulted in 32 articles, combining "pouchitis" with "barrier function" yielded 37 articles, and "pouchitis" with "permeability" yielded only 8 articles. No article discussed the mucus coat as a barrier to bacterial invasion of the epithelium or mentioned inadequate mucus as a factor in pouchitis. However, an ileal pouch produces a colonic environment in the small bowel, and the ileum lacks the mucus protection needed for this sort of environment. This predisposes pouch mucosa to bacterial invasion and chronic microscopic inflammation that may promote clinical pouchitis in patients prone to an autoimmune response.

LIMITATIONS

No prior studies address inadequate mucus protection and the origin of proctitis. There is no objective way of measuring the autoimmune tendency in patients with ulcerative colitis.

CONCLUSIONS

Studies of intestinal mucus in the ileal pouch and its association with pouchitis are warranted.

Risk factors for positive resection margins after endoscopic resection for gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumors

BACKGROUND

In recent years, the incidence of gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumors (GI-NETs) has remarkably increased due to the widespread use of screening gastrointestinal endoscopy. Currently, the most common treatments are surgery and endoscopic resection. Compared to surgery, endoscopic resection possesses a higher risk of resection margin residues for the treatment of GI-NETs.

METHODS

A total of 315 patients who underwent surgery or endoscopic resection for GI-NETs were included. We analyzed their resection modality (surgery, ESD, EMR), margin status, Preoperative marking and Prognosis.

RESULTS

Among 315 patients included, 175 cases underwent endoscopic resection and 140 cases underwent surgical treatment. A total of 43 (43/175, 24.57%) and 10 (10/140, 7.14%) patients exhibited positive resection margins after endoscopic resection and surgery, respectively. Multivariate regression analysis suggested that no preoperative marking and endoscopic treatment methods were risk factors for resection margin residues. Among the patients with positive margin residues after endoscopic resection, 5 patients underwent the radical surgical resection and 1 patient underwent additional ESD resection. The remaining 37 patients had no recurrence during a median follow-up of 36 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with surgery, endoscopic therapy has a higher margin residual rate. During endoscopic resection, preoperative marking may reduce the rate of lateral margin residues, and endoscopic submucosal dissection may be preferred than endoscopic mucosal resection. Periodical follow-up may be an alternative method for patients with positive margin residues after endoscopic resection.

Efficacy and safety of precutting endoscopic mucosal resection versus endoscopic submucosal dissection for non-ampullary superficial duodenal lesions

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic treatments for non-ampullary superficial duodenal lesions (NASDLs) are yet to be standardized. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for NASDLs demands advanced techniques and a long procedure time to prevent perforation and bleeding. Precutting endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is a technical modification of ESD that overcomes the limitations of ESD. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of precutting EMR versus ESD for NASDLs.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients with NASDLs treated with either precutting EMR or ESD from January 2015 to March 2023.

RESULTS

A total of 90 patients with NASDLs were analyzed, with 44 patients in the precutting EMR group and 46 patients in the ESD group. The endoscopic procedure achieved satisfactory outcomes in both groups, with en block resection rate of 100.0 %. The R0 resection rates in the precutting EMR and ESD groups were 95.5 % and 93.5 %, respectively. No delayed perforation occurred postoperatively in either group. There were no significant differences between the two groups in age, gender, lesion location, layer of lesion origin, macroscopic type, and lesion size. The procedure time was significantly shorter in the precutting EMR group than in the ESD group (22.9 ± 7.1 min vs 36.0 ± 10.6 min, p<0.001). The intraoperative perforation rate was significantly lower in the precutting EMR group compared to ESD group (4.5% vs 19.6 %, p = 0.030).

CONCLUSIONS

Precutting EMR is comparable to ESD for NASDLs, demonstrating a lower intraoperative perforation rate and shorter procedure time compared to ESD.

Prevalence and clinical significance of the muscle retracting sign during endoscopic submucosal dissection of large macronodular colorectal lesions (with videos)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The muscle retracting sign (MRS) can be present during endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) of macronodular colorectal lesions. The prevalence of MRS and its pathologic and clinical implications is unclear. This study evaluated the effect of MRS on the technical and clinical outcomes of ESD.

METHODS

All patients referred for ESD of protruding lesions or granular mixed lesions with >10 mm macronodule granular mixed laterally spreading tumors (LST-GMs) in 2 academic centers from January 2017 to October 2022 were prospectively included. Size of the macronodule was analyzed retrospectively. The primary outcome was the curative resection rate according to MRS status. Secondary outcomes were R0 resection, perforation, secondary surgery rate, and risk factors for MRS.

RESULTS

Of 694 lesions, 84 (12%) had MRS (MRS+). The curative resection rate was decreased by MRS (MRS+ 41.6% vs lesions without MRS [MRS-] 81.3%), whereas the perforation (MRS+ 22.6% vs MRS- 9.2%), submucosal cancer (MRS+ 34.9% vs MRS- 9.2%), and surgery (MRS+ 45.2% vs MRS- 6%) rates were increased. The R0 resection rate of MRS+ colonic lesions was lower than that of rectal lesions (53% vs 74.3%). In multivariate analysis, protruding lesions (odds ratio, 2.47; 95% confidence interval, 1.27-4.80) and macronodules >4 cm (odds ratio, 4.24; 95% confidence interval, 2.23-8.05) were risk factors for MRS.

CONCLUSIONS

MRS reduces oncologic outcomes and increases the perforation rate. Consequently, procedures in the colon should be stopped if MRS is detected, and those in the rectum should be continued due to the morbidity of alternative therapy.

Endoscopic mucosal resection using anchored snare Tip-in versus precut technique for small rectal neuroendocrine tumors

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Small rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) can be treated with modified endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). However, an optimal EMR method remains to be established. We aimed to assess the non-inferiority of Tip-in EMR versus precut EMR (EMR-P) for treating rectal NETs.

METHODS

This prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial enrolled patients with rectal NETs of < 10 mm in diameter. The patients were randomly assigned to EMR-P and Tip-in EMR groups in a 1:1 ratio. Primary outcome was margin-negative (R0) resection rate between the two methods, with a noninferiority margin of 10%.

RESULTS

Seventy-five NETs in 73 patients, including 64 eligible lesions (32 lesions in each, EMR-P and Tip-in EMR groups), were evaluated. In a modified intention-to-treat analysis, R0 resection rates of the EMR-P and Tip-in EMR groups were 96.9% and 90.6%, respectively, which did not demonstrate non-inferiority (risk difference, -6.3 [95% confidence interval: -18.0 to 5.5]). Resection time in the EMR-P group was longer than that in the Tip-in EMR group (p < 0.001). One case of intraprocedural bleeding was reported in each group.

CONCLUSION

We did not demonstrate the non-inferiority of Tip-in EMR compared to EMR-P for treating small rectal NETs. However, the R0 resection rates for both techniques were high enough for clinical application.

Superior predictive value of transmural over endoscopic severity for colectomy risk in ulcerative colitis: a multicentre prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic activity is associated with an increased risk of surgery in patients with ulcerative colitis [UC]. Transmural activity, as defined by Milan Ultrasound Criteria [MUC] > 6.2, reliably detects endoscopic activity in patients with UC. The present study aimed to assess in UC patients whether transmural severity is a better predictor of colectomy as compared to endoscopy.

METHODS

Consecutive adult UC patients were recruited in two IBD Referral Centres and underwent colonoscopy and intestinal ultrasound in a blinded fashion. The need for colectomy was assessed at follow-up. Univariable and multivariable logistic and Cox regression analyses were performed. Receiver operating characteristic [ROC] analysis was used to compare MUC baseline values and Mayo Endoscopic Scores [MES] in predicting colectomy risk.

RESULTS

Overall, 141 patients were enrolled, and 13 underwent colectomy in the follow-up period. Both MES (hazard ratio [HR]: 3.15, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.18-8.37, p = 0.02) and MUC [HR: 1.48, 95% CI: 1.19-1.76, p < 0.001] were associated with colectomy risk, but only MUC was independently associated with this event on multivariable analysis [HR: 1.46, 95% CI: 1.06-2.02, p = 0.02]. MUC was the only independent variable associated with colectomy risk in patients with clinically active disease (odds ratio [OR]: 1.53 [1.03-2.27], p = 0.03). MUC demonstrated higher accuracy than MES (area under ROC curve [AUROC] 0.83, 95% CI: 0.75-0.92 vs 0.71, 95% CI: 0.62-0.80) and better performance for predicting colectomy [p = 0.02]. The optimal MUC score cut-off value for predicting colectomy, as assessed by the Youden index, was 7.7.

CONCLUSIONS

A superior predictive value was found for transmural vs endoscopic severity for colectomy risk in UC patients.

Underwater clip closure method for mucosal defects after duodenal endoscopic submucosal dissection (with video)

Conventional clip closure of mucosal defects after duodenal endoscopic submucosal dissection decreases the incidence of delayed adverse events, but may result in incomplete closure, depending on size or location. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of the underwater clip closure method for complete duodenal defect closure without the difficulties associated with conventional closure methods. We investigated 19 patients with 20 lesions who underwent endoscopic submucosal dissection of the duodenum and subsequent mucosal defect closure in underwater conditions at our facility between February 2021 and January 2022. The success rate of the underwater clip closure method was defined as the complete endoscopic closure of the mucosal defect; a success rate of 100% was achieved. The median resected specimen size was 34.3 mm, the median procedure time for mucosal defect closure was 14 min, and the median number of clips used per patient was 12. No delayed adverse events were observed. The underwater clip closure method is a feasible option for complete closure of mucosal defects, regardless of the size or location of a duodenal endoscopic submucosal dissection.

Curative Effect Analysis of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection in Giant Laterally Spreading Rectal Tumors

GOAL

The objective of this study was to investigate the clinical efficacy of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the treatment of giant lateral developing rectal-type tumors (laterally spreading tumors, LSTs).

BACKGROUND

There are no specialized studies on the efficacy of ESD in the treatment of LSTs measuring >5 cm in diameter, surgery was often used in the past, but it has the disadvantages of large trauma, many complications, and high cost.

METHODS

The data of 185 patients with rectal LSTs who had undergone ESD in the digestive endoscopy center of our hospital from January 2012 to June 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. Based on the size of the lesions, the patients were divided into 2 groups: diameter ≤5 cm (110 cases) and diameter >5 cm (75 cases), and we summarized and analyzed the en bloc resection rate, curative resection rate, procedure time, muscle injury, bleeding, perforation, postoperative stricture, and recurrence.

RESULTS

There was no difference in the en bloc resection rate and R0 resection rate between the 2 groups ( P =0.531). Moreover, there was no difference in the incidence of delayed perforation, postoperative stenosis, and recurrence, but the incidence of delayed bleeding was significantly higher in the giant LST group than the small LST group ( P =0.001). Moreover, for giant rectal LSTs, the growth pattern of the lesion, JNET classification, and the extent of postoperative mucosal defect do not significantly affect the efficacy of ESD. It is worth mentioning that the operation time was longer in the group with a diameter >5 cm, in which perforation was more frequent and the muscle layer was more likely to be injured during ESD ( P <0.001). The muscle injury during ESD was mainly related to the diameter of the lesion, the crossing the rectal pouch, and the operation time.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of ESD to treat giant rectal LSTs (>5 cm) is relatively difficult and can easily lead to intraoperative muscle injury, perforation, and late postoperative bleeding. However, if active intervention is performed, patients can still achieve good efficacy and prognosis, which can be applied in hospitals with certain conditions.

Risk factors of unintentional piecemeal resection in endoscopic mucosal resection for colorectal polyps ≥ 10 mm

This study aimed to investigate the lesion and endoscopist factors associated with unintentional endoscopic piecemeal mucosal resection (uniEPMR) of colorectal lesions ≥ 10 mm. uniEPMR was defined from the medical record as anything other than a preoperatively planned EPMR. Factors leading to uniEPMR were identified by retrospective univariate and multivariate analyses of lesions ≥ 10 mm (adenoma including sessile serrated lesion and carcinoma) that were treated with endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) at three hospitals. Additionally, a questionnaire survey was conducted to determine the number of cases treated by each endoscopist. A learning curve (LC) was created for each lesion size based on the number of experienced cases and the percentage of uniEPMR. Of 2557 lesions, 327 lesions underwent uniEPMR. The recurrence rate of uniEPMR was 2.8%. Multivariate analysis showed that lesion diameter ≥ 30 mm (odds ratio 11.83, 95% confidence interval 6.80-20.60, p < 0.0001) was the most associated risk factor leading to uniEPMR. In the LC analysis, the proportion of uniEPMR decreased for lesion sizes of 10-19 mm until 160 cases. The proportion of uniEPMR decreased with the number of experienced cases in the 20-29 mm range, while there was no correlation between the number of experienced cases and the proportion of uniEPMR ≥ 30 mm. These results suggest that 160 cases seem to be the minimum number of cases needed to be proficient in en bloc EMR. Additionally, while lesion sizes of 10-29 mm are considered suitable for EMR, lesion sizes ≥ 30 mm are not applicable for en bloc EMR from the perspective of both lesion and endoscopist factors.

Endoscopic En Bloc Versus Piecemeal Resection of Large Nonpedunculated Colonic Adenomas : A Randomized Comparative Trial

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic resection of adenomas prevents colorectal cancer, but the optimal technique for larger lesions is controversial. Piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) has a low adverse event (AE) rate but a variable recurrence rate necessitating early follow-up. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) can reduce recurrence but may increase AEs.

OBJECTIVE

To compare ESD and EMR for large colonic adenomas.

DESIGN

Participant-masked, parallel-group, superiority, randomized controlled trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03962868).

SETTING

Multicenter study involving 6 French referral centers from November 2019 to February 2021.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with large (≥25 mm) benign colonic lesions referred for resection.

INTERVENTION

The patients were randomly assigned by computer 1:1 (stratification by lesion location and center) to ESD or EMR.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary end point was 6-month local recurrence (neoplastic tissue on endoscopic assessment and scar biopsy). The secondary end points were technical failure, en bloc R0 resection, and cumulative AEs.

RESULTS

In total, 360 patients were randomly assigned to ESD (n = 178) or EMR (n = 182). In the primary analysis set (n = 318 lesions in 318 patients), recurrence occurred after 1 of 161 ESDs (0.6%) and 8 of 157 EMRs (5.1%) (relative risk, 0.12 [95% CI, 0.01 to 0.96]). No recurrence occurred in R0-resected cases (90%) after ESD. The AEs occurred more often after ESD than EMR (35.6% vs. 24.5%, respectively; relative risk, 1.4 [CI, 1.0 to 2.0]).

LIMITATION

Procedures were performed under general anesthesia during hospitalization in accordance with the French health system.

CONCLUSION

Compared with EMR, ESD reduces the 6-month recurrence rate, obviating the need for systematic early follow-up colonoscopy at the cost of more AEs.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

French Ministry of Health.

Low delayed bleeding and high complete closure rate of mucosal defects with the novel through-the-scope dual-action tissue clip after endoscopic resection of large nonpedunculated colorectal lesions (with video)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Complete closure after endoscopic resection of large nonpedunculated colorectal lesions (LNPCLs) can reduce delayed bleeding but is challenging with conventional through-the-scope (TTS) clips alone. The novel dual-action tissue (DAT) clip has clip arms that open and close independently of each other, facilitating tissue approximation. We aimed to evaluate the rate of complete closure and delayed bleeding with the DAT clip after endoscopic resection of LNPCLs.

METHODS

This was a multicenter prospective cohort study of all patients who underwent defect closure with the DAT clip after EMR or endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) of LNPCLs ≥20 mm from July 2022 to May 2023. Delayed bleeding was defined as a bleeding event requiring hospitalization, blood transfusion, or any intervention within 30 days after the procedure. Complete closure was defined as apposition of mucosal defect margins without visible submucosal areas <3 mm along the closure line.

RESULTS

One hundred seven patients (median age, 64 years; 42.5% women) underwent EMR (n = 63) or ESD (n = 44) of LNPCLs (median size, 40 mm; 74.8% right-sided colon) followed by defect closure. Complete closure was achieved in 96.3% (n = 103) with a mean of 1.4 ± .6 DAT clips and 2.9 ± 1.8 TTS clips. Delayed bleeding occurred in 1 patient (.9%) without requiring additional interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the DAT clip in conjunction with TTS clips achieved high complete defect closure after endoscopic resection of large LNPCLs and was associated with a .9% delayed bleeding rate. Future comparative trials and formal cost-analyses are needed to validate these findings. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT05852457.).

Hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection as a salvage option for difficult colorectal conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection

BACKGROUND

When total submucosal dissection is difficult to achieve during conventional colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (C-ESD), the lesion can be resected by final snaring through salvage hybrid ESD (SH-ESD). This study aimed to examine the outcomes of SH-ESD and identify its indications that could achieve en bloc resection.

METHODS

We recruited 1039 consecutive patients with colorectal lesions that underwent ESD at Hiroshima University Hospital between January 2015 and December 2020. C-ESD was attempted thoroughly in 924 lesions (C-ESD group, including 9 lesions in which ESD was discontinued), and SH-ESD was performed owing to some difficulties in 115 lesions (SH-ESD group). Risk factors for incomplete resection by SH-ESD and ESD discontinuation were evaluated using multivariate analysis. The outcomes were compared between cases with remaining undissected submucosa of < 20 mm in diameter in the SH-ESD and C-ESD groups, using propensity score matching.

RESULTS

Multivariate analysis revealed that a procedure time > 80 min and remaining undissected submucosa ≥ 20 mm in diameter were significant risk factors for incomplete resection after SH-ESD and ESD discontinuation. By propensity score matching analysis, procedure time was significantly shorter in the SH-ESD group with remaining undissected submucosa < 20 mm in diameter than in the C-ESD group (71 min vs. 90 min, p = 0.0053), although no significant difference was found in the en bloc resection rate (94% vs. 87%, p = 0.0914).

CONCLUSION

SH-ESD can be an alternative surgical method when conventional ESD is difficult to continue in cases in which the remaining undissected submucosa is < 20 mm in diameter.

The feasibility of endoscopic resection for colorectal laterally spreading tumors

The present study aimed to investigate the feasibility and safety of endoscopic resection for colorectal laterally spreading tumors (LSTs) in different size groups. This retrospective study included 2699 patients with LSTs who underwent endoscopic treatment at the Second Xiangya Hospital of Central South University from May 2012 to February 2022. The patient baseline and procedure outcomes were compared between the < 5 cm group, 5-10 cm group, and ≥ 10 cm group. Meanwhile, lesions larger than 5 cm in diameter were longitudinally compared for endoscopic safety using ESD with surgical operation outcomes. There were 2105 patients in the < 5 cm group, 547 patients in the 5-10 cm group, and 47 patients in the ≥ 10 cm group. En bloc resection and R0 resection rates, the incidence of adverse events, length of stay (LOS), and medical costs significantly differed between the groups (P < 0.01). Comorbidity of diabetes or hypertension, history of antithrombotic drug use, lesion size, location, gross type, endoscopic procedures selection, and circumferential extent of the mucosal defect were independent risk factors for delayed bleeding (P < 0.05). En bloc resection, R0 resection, and lesion canceration were associated with local recurrence. For lesions larger than 5 cm in diameter, ESD had similar R0 resection and local recurrence rates compared with a surgical operation but a lower en bloc rate, LOS, and medical costs. Expert endoscopists can significantly increase en bloc and R0 resection rates and reduce the incidence of adverse events. Endoscopic resection results distinguish in different size groups of colorectal LSTs, yet its safety and feasibility are not inferior to a surgical operation.

Underwater cap-suction pseudopolyp formation for endoscopic mucosal resection: a simple technique for treating flat, appendiceal orifice or ileocecal valve colorectal lesions

BACKGROUND

We aimed to evaluate the safety and technical success of an easy-to-use technique that applies underwater cap suction pseudopolyp formation to facilitate the resection of flat lesions or those at the appendiceal orifice or ileocecal valve.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed a register of consecutive cap suction underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (CAP-UEMR) procedures performed at two centers between September 2020 and December 2021. Procedures were performed using a cone-shaped cap, extending 7 mm from the endoscope tip, to suction the lesion while submerged underwater, followed by underwater snare resection. Our primary end point was technical success, defined as macroscopic complete resection.

RESULTS

We treated 83 lesions (median size 20 mm; interquartile range [IQR] 15-30 mm) with CAP-UEMR: 64 depressed or flat lesions (18 previously manipulated, 9 with difficult access), 11 from the appendix, and 8 from the ileocecal valve. Technical success was 100 %. There were seven intraprocedural bleedings and two delayed bleedings, all managed endoscopically. No perforations or other complications occurred. Among the 64 lesions with follow-up colonoscopy, only one recurrence was detected, which was treated endoscopically.

CONCLUSIONS

CAP-UEMR was a safe and effective technique for removing nonpolypoid colorectal lesions, including those arising from the appendiceal orifice or ileocecal valve.

Continuous suture technique increases the complete closure rate of colorectal mucosal defects after endoscopic resection: a single-blind, randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Complete closure of mucosal defects after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD)/piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection (p-EMR) procedures reduces postoperative adverse events, but the complete closure rate of the traditional method using only hemostatic clips is not satisfactory. Therefore, we invented a continuous suture technique using a barbed suture and clips to increase the complete closure rate of colorectal mucosal defects.

METHODS

Patients with a single large (≥ 2 cm) colorectal lesion were recruited. After completion of the ESD/p-EMR procedures, they were randomly allocated to the treatment group or control group. The mucosal defects of the treatment group were closed using barbed suture and clips, while the control group was closed using only clips.

RESULTS

From January 18, 2022 to April 13, 2022, a total of 62 patients with colorectal lesions were enrolled, with 31 patients in each group. Complete closure was achieved in 29 patients (93.5%) in the treatment group and 18 patients (58.1%) in the control group (P = 0.001). The median closure time was 13 min in the treatment group and 19 min in the control group (P < 0.001). The median closure speed was 6.4 cm2/10 min in the treatment group and 3.5 cm2/10 min in the control group (P = 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provided a clinically feasible continuous suture technique that was safe and effective for the complete closure of colorectal mucosal defects after endoscopic resection.

Tip-in Versus Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for Colorectal Neoplasia: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Early-stage gastrointestinal neoplasms are frequently treated with conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (C-EMR). However, C-EMR frequently leads to incomplete resection of large colorectal lesions. Tip-in endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), which was recently introduced for en bloc resection of colorectal neoplasms, minimizes slippage during the procedure.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies that compared Tip-in EMR with conventional EMR. We searched several electronic databases and included studies that reported on the primary outcomes of en bloc resection rate and complete resection rate, as well as secondary outcomes such as procedure time and procedure-related complications (including perforation and delayed bleeding rate). We used a random effects model to calculate odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs for dichotomous data and weighted mean differences with 95% CIs for continuous data. We also conducted several sensitivity analyses to assess the robustness of our findings.

RESULTS

A total of 11 studies involving 1244 lesions (684 in the Tip-in EMR group and 560 in C-EMR group) were included in the meta-analysis. Our meta-analysis showed that compared with conventional EMR, Tip-in EMR significantly increased the en bloc resection rate in patients with colorectal neoplasia (OR=3.61; 95% CI, 2.09-6.23; P <0.00001; I2 =0%) and had a higher complete resection rate (OR=2.49; 95% CI, 1.65-3.76; P <0.0001; I2 =0%). However, the procedure time and rates of procedure-related complications did not differ significantly between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Tip-in EMR outperformed C-EMR for both the en bloc and complete resection of colorectal lesions with similar rates of procedural complications.

Cap-assisted endoscopic mucosal resection as a salvage technique for challenging colorectal laterally spreading tumors

BACKGROUND

Cap-assisted endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR-c) has emerged as a potential alternative to standard piecemeal wide-field EMR (WF-EMR) for the resection of laterally spreading tumors (LSTs). However, clear indications for this technique are still lacking. Our objective was to investigate the performance of salvage EMR-c after WF-EMR failure in the resection of large colorectal LSTs.

METHODS

The data of consecutive patients undergoing WF-EMR for large colorectal LSTs (2015-2021) were analyzed in this single-center, retrospective, observational study. In the event of a WF-EMR failure, the procedure was switched to EMR-c in the same session. The efficacy of the two techniques was evaluated in terms of complete endoscopic resection, R0 resection, and recurrence rate. Safety was also assessed.

RESULTS

Overall, the data from 81 WF-EMRs were collected. Eighteen cases of WF-EMR failure were switched to EMR-c in the same session and complete endoscopic resection was achieved in 17/18 patients (94.4%). No statistically significant difference was observed between WF-EMR and salvage EMR-c in terms of macroscopic radicality (P = 0.40) and R0 resection (P = 0.12). However, recurrence was more common with EMR-c (44.4% vs. 23.5%; P = 0.05), as were adverse events, particularly intraprocedural bleeding (27.8% vs. 7.9%; P = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

EMR-c is an effective salvage technique for challenging colorectal LSTs following WF-EMR failure. Due to the elevated risk of adverse events associated with this procedure, careful patient selection, endoscopic expertise, and close follow-up are strongly recommended.

Endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection with an external additional working channel (EMR+ and ESD+) are equivalent to using a double-channel endoscope: a systematic evaluation in a porcine ex vivo model

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

With an external additional working channel (AWC) endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) as well as endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) can be extended to techniques termed "EMR+" and "ESD+." These novel techniques are systematically compared to EMR and ESD under the use of a double-channel endoscope (DC).

METHODS

Our trial was conducted prospectively in a pre-clinical porcine animal model (EASIE-R simulator) with standardized gastric lesions measuring 3 or 4 cm.

RESULTS

EMR+ and EMR DC showed both good results for 3 cm lesions with no adverse events and an en bloc resection rate of 73.33% (EMR+) and 60.00% (EMR DC, p = 0.70). They came to their limits in 4 cm lesions with muscularis damages of 20.00% (EMR+), 13.33% (EMR DC, p ≥ 0.99) and decreasing en bloc resection rates of 60.00% (EMR+) and 46.67% (EMR DC, p = 0.72). ESD+ and ESD DC were both reliable concerning en bloc resection rates (100% in all groups) and adverse events (0.00% in 3 cm lesions, 12.50% muscularis damages in both ESD+ and ESD DC in 4 cm lesions). Resection time was slightly shorter in all groups with the AWC compared to DC although only reaching significance in 3 cm ESD lesions (p < 0.05*).

CONCLUSIONS

With the AWC, a standard endoscope can easily be transformed to double-channel functionality. We could show that EMR+ and ESD+ are non-inferior to EMR and ESD under the use of a double-channel endoscope. Consequently, the AWC presents an affordable alternative to a double-channel endoscope for both EMR and ESD.

Clinical outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection for giant rectal tumors larger than 8 cm: A European referral center experience

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

To date, western data on colorectal ESD are limited. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of rectal ESD for superficial lesions ≥ 8 cm.

METHODS

A total of 138 superficial rectal neoplasms treated by ESD were allocated in two groups: 25 in the "giant" ESD group and 113 in the control group.

RESULTS

En bloc resection was achieved in 96% of cases in both groups. En bloc R0 resection rate was similar between the "giant" ESD group and the control group (84% vs 86%; p: 0.5) and curative resection was higher in the control group (81%) than in "giant" ESD group (68%) without reaching statistical significance (p: 0.2). Dissection time was significantly longer in the "giant" ESD group (251 vs 108 min; p <0.001), however, dissection speed was significantly higher (0.35 vs 0.17 cm2/min; p: 0.02).). Post-ESD stenosis was observed in 2 patients from the "giant" ESD group (8% vs 0% of control group, p: 0.03). No significant differences were found in delayed bleeding, perforation, local recurrences, and need for additional surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

ESD for superficial rectal tumors ≥ 8 cm is a feasible, safe, and effective therapeutic option.

Underwater Endoscopic Mucosal Resection Versus Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for Superficial Non-ampullary Duodenal Epithelial Tumors ≤20 mm: A Systematic Review With Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) is increasingly applied in the treatment of superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors (SNADETs). This meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of UEMR for SNADETs ≤20 mm in comparison with conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (CEMR).

METHODS

The following electronic databases were searched from 2012 until November 20, 2021: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science databases, and Cochrane Library. The primary outcomes were the rates of en bloc resection and complete (R0) resection, and the secondary outcomes were procedure time, adverse events (delayed bleeding and delayed perforation), and recurrence rate.

RESULTS

A total of 6 studies with 679 lesions (331 underwent UEMR and 348 CEMR) were included in this study. The pooled analysis showed that UMER achieves a similar en bloc resection rate (87.6 vs. 89.9%; odds ratio [OR], 1.29; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45 to 3.73; P =0.64; I2 =74%), a similar R0 resection rate (67.3 vs. 73.6%; OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.55 to 2.23; P =0.78; I2 =59%), a shorter procedure time (min) (mean difference [MD], -4.05, 95% CI: -6.40 to -1.71; P =0.0007; I2 =70%) compared with CEMR. There were no significant differences in the rates of delayed bleeding, delayed perforation, and recurrence (2.4 vs. 1.7%, 0 vs. 0.6%, 2.2 vs. 4.4%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis demonstrated that UEMR appears to be an effective and safe alternative to CEMR for SNADETs ≤20 mm.

Factors associated with increased duration of endoscopic submucosal dissection for rectal tumors: a 22-year retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is widely used in several countries. However, it is associated with technical difficulties. Rectal ESD is considered an intermediate step in colorectal ESD training. Nevertheless, some rectal lesions require a longer procedure time than usual, and the reason for the prolonged time taken for these specific lesions remains unclear. Therefore, this study aimed to clarify the factors associated with prolonged rectal ESD.

METHODS

In total, 483 rectal lesions resected using ESD from February 1998 to June 2021 were investigated. Prolonged ESD procedure time was defined as the time from the first submucosal injection to lesion removal exceeding 120 minutes, whereas other procedures were defined as average ESD procedure time. Clinicopathologic and endoscopic findings were compared between the 2 groups using univariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

One hundred forty-four lesions were resected using a prolonged ESD procedure time of 202.9 ± 92.3 minutes, whereas 339 lesions were resected using an average ESD procedure time of 77.8 ± 29.4 minutes. Multivariate analysis revealed that tumors involving the dentate line (P = .026), resection size ≥50 mm (P < .001), invasion depth ≥T1b (P = .006), and circumferential range ≥2/3 (P = .001) were independent risk factors for prolonged-duration ESDs, regardless of whether the procedure was performed by an expert or not.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the present study suggest that the location of a lesion involving the dentate line, resection size ≥50 mm, circumferential range ≥2/3, and invasion depth ≥T1b are the independent risk factors for prolonged ESD procedure time.

Underwater versus conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for colorectal lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (CEMR) is the established method for the resection of non-pedunculated colorectal lesions (NPCRL) ≥ 10 mm. In the last decade, underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) has been introduced as a potential alternative. The aim of this systematic review with meta-analysis is to compare the recurrence and safety of UEMR and CEMR by analyzing only randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane Library and EMBASE until April 2023. Studies met the following inclusion criteria: (1) RCTs, (2) comparing UEMR with CEMR, (3) NPCRL ≥ 10 mm, and (4) reporting the outcomes of interest. Primary outcomes were recurrence and safety. Secondary outcomes were en bloc, R0, complete resection, clipping and adverse events per type.

RESULTS

Five RCTs were included. UEMR was associated with a lower recurrence rate (OR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.32-0.97). Thus, the RR of recurrence was 1.7 times higher in the CEMR group (95% CI, 1.04-2.77). There was no significant difference in the pooled safety analysis. UEMR showed better en bloc resection rates (OR: 1.54; 95% CI: 1.15-2.07), but subgroup analysis showed comparable rates in lesions ≥ 20 mm. R0 resection was higher in UEMR (OR: 1.72; 95% CI: 1.23-2.41). Other outcomes were not different between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

UEMR is as safe as CEMR, with a higher overall R0 rate and a higher en bloc resection rate for lesions < 20 mm, leading to a lower overall recurrence rate. The results of this meta-analysis support the widespread use of UEMR.

Is colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection safe and effective for 15-19-mm tumors?

PURPOSE

The outcomes of colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in 15-19-mm tumors are unclear. This study compared the effectiveness and safety of colorectal ESD for 15-19-mm tumors and tumors exceeding that size.

METHODS

From August 2018 to December 2020, 213 cases of colorectal tumors removed by colorectal ESD at a tertiary hospital were enrolled in this study. The cases were divided into two groups according to the pathologically measured size of the resected lesion: an intermediate group (15-19 mm, n = 62) and a large group (≥ 20 mm, n = 151). The en bloc resection rate, complete resection rate, and complications were investigated retrospectively.

RESULTS

The en bloc resection rate was significantly higher in the intermediate than large group (100% vs. 94%, p = 0.049), and the mean total procedure time was shorter in the intermediate than large group (29.2 [Formula: see text] 12.6 vs. 48.4 [Formula: see text] 28.8 min, p < 0.001). However, the mean procedure speed was significantly lower in the intermediate than large group (0.25 [Formula: see text] 0.10 vs. 0.28 [Formula: see text] 0.11 cm2/min, p = 0.031). The complete resection rate, post-procedural bleeding, and perforation rate were not significantly different between the two groups. In multivariate analyses, the total procedure time and mean procedure speed were significantly associated with lesion size.

CONCLUSION

Colorectal ESD of 15-19-mm lesions is effective, and has a shorter procedure time and higher en bloc resection rate than the same procedure for larger lesions.

A case report of heterotopic gastric mucosa in the rectum treated by endoscopic submucosal dissection and a systematic review

RATIONALE

Heterotopic gastric mucosa (HGM) can occur in all segments of the gastrointestinal tract, but rectal is very rare. In recent years, rectal HGM is more often treated by endoscopic resection (ER).

PATIENT CONCERNS

A 28-year-old female was admitted to the hospital with the chief complaint of "a rectal lesion found on physical examination".

DIAGNOSES

Heterotopic gastric mucosa (HGM).

INTERVENTIONS

An endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) was performed to completely dissect the lesion.

OUTCOMES

The patient recovered well at 1 month of follow-up and did not suffer from further blood in the stool.

LESSONS

Rectal HGM has acid secretion function and HP can be colonized, causing a variety of symptoms such as abdominal pain, bloody stool, and anal pain and has the potential risk of malignant transformation; resection is the best treatment method, and ESD has its unique advantages and can be promoted in the clinic.

A novel through-the-scope helix tack-and-suture device for mucosal defect closure following colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: a multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Complete closure of large mucosal defects following colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) with through-the-scope (TTS) clips is oftentimes not possible. We aimed to report our early experience of using a novel TTS suturing system for the closure of large mucosal defects after colorectal ESD.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective multicenter cohort study of consecutive patients who underwent attempted prophylactic defect closure using the TTS suturing system after colorectal ESD. The primary outcome was technical success in achieving complete defect closure, defined as a < 5 mm residual mucosal defect in the closure line using TTS suturing, with or without adjuvant TTS clips.

RESULTS

82 patients with a median defect size of 30 (interquartile range 25-40) mm were included. Technical success was achieved in 92.7 % (n = 76): TTS suturing only in 44 patients (53.7 %) and a combination of TTS suturing to approximate the widest segment followed by complete closure with TTS clips in 32 (39.0 %). Incomplete/partial closure, failure of appropriate TTS suture deployment, and the need for over-the-scope salvage closure methods were observed in 7.3 % (n = 6). One intraprocedural bleed, one delayed bleed, and three intraprocedural perforations were observed. There were no adverse events related to placement of the TTS suture.

CONCLUSION

The TTS suture system is an effective and safe tool for the closure of large mucosal defects after colorectal ESD and is an alternative when complete closure with TTS clips alone is not possible.

Novel closure method for a large mucosal defect after endoscopic resection: String clip suturing method with an anchor

Duodenal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a high-risk technique; however, prophylactic closure of mucosal defects reduces the risk. Unfortunately, we have encountered cases where closure is difficult, especially in large lesions. Therefore, we developed a novel closure technique, a string clip suturing method with an anchor (SCSM-A). This study aimed to elucidate the feasibility of this method. Five patients underwent this method for the closure of mucosal defects after duodenal ESD. The initial string clip was deployed at the anal end of the mucosal defects and the second clip was deployed at the other end of the mucosal defect. A third clip was deployed on the muscular layer in the middle of the mucosal defect. The free end of the string was pulled, and additional clips were deployed around the first to the third clips for complete closure. Because of grasping the muscle layer, SCSM-A can be employed for secure closure without creating a pocket. We reviewed the background and clinical course of hospitalization of patients who underwent this method. The resected specimens ranged from 52 to 103 mm in diameter. Complete closure of the mucosal defects was possible in all the cases. There were no adverse events, and no cases required additional treatment. All the patients were discharged within 7 days. The new method achieved secure closure even for large mucosal defects after duodenal ESD. This is a technique that can be applied to other organs, e.g., the colon.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection for tumors involving the ileocecal valve with extension into the terminal ileum: a multicenter study from the Hiroshima GI Endoscopy Research Group

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for tumors extending into the terminal ileum remain obscure. We aimed to evaluate the outcomes of ESD for tumors involving the ileocecal valve (ICV) with extension into the terminal ileum.

METHODS

Sixty-eight patients (40 men; mean age, 67 years) with 68 tumors involving the ICV that were resected by ESD between December 2013 and December 2018 were included and classified into Group A (21 tumors with extension into the terminal ileum) and Group B (47 tumors without extension). ESD outcomes were compared between groups.

RESULTS

The clinical features of the patients and tumors were not significantly different between the groups. There were no significant differences in en bloc resection rate (95% and 94%, respectively; p = 0.79), R0 resection rate (90% and 89%, respectively; p = 0.89), procedure time (95 ± 54 min and 94 ± 69 min, respectively; p = 0.64), postoperative bleeding rate (5% and 3%, respectively; p = 0.79), intraoperative perforation rate (0% and 4%, respectively; p = 0.34), delayed perforation rate (0% and 0%, respectively), or postoperative symptomatic stenosis rate (0% and 0%, respectively) between Groups A and B. No specific factors related to the outcomes of ESD were found by subgroup analysis according to the dominance and degree of circumference of the ICV. Local recurrence was observed in 1 patient in Group A who was retreated using ESD.

CONCLUSIONS

ESD for tumors involving the ICV with extension into the terminal ileum is safe and effective.

Conventional endoscopic mucosal resection versus modified endoscopic mucosal resection for duodenal neuroendocrine tumor

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

As the incidence of duodenal neuroendocrine tumors (DNET) is steadily increasing, the role of endoscopic treatment for appropriate lesions is becoming more significant. We aimed to compare the outcomes according to lesion size and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) techniques for DNET treatment.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients who underwent endoscopic treatment for DNET between June 2000 and December 2019 were included. The clinicopathologic features and treatment outcomes were investigated by reviewing medical records.

RESULTS

Overall, 104 cases underwent endoscopic resection for nonampullary DNET, including conventional EMR (n = 57), cap-assisted EMR (EMR-C, n = 19), and precut EMR (EMR-P, n = 28). The en bloc resection rates (100% vs. 94.7% vs. 96.4%) and histologic complete resection rates (45.6% vs. 52.6% vs. 57.1%) were not significantly different between the EMR, EMR-C, and EMR-P groups. The histologic complete resection rates were significantly higher in lesions < 10 mm than in lesions ≥ 10 mm (69.8% vs. 38.9%, P = 0.013). In lesions < 10 mm, perforation occurred more frequently in the modified EMR group than in the conventional EMR group (13.2% vs. 0.0%, P = 0.007). During the median follow-up period of 88.0 months, the recurrence-free survival (92.2% vs. 94.4% vs. 92.1%) and overall survival (98.0% vs. 88.1% vs. 100.0%) rates did not show significant differences between the EMR, EMR-C, and EMR-P groups.

CONCLUSION

Conventional EMR and modified EMR are feasible and effective for the treatment of nonampullary DNET sized < 10 mm and limited to mucosal and submucosal layer. Additionally, endoscopists should be aware of the high risk of perforation in modified EMR.

Feasibility and efficacy of endoscopic purse-string suture-assisted closure for mucosal defects induced by endoscopic manipulations

BACKGROUND

Large or transmural defects induced by gastrointestinal endoscopic manipulations are difficult to close, although complete closure is recommended for better recovery. Endoscopic purse-string assisted suturing (EPSS) has been used in clinical practice and has proven to be an effective and safe technique for the closure of large mucosal defects. However, details regarding the efficacy of endoscopic pre-purse-string suture (P-EPSS) are unknown, especially that it offers several advantages over conventional EPSS (C-EPSS).

AIM

To elucidate the outcomes of EPSS-assisted closure in different clinical situations, and evaluate the efficacy of P-EPSS.

METHODS

This retrospective observational study included a total of 180 patients who underwent closure assisted by P-EPSS (n = 63) or C-EPSS (n = 117) between July 2014 and June 2020. The P-EPSS and C-EPSS groups were compared and the intergroup differences in aspects such as the lesion size, location, and mor-phology, incidence of complete closure, intraoperative perforation, and delayed adverse events were evaluated. Data on the features and clinical course of cases with adverse events were collected for further analysis.

RESULTS

Patients with lesion size larger than 3 cm, lesions located at the fundus of stomach, or submucosal tumors originating from the deep mucosa were more likely to undergo P-EPSS-assisted closure. The P-EPSS group showed a sign-ificantly higher proportion of intraoperative perforation (56% vs 17%) and a much shorter procedure time (9.06 ± 6.14 min vs 14.84 ± 7.25 min). Among adverse events, the incidence of delayed perforation (5% vs 4%; P = 0.82) and delayed bleeding (3% vs 4%; P = 0.96) did not differ significantly between the groups. Multivariate analysis revealed that lesions with incomplete closure [odds ratio (OR) = 21.33; 95% confidence interval (CI): 5.45-83.45; P < 0.01] or size greater than 3 cm (OR = 3.14; 95%CI: 1.08-9.18; P = 0.039) showed a statistical tendency to result in an increase in delayed adverse events.

CONCLUSION

The present study revealed that EPSS could achieve secure complete closure of mucosal defect. P-EPSS could shorten the procedure and yield complete closure of mucosal defects. Rather than closure-type selection, incomplete closure or lesion size larger than 3 cm were associated with worse outcomes.

Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection in the Colon and Rectum: Indications, Techniques, and Outcomes

Multimodal assessment of colorectal polyps is needed before decision-making for endoscopic mucosal resection or endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). Assessment should include morphology according to Paris classification, magnification endoscopy for vascular pattern, and Kudo pit pattern analysis. ESD should be offered to patients that have Vi pit pattern, lateral spreading tumors (LST) granular multinodular and LST nongranular, lesions with fibrosis and those in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. A defined strategy for resection and planning is crucial for successful and efficient resection with a clear audit of outcomes aiming for a perforation and bleeding rate of less than 1% and R0 resection greater than 90%.

Left colonic localization, non-granular morphology, and pit pattern independently predict submucosal fibrosis of naïve colorectal neoplasms before endoscopic submucosal dissection

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) represents the method of choice for removal of large colorectal neoplasms with suspected submucosal invasion. Presence and degree of submucosal fibrosis increases ESD duration and technical complexity, reduces the rate of curative resection and reduces safety profile. The aim of the study was to identify pre-procedural predictive factors of submucosal fibrosis in naïve colorectal neoplasms and to assess the impact of fibrosis on technical and clinical ESD outcomes.

METHODS

All consecutive ESD performed between 2014 and 2021 were retrieved from a prospectively collected database. For each patient, pre-procedural, procedural, and post-procedural data were recorded. Logistic regression was used to identify pre-procedural predictive factors for submucosal fibrosis. The study was approved by Institutional Reviewer Board and registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04780256).

RESULTS

One hundred-74 neoplasms (46.6% rectum, 21.8% left colon, 31.6% right colon; size 34.9 ± 17.5 mm) from 169 patients (55.0% male; 69.5 ± 10.4-year-old) were included. 106 (60.9%) neoplasms were granular type laterally spreading tumor (LST-G), 42 (24.1%) non-granular (LST-NG), and 26 (14.9%) sessile; invasive pit pattern was observed in 90 (51.7%) lesions. No fibrosis (F0) mild (F1) and severe (F2) were observed in 62 (35.6%), 92 (52.9%), and 20 (11.5%), respectively. Left colonic localization [OR 3.23 (1.1-9.31)], LST-NG morphology [OR 5.84 (2.03-16.77)] and invasive pit pattern [OR 7.11 (3.11-16.23)] were independently correlated to submucosal fibrosis. Lower curative resection rate (59.8% vs. 93.5%, P < 0.001) was observed in case of fibrosis; the incidence of adverse events was higher in case of severe fibrosis (35.5%) compared to no (3.2%) and mild fibrosis (3.3%; P < 0.001). Procedure time was significantly impacted by presence and degree of fibrosis (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Left colonic localization, LST-NG morphology, and invasive pit pattern are independent predictors of fibrosis, affecting technical and clinical ESD outcomes. Pre-procedural stratification is pivotal to estimate procedure time, required operator's experience and advanced dissection techniques. Cecinato P et al. Left colonic localization, non-granular morphology, and pit pattern independently predict submucosal fibrosis of colorectal neoplasms before endoscopic submucosal dissection. Surg Endosc. 2023.

Endoscopic mucosal resection-precutting vs conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for sessile colorectal polyps sized 10-20 mm

BACKGROUND

The optimal method to remove sessile colorectal lesions sized 10-20 mm remains uncertain. Piecemeal and incomplete resection are major limitations in current practice, such as endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and cold or hot snare polypectomy. Recently, EMR with circumferential precutting (EMR-P) has emerged as an effective technique, but the quality of current evidence in comparative studies of conventional EMR (CEMR) and EMR-P is limited.

AIM

To investigate whether EMR-P is superior to CEMR in removing sessile colorectal polyps.

METHODS

This multicenter randomized controlled trial involved seven medical institutions in China. Patients with colorectal polyps sized 10-20 mm were enrolled and randomly assigned to undergo EMR-P or CEMR. EMR-P was performed following submucosal injection, and a circumferential mucosa incision (precutting) was conducted using a snare tip. Primary outcomes included a comparison of the rates of en bloc and R0 resection, defined as one-piece resection and one-piece resection with histologically assessed clear margins, respectively.

RESULTS

A total of 110 patients in the EMR-P group and 110 patients in the CEMR group were finally evaluated. In the per-protocol analysis, the proportion of en bloc resections was 94.3% [95% confidence interval (CI): 88.2%-97.4%] in the EMR-P group and 86% (95%CI: 78.2%-91.3%) in the CEMR group (P = 0.041), while subgroup analysis showed that for lesions > 15 mm, EMR-P also resulted in a higher en bloc resection rate (92.0% vs 58.8% P = 0.029). The proportion of R0 resections was 81.1% (95%CI: 72.6%-87.4%) in the EMR-P group and 76.6% (95%CI: 68.8%-84.4%) in the CEMR group (P = 0.521). The EMR-P group showed a longer median procedure time (6.4 vs 3.0 min; P < 0.001). No significant difference was found in the proportion of patients with adverse events (EMR-P: 9.1%; CEMR: 6.4%; P = 0.449).

CONCLUSION

In this study, EMR-P served as an alternative to CEMR for removing nonpedunculated colorectal polyps sized 10-20 mm, particularly polyps > 15 mm in diameter, with higher R0 and en bloc resection rates and without increasing adverse events. However, EMR-P required a relatively longer procedure time than CEMR. Considering its potential benefits for en bloc and R0 resection, EMR-P may be a promising technique in colorectal polyp resection.

A Gut-Centric Model of Metabolic Homeostasis

Modern changes in diet and lifestyle have led to an explosion of insulin resistance and metabolic diseases around the globe which, if left unchecked, will become a principal driver of morbidity and mortality in the 21st century. The nature of the metabolic homeostatic shift within the body has therefore become a topic of considerable interest. While the gut has long been recognized as an acute nutrient sensor with signaling mechanisms to the other metabolic organs of the body, its role in regulating the body's metabolic status over longer periods of time has been underappreciated. Recent insights from bariatric surgery and intestinal nutrient stimulation experiments provide a window into the adaptive role of the intestinal mucosa in a foregut/hindgut metabolic balance model that helps to define metabolic parameters within the body-informing the metabolic regulation of insulin resistance versus sensitivity, hunger versus satiety, energy utilization versus energy storage, and protection from hypoglycemia versus protection from hyperglycemia. This intestinal metabolic balance model provides an intellectual framework with which to understand the distinct roles of proximal and distal intestinal segments in metabolic regulation. The model may also aid in the development of novel disease-modifying therapies that can correct the dysregulated metabolic signals from the intestine and stem the tide of metabolic diseases in society.

Is endoscopic mucosal ablation a valid option for treating colon polyps?

The present letter to editor is related to endoscopic mucosal ablation (EMA). EMA is safe and effective in the treatment of colonic polyps when endoscopic resection is not possible or available, but the indication of EMA should be determined for a further large number of studies. EMA should be used with caution for larger lesions.

New Applications for Submucosal Tunneling in Third Space Endoscopy: A Comprehensive Review

Third space endoscopy (TSE), a type of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery, was first introduced a decade ago, and since then, has revolutionized the field of therapeutic endoscopy. TSE involves tunneling into the submucosal space between the intestinal mucosa and the muscularis propria. By accessing this "third space," endoscopists can perform minimally invasive myotomies, resections, and dissections while maintaining the mucosa and preventing full-thickness perforation. TSE procedures can be used to treat motility disorders as well as neoplasms throughout the gastrointestinal tract, which were traditionally conditions that would require open or laparoscopic surgery. The main TSE procedures include peroral endoscopic myotomy, gastric peroral endoscopic myotomy, Zenker peroral endoscopic myotomy, submucosal tunneling for endoscopic resection, endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection, peroral endoscopic tunneling for restoration of the esophagus, and per-rectal endoscopic myotomy. Some of those procedures have now been accepted as viable alternative to surgical techniques due to their limited invasiveness, safety and cost. This review will explore the different techniques recently added to our arsenal while describing their potential efficacy and limitations.

Factors for conversion risk of colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: a multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has become a widely accepted treatment method for colorectal tumors; however, there are some persistent problems. This multi-center study aimed to characterize the risk factors for incomplete resection and perforation in standardized colorectal ESD procedures.

METHODS

This study included 2423 consecutive patients who underwent ESD for 2592 colorectal tumors between August 2013 and December 2018 at 11 institutions (1 academic hospital and 10 affiliated hospitals) from the Hiroshima GI Endoscopy Research Group. We evaluated the risk factors for interruption, piecemeal resection, and perforation of standardized colorectal ESD in relation to clinicopathologic and endoscopic characteristics.

RESULTS

The incidences of interruption, piecemeal resection, and perforation were 0.7%, 2.9%, and 3.0%, respectively. Multivariate analysis identified the following risk factors for interruption: perforation during the procedure, deep submucosal invasion (> 1000 μm), poor scope operability, and severe submucosal fibrosis. The risk factors for piecemeal resection included poor scope operability, severe submucosal fibrosis, and procedure time (≥ 85 min). The risk factors for perforation during the procedure were severe submucosal fibrosis, poor scope operability, procedure time (≥ 85 min), and tumor size (≥ 40 mm). Independent risk factors for severe submucosal fibrosis included a history of biopsy and lesions located on the fold or flexure.

CONCLUSIONS

Severe submucosal fibrosis and poor scope operability are the common risk factors for interruption, piecemeal resection, and perforation in standardized colorectal ESD.

Efficacy and Safety of a Novel Triple-anchoring Technique for Colonic Hybrid Endoscopic Mucosal Resection: A Case Series

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

A hybrid technique may be a reasonable compromise to make endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) more reliable for lesions ≥ 20 mm and a good way of approaching to endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of a novel hybrid EMR technique, triple-anchoring EMR (T-EMR) for colorectal lesions 20-30 mm.

METHODS

Fifteen patients have been prospectively enrolled to T-EMR from December 2019 to April 2020 in two Endoscopy Units: Policlinico A. Gemelli, Rome, and University Hospital of Udine, Italy. Patients eligible for the study were ≥18 years old with superficial colorectal lesions 20-30 mm, morphologically liable to endoscopic treatment based on chromoendoscopy. The primary endpoint was assessment of the "en bloc" and the free resection margins (R0) rates. The secondary endpoints were resected specimen size, procedure time, complication rate, and recurrence rate at 6 months.

RESULTS

Among the 15 patients enrolled, 12 were males (80%), mean age 68.73±11.04 years. The mean size of the lesions was 24.93±2.89 mm. Mean procedure time was 22.13±4.31 min. T-EMR was performed en bloc in 14/15 patients (93.3%) with R0 in 13/15 patients (86.7%). No major intra-/peri-procedural or delayed complications occurred. At histological analysis, 13/15 lesions (86.7%) were adenomas, while 2 were early colorectal cancer. At a 6-month follow-up colonoscopy, only one patient (6.7%) had a recurrence of adenoma.

CONCLUSIONS

T-EMR seems to be an effective and safe option to treat colorectal lesions between 20 and 30 mm, with a short procedure time and low costs.

Safety and efficacy of hydrothermal duodenal mucosal resurfacing in patients with type 2 diabetes: the randomised, double-blind, sham-controlled, multicentre REVITA-2 feasibility trial

OBJECTIVE

Hydrothermal duodenal mucosal resurfacing (DMR) is a safe, outpatient endoscopic procedure. REVITA-2, a double-blind, superiority randomised controlled trial, investigates safety and efficacy of DMR using the single catheter Revita system (Revita DMR (catheter and system)), on glycaemic control and liver fat content in type 2 diabetes (T2D).

DESIGN

Eligible patients (haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) 59-86 mmol/mol, body mass index≥24 and ≤40 kg/m2, fasting insulin >48.6 pmol/L, ≥1 oral antidiabetic medication) enrolled in Europe and Brazil. Primary endpoints were safety, change from baseline in HbA1c at 24 weeks, and liver MRI proton-density fat fraction (MRI-PDFF) at 12 weeks.

RESULTS

Overall mITT (DMR n=56; sham n=52), 24 weeks post DMR, median (IQR) HbA1c change was -10.4 (18.6) mmol/mol in DMR group versus -7.1 (16.4) mmol/mol in sham group (p=0.147). In patients with baseline liver MRI-PDFF >5% (DMR n=48; sham n=43), 12-week post-DMR liver-fat change was -5.4 (5.6)% in DMR group versus -2.9 (6.2)% in sham group (p=0.096). Results from prespecified interaction testing and clinical parameter assessment showed heterogeneity between European (DMR n=39; sham n=37) and Brazilian (DMR n=17; sham n=16) populations (p=0.063); therefore, results were stratified by region. In European mITT, 24 weeks post DMR, median (IQR) HbA1c change was -6.6 mmol/mol (17.5 mmol/mol) versus -3.3 mmol/mol (10.9 mmol/mol) post-sham (p=0.033); 12-week post-DMR liver-fat change was -5.4% (6.1%) versus -2.2% (4.3%) post-sham (p=0.035). Brazilian mITT results trended towards DMR benefit in HbA1c, but not liver fat, in context of a large sham effect. In overall PP, patients with high baseline fasting plasma glucose ((FPG)≥10 mmol/L) had significantly greater reductions in HbA1c post-DMR versus sham (p=0.002). Most adverse events were mild and transient.

CONCLUSIONS

DMR is safe and exerts beneficial disease-modifying metabolic effects in T2D with or without non-alcoholic liver disease, particularly in patients with high FPG.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02879383.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection vs endoscopic mucosal resection for colorectal polyps: A meta-analysis and meta-regression with single arm analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has shown to be effective in management of colorectal neoplasm in the Asian countries, while its implementation in Western countries where endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is preferred is still debatable.

AIM

To compare the surgical, histological, and oncological outcomes between ESD and EMR in the treatment of colorectal polyps, with subgroup analysis comparing the efficacy of ESD and EMR between Japan and the rest of the world.

METHODS

Embase and Medline databases were searched from inception to October 2020 in accordance with PRISMA guidelines for studies comparing en bloc, complete resection, margin involvement, resection time, need for additional surgery, complications, and recurrence rate of ESD with EMR.

RESULTS

Of 281344 colorectal polyps from 21 studies were included. When compared to EMR, the pooled analysis revealed ESD was associated with higher en bloc and complete resection rate, and lower lateral margin involvement and recurrence. ESD led to increased procedural time, need for additional surgery, and perforation risk. No significant difference in bleeding risk was found between the two groups. Meta-regression analysis suggested only right colonic polyps correlated with an increased perforation risk in ESD. Confounders including polyp size and invasion depth did not significantly influence the en bloc and complete resection rate, bleeding risk and recurrence. In subgroup analysis, Japan performed better than the rest of the world in both ESD and EMR with perforation risk of 4% and 0.0002%, respectively, as compared to perforation risk of 8% and 1%, respectively, in reports coming from rest of the world.

CONCLUSION

ESD resulted in better resection outcomes and lower recurrence compared to EMR. With appropriate training, ESD is preferred over EMR as the first-line therapy for resection of colorectal polyps, without restricting to lesions greater than 20 mm and those with high suspicion of submucosal invasion.

Jejunal Dieulafoy lesion with intraintestinal calcification on computerized tomography: A case report

RATIONALE

A Dieulafoy lesion is a rare cause of gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding, especially in the jejunum, and the presence of calcifications on CT might be suspicious of the diagnosis.

PATIENT CONCERNS

We describe a 72-year-old woman with anemia and melena. Hemoglobin was 6.0 g/dL, and the stools were positive for occult blood (4+). Blood pressure was 116/54 mm Hg. Physical examination showed pale face and pitting edema in both lower limbs. Abdominal computerized tomography showed calcification in the small intestine of the left lower abdomen. Capsule endoscopy showed a blood clot.

DIAGNOSES

Dieulafoy lesion.

INTERVENTIONS

Single balloon endoscopy was performed via the oral approach and showed a blood clot on the suspected submucosal tumor of jejunum. A hemostatic clip was placed at the base of the lesion to allow the surgeon to locate it during the operation. Laparoscopy was performed, and the lesion was resected.

OUTCOMES

The postoperative pathology showed a Dieulafoy lesion. The lower extremity edema subsided. GI bleeding did not recur over 1 year of follow-up, and hemoglobin was 12.2 g/dL. A Dieulafoy lesion is a rare cause of GI bleeding, and it is even rarer in the jejunum.

LESSONS

A Dieulafoy lesion does not have special imaging features, but the presence of calcifications in the small intestine on computerized tomography might be suspicious of the diagnosis. When endoscopic treatment is difficult, surgical treatment could be considered.

Colon Cancer and Diverticular Disease Association: a Case-Control Study

PURPOSE

To determine if there is an association between diverticular disease and colon cancer diagnoses with a secondary outcome of assessing other known risk factors for colon cancer. Colon cancer and diverticular disease have many shared symptoms and risk factors; the association between the two has been debated for many years.

METHODS

36 cases of colon cancer and 144 age- and sex-matched controls were identified from records at an outpatient endoscopy center in Georgia. These cases and controls then were subject to a retrospective chart review to obtain any known risk factor data points for both diverticular disease and colon cancer. A traditional conditional logistic regression and a stepwise conditional logistic regression model were used to analyze the data using significant data points (P < 0.05).

RESULTS

The final stepwise model found that systolic blood pressure (aOR = 1.027, 95% CI = 1.001 to 1.053), history of polyps (aOR = 0.106, 95% CI = 0.029 to 0.387), exercise (aOR = 0.311, 95% CI = 0.029 to 0.387), and history of diverticular disease (aOR = 0.269, 95% CI = 0.091 to 0.795) were protective factors significantly associated with colon cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Presence and history of the removal of colorectal polyps, presence or history of diverticular disease, and exercise pose as protective factors against development of colon cancer.

Challenging Diagnosis and Endoscopic Management of Dieulafoy's Lesion-Induced Small-Bowel Bleeding: A Case Report

Small-bowel bleeding is a relatively uncommon event of gastrointestinal bleeding. Some causes of small-bowel bleeding, such as vascular lesions, are still challenging to confirm, despite the use of various diagnostic modalities (e.g., capsule endoscopy, deep enteroscopy, and radiographic imaging). Vascular lesion-induced bleeding tends to be insidious and intermittent, but sometimes it can be massive and fatal, so that the timing of an endoscopy is critical. We describe herein the case of an elderly female patient with Dieulafoy's lesion-induced small-bowel bleeding presenting with recurrent melena. In this article, we describe how the cause of her bleeding was found and how the bleeding was stopped endoscopically. Finally, we discuss the characteristics of a small-bowel Dieulafoy's lesion and its endoscopic treatment.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection versus endoscopic mucosal resection for colorectal tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare early (resection quality, complication rate, surgery time) and long-term (recurrence rate) outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection versus endoscopic mucosal resection.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Data were analyzed using the Rewiew Manager 5.3 software.

RESULTS

The study included 8 manuscripts including 6 retrospective trials, 1 case-control and only 1 prospective study. These studies comprised the results of endoscopic resection of 1989 colonic tumors (EMR - 748, ESD - 1241). ESD is associated with higher incidence of en-bloc resection (OR 0.13; 95% CI 0.03 0.49; p=0.003) and R0 resection (OR 0.23; 95% CI 0.05 1.02; p=0.05) compared to EMR. Local recurrence rate is 13 times higher after EMR compared to ESD (OR 13.94; 95% CI 6.3 30.8; p=0.00001). However, ESD is followed by 4 times higher risk of colon wall perforation (OR 0.25; 95% CI 0.08 0.81; p=0.02).

CONCLUSION

ESD is more advisable regarding resection quality compared to EMR. However, higher incidence of perforations, surgery time and technical features of ESD do not allow us to unambiguously interpret the results of our meta-analysis and determine the optimal surgical approach.