Multicenter study of endoscopic mucosal resection using 0.13% hyaluronic acid solution of colorectal polyps less than 20 mm in size

Polysaccharides as submucosal injection materials (SIMs) in endoscopic resection: A comprehensive review

Submucosal injection materials (SIMs) play a vital role in the endoscopic treatment of benign and early malignant gastrointestinal lesions by effectively elevating lesions while significantly reducing the risks of thermal injury and bleeding. However, the traditional use of normal saline (NS) presents challenges due to its rapid absorption, which necessitates frequent reapplications and complicates procedural efficiency. Therefore, there is a pressing need for ideal SIMs that are cost-effective, readily available, and suitable for personalized therapy, while also demonstrating excellent biocompatibility and physicochemical stability. Recent advancements have highlighted the potential of polysaccharide-based natural polymers, such as sodium hyaluronate, cellulose, starch derivatives, chitosan, and sodium alginate, due to their superior biocompatibility and biodegradability. These polysaccharides have exhibited enhanced operational characteristics and therapeutic efficacy in animal and clinical studies. Nevertheless, ongoing research must address several challenges, including optimizing cost-effectiveness, improving mechanical strength and bioactivity, and mitigating intraoperative and postoperative complications. This review systematically examines the progress of polysaccharide-based natural polymers in SIMs, evaluates their current status and challenges in both research and clinical applications, and proposes future directions to enhance their utilization in gastrointestinal endoscopic therapy.

Feasibility of a novel self-assembling submucosal injection peptide solution for endoscopic mucosal resection of colorectal lesions: A multicenter study

Objectives

Although a novel submucosal injection material consisting of a fully synthetic, self-assembling peptide solution, PuraLift, has recently become commercially available in Japan, there are a few reports regarding the usefulness of this solution. The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility of PuraLift for conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) in clinical practice.

Methods

This multicenter retrospective study was conducted at the endoscopy units of five institutions from January 2023 to May 2023. Consecutive patients who underwent EMR with PuraLift for 5-20-mm colorectal lesions were included in the introduction of this solution at each institute. The primary endpoint was the "effective resection" rate, defined as pathological complete resection, with "effective injection" defined as requiring no more than one additional injection due to adequate maintenance of mucosal lifting during EMR.

Results

In total, 110 lesions in 70 patients were treated by conventional EMR using PuraLift. En-bloc resection was performed for 109 (99%) lesions, and complete resection was performed for 102 (93%) lesions. More than 95% of the lesions were neoplastic. Additional injections were required in only two lesions. Both were single additional injections, and the median overall injection volume was 1.5 mL. Therefore, the effective injection rate was 93% (95% confidence interval, 86%-96%). No adverse events occurred during the study period.

Conclusions

Although direct comparison with other materials is required, PuraLift seems feasible as an injection material for EMR.

Clinical outcomes and learning curve of Tip-in endoscopic mucosal resection for 15-25 mm colorectal neoplasms among non-experts

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Tip-in endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) has a high en bloc resection rate for large colorectal neoplasms. However, non-experts' performance in Tip-in EMR has not been investigated. We investigated whether Tip-in EMR can be achieved effectively and safely even by non-experts.

METHODS

This retrospective study included consecutive patients who underwent Tip-in EMR for 15-25 mm colorectal nonpedunculated neoplasms at a Japanese tertiary cancer center between January 2014 and December 2020. Baseline characteristics, treatment outcomes, learning curve of non-experts, and risk factors of failing self-achieved en bloc resection were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 597 lesions were analyzed (438 by experts and 159 by non-experts). The self-achieved en bloc resection (69.8% vs 88.6%, P < 0.001) and self-achieved R0 resection (58.3% vs 76.5%, P < 0.001) rates were significantly lower in non-experts with <10 cases of experience than in experts, but not in non-experts with >10 cases. Adverse event (P = 0.165) and local recurrence (P = 0.892) rates were not significantly different between experts and non-experts. Risk factors of failing self-achieved en bloc resection were non-polypoid morphology (OR 3.4, 95% CI 1.6-7.3, P = 0.001), lesions with an underlying semilunar fold (OR 3.6, 95% CI 1.6-7.3, P < 0.001), positive non-lifting sign (OR 3.1, 95% CI 1.2-8.0, P = 0.023), and non-experts with an experience of ≤10 cases (OR 3.6, 95% CI 2.1-6.3, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The clinical outcomes of Tip-in EMR for 15-25 mm lesions performed by non-experts were favorable.

Does precutting prior to endoscopic piecemeal resection of large colorectal neoplasias reduce local recurrence? A KASID multicenter study

BACKGROUND

It would be expected that local recurrence could be reduced by performing precutting (with sufficient margins) prior to endoscopic piecemeal mucosal resection (EPMR). We explored the clinical outcomes and local recurrence after precutting EPMR of large colorectal neoplasias.

METHODS

Between January 2005 and December 2015, in total, 223 patients with colorectal neoplasias ≥ 2 cm in diameter removed via EPMR in four tertiary hospitals were enrolled. The patients were divided into a precut EPMR group (n = 62) and a non-precut EPMR group (n = 161). We retrospectively evaluated clinical outcomes and factors associated with local recurrence.

RESULTS

The mean total procedure time was significantly shorter in the non-precut EPMR group than in the precut EPMR group. However, the number of pieces, and the complete resection and recurrence rates, did not differ significantly [for the latter, precut 8.1% vs. non-precut 9.9%, P = 0.668]. The complete resection rate, number of pieces, and use of argon plasma coagulation (APC) were significantly associated with the local recurrence rate on univariate analysis. In the Cox's proportional hazards model, prophylactic APC [hazard ratio 0.307, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.114-0.823; P = 0.019] and complete resection rate (odds ratio 0.083, 95% CI 0.011-0.655; P = 0.018) were significantly associated with the local recurrence rate.

CONCLUSION

Precutting prior to EPMR did not significantly reduce the local recurrence rate or the number of resected pieces. Histologically complete resection, reducing the number of pieces, and prophylactic APC seem to be important in terms of reducing local recurrence.

Rates of Incomplete Resection of 1- to 20-mm Colorectal Polyps: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Incomplete resection of neoplastic colorectal polyps can result in postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the incomplete resection rate (IRR) of colorectal polyps and associated factors.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, EBM Reviews, and CINAHL to identify full-text articles that reported IRRs of polyps 1 to 20 mm, published until March 2019. Exclusion criteria were studies of inflammatory bowel disease cohorts, referrals for difficult polypectomy, polyp sizes larger than 20 mm, and endoscopic submucosal resection and/or dissection as polypectomy approaches. IRRs were calculated based on findings from biopsies taken at polypectomy sites or assessments of margins of resected polyps. The primary outcome was IRR for snare removal of polyps 1 to 20 mm. Secondary outcomes included IRR for polyps 1 to 10 mm and 10 to 20 mm, IRR for hot and cold snare removal of polyps 1 to 10 mm and 10 to 20 mm, IRR of snare removal with or without submucosal injection, and IRR for forceps and cold snare removal of polyps 1 to 5 mm.

RESULTS

We identified 6148 reports and used 32 studies, with a total of 9282 polyps, in our quantitative analysis. The IRR for snare removal of polyps 1 to 20 mm was 13.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 10.3-17.3; 13 studies, 5128 polypectomies). IRRs were 15.9% for snare removal of polyps 1 to 10 mm (95% CI 9.6-22.1; 9 studies, 2531 polypectomies) and 20.8% for snare removal of polyps 10 to 20 mm (95% CI 12.9-28.8; 6 studies, 412 polypectomies). The IRR for hot snare removal of polyps 1 to 10 mm was 14.2% (95% CI 5.2-23.2) vs 17.3% for cold snare polypectomy (95% CI 14.3‒20.3). The IRR for forceps removal of polyps 1 to 5 mm was 9.9% (95% CI 7.1-13.0) vs 4.4% for snare polypectomy (95% CI 2.9-6.1).

CONCLUSIONS

In a systematic review and meta-analysis, we found that colorectal polyps 1 to 20 mm are frequently incompletely resected, and that risk increases for polyps 10 mm or larger. There is no difference in IRRs of cold vs hot snares for polyps 1 to 10 mm. Snare polypectomy should be used over forceps for polyps 1 to 5 mm.

Endoscopic mucosal resection with anchoring of the snare tip: multicenter retrospective evaluation of effectiveness and safety

Background  Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) with snare is the recommended technique to resect non-invasive colorectal neoplastic lesions between 10 and 30 mm in diameter. The objective of EMR is to resect completely the neoplastic tissue en bloc and preferably with free margins (R0), avoiding recurrences. Anchoring the tip of the snare in the submucosa is a technical trick that allows snare sliding to be reduced and larger pieces to be caught. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of anchoring-EMR (A-EMR). Methods  This was a retrospective analysis of A-EMR procedures for lesions of diameter between 10 and 30 mm (endoscopic evaluation) performed consecutively in four French centers between May 2017 and January 2018. A-EMR was routinely performed for all EMR using Olympus conventional snares (10 or 25 mm). The primary outcome was evaluation of the proportion of R0 resections. Results  A total of 141 A-EMR procedures were performed by 10 operators. Mean lesion size was 19.8 mm. Anchoring was feasible in 96.5 % of cases. There were 81.6 % en bloc resections and 70.2 % R0 resections, with the percentage of procedures decreasing with increasing lesion size (82.8 % < 20 mm, 55.3 % 21 - 30 mm, and 50.0 % > 30 mm, P  = 0.002). Complete perforations closed endoscopically occurred in 3/141 cases (2.1 %); none occurred in lesions < 20 mm in size (0 /87). Conclusion  The A-EMR technique appears to be promising with a high proportion of R0 for lesions of 10 - 20 mm in size without any perforations. It could also offer an alternative to endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), or to hybrid techniques to reach R0 for lesions between 20 and 30 mm in size.

Feasibility of Underwater Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for Colorectal Lesions: A Single Center Study in Japan

Background

Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (U-EMR) has emerged as an alternative technique for the resection of colorectal lesions. This study aimed to evaluate our initial experience using U-EMR.

Methods

This is a single-center, retrospective case series study. We analyzed the clinical outcomes of consecutive patients who underwent U-EMR in our endoscopy center, from December 2015 to February 2017.

Results

Our analysis included 64 lesions, contributed by 38 patients, with a mean age of 68.6 years (range, 25 to 90 years). The study sample included 33 right-sided and 25 left-sided colon lesions, and seven rectal lesions, with an average size of 16.2 mm (6 - 40 mm). Of these, 46 lesions were polypoid and 18 ones non-polypoid. Histologically, 31 lesions were low-grade adenomas, eight ones were high-grade adenomas, 11 were mucosal cancers, four were submucosal cancers, and 10 were classified as “others”. En bloc resection was achieved in 52 (81%) lesions, with an en bloc resection rate of 95% for lesions < 20 mm and 55% for lesions ≥ 20 mm. Complete resection of neoplastic epithelial lesions, defined by a negative pathological margin, was achieved in 32 of 59 neoplastic epithelial lesions (54%). We identified three cases (5%) of post-procedural bleeding and one case of perforation (2%).

Conclusions

U-EMR can be feasibly used for resection of colonic lesions, including lesions ≥ 20 mm, although the en bloc resection rate for these lesions was lower than for lesions < 20 mm.

How to deal with large colorectal polyps: snare, endoscopic mucosal resection, and endoscopic submucosal dissection; resect or refer?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The importance of accurate polyp detection and removal is paramount to preventing colon cancer. Resection of large polyps can be challenging to the endoscopist based on their size, shape, or location. Large polyps have the potential of harboring malignancy and a higher risk of complications with resection. Careful assessment of each lesion and meticulous resection using the appropriate tools and techniques is essential.

RECENT FINDINGS

Over the last 15 years, the development of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) techniques has presented the endoscopist with the opportunity to manage patients with large and flat lesions thereby avoiding the need for surgery. However, these techniques are complex and require extensive knowledge and skill in the use of various devices to resect a lesion completely and manage bleeding and perforation associated with these procedures.

SUMMARY

Large colon polyps manifest as either polypoid or nonpolypoid (flat) lesions. Polypoid lesions, especially those with pedicles, are removed with snare resection, whereas flat lesions may require the use of EMR or ESD. Resection of large polyps (>1 cm) requires additional tools and techniques to ensure safe and complete resection. We will discuss our approach to dealing with large colorectal polyps: snare, EMR, and ESD; resect or refer?

Endoscopic mucosal resection for middle and large colorectal polyps with a double-loop snare

BACKGROUND/AIMS

This study aimed to analyze the endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) with a novel uniquely shaped, double-loop snare (Dualoop, Medico's Hirata Inc., Tokyo, Japan) for colorectal polyps.

METHODS

This was a clinical trial conducted in two referral centers, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine and National Cancer Center Hospital in Japan. First, the firmness of various snares including 'Dualoop' was experimentally analyzed with a pressure gauge. Five hundred and eighty nine consecutive polyps that underwent EMR with 'Dualoop' were compared to 339 polyps with the standard round snare. Lesion characteristics, en bloc resection, and complications were analyzed.

RESULTS

'Dualoop' had the most firmness among the various snares. The average tumor size was 9.3 mm (5-30), and en bloc resection was achieved in 95.4%. The rate of en bloc resection for middle polyps 15-19 mm in diameter was significantly higher with the 'Dualoop' than that with the round snare (97.9 vs. 80.0%, p < 0.05). The rate of en bloc resection was 64.7% for large polyps ≥20 mm in diameter using 'Dualoop'. Higher age, larger tumor size, and superficial polyps were associated with the failure of en bloc resection.

CONCLUSION

EMR with 'Dualoop' was effective for resecting both middle and large polyps en-bloc.

Re-evaluation of indications and outcomes of endoscopic excision procedures for colorectal tumors: a review

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) are useful therapeutic techniques for colorectal tumors. Currently, new techniques based on these procedures are available, such as endoscopic submucosal dissection with snare (ESD-S) and endoscopic mucosal resection with pre-cutting (EMR-P). For the excision of colorectal tumors, each of these techniques has been characterized as having a high total resection rate, low recurrence rate or low complication rate. In this study, we analysed clinical trials that had recently been published, to search for the most appropriate endoscopic treatment for colorectal tumors. Our search results revealed the following: for a tumor with a diameter less than 20 mm, the surgeon should choose ESD, ESD-S, EMR-P or EMR, depending on the condition of the tumor. On the other hand, to excise a tumor larger than 20 mm in diameter, ESD and ESD-S should be the first choices. However, if the patient has a high risk of complications due to ESD or ESD-S, the use of EMR-P would be suitable. Because of the high possibility of canceration in a tumor larger than 20 mm in diameter, EMR is not the optimal endoscopic treatment for the excision of a colorectal tumor, due to a low total resection rate and a high recurrence rate.

Prediction and treatment of difficult cases in colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection

Purpose. The aim of this study was to examine the characteristics of difficult cases and the learning curve in colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). Methods. We studied 518 colorectal tumors treated by ESD. Patients were divided into 2 groups such as the difficult ESD group and non-difficult ESD group in view of procedure time and procedure speed, respectively. The clinical features in each group were analyzed, and we also examined cases with severe fibrosis. Furthermore, we divided all cases into 5 periods according to experience of ESDs and investigated the rates of difficult and perforation cases. Results. In view of both procedure time and procedure speed, there were significant differences about mean tumor size, rates of severe fibrosis and perforation, and en bloc resection rate between the two groups. Severe fibrosis was detected in protruding tumors >40 mm in diameter. With respect to the learning curve, the rate of difficult and perforation cases decreased significantly in the late periods compared to the first period. Conclusions. Large tumor size, high rates of severe fibrosis and perforation, and low rate of en bloc resection are related with difficult ESD cases. The increasing of experiences can decrease the rate of difficult cases and perforation.