Treatment strategy for recurrent or residual colorectal tumors after endoscopic resection

Initial Experience With Safety and Efficacy of Endoscopic Full-Thickness Resection in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Case Series

Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) is a novel endoscopic technique for removing complex colorectal lesions. The inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) population poses unique challenges for endoscopic resection due to an increased prevalence of fibrotic, nonlifting lesions and higher recurrence rates compared with the general population. This case series reports on the successful use of EFTR in 5 patients with IBD who had challenging colonic polyps, including fibrotic and nonlifting lesions. Technical success was achieved in all cases without any postoperative complications. Follow-up surveillance revealed no residual lesions or recurrence, and histopathological analysis confirmed full-thickness resection in all samples. This is one of the first case series suggesting that EFTR is a promising, safe, and effective alternative to surgery for managing complex colorectal polyps in patients with IBD.

Short-term and long-term outcomes of submucosal dissection for residual or recurrent colorectal tumors after endoscopic resection: Analysis of a multicenter prospective study

OBJECTIVES

We previously demonstrated that a favorable long-term prognosis indicated that endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) could be the standard treatment for large colorectal epithelial neoplasms, but the usefulness of ESD for local residual or recurrent tumors with submucosal fibrosis has not been fully demonstrated. The aim of the present study was to assess the usefulness of ESD for local residual or recurrent colorectal tumors.

METHODS

We conducted a nationwide multicenter prospective study to evaluate the outcomes of ESD for colorectal tumors. In this post hoc analysis, a total of 54 local residual or recurrent colorectal tumors in 54 patients were included, and we analyzed the short-term and long-term outcomes of ESD for these lesions.

RESULTS

The median size of the lesions was 16.0 (interquartile range [IQR] 11-25) mm. ESD was completed in 53 cases (98.1%) with a median procedure time of 65.0 min, but it was discontinued in one case because of submucosal cancer invasion. En bloc resection was achieved in 52 cases (96.3%), whereas R0 resection was achieved in 45 cases (83.3%). Intraoperative perforation was observed in four cases (7.4%) and delayed perforation in one (1.9%), but all cases could be managed conservatively. Delayed bleeding was not observed. There were no significant differences in short-term outcomes between the rectal and colonic lesions. There was no recurrence of the tumor during the median follow-up period of 60 (IQR 50-64) months.

CONCLUSION

An analysis of our multicenter prospective study suggests that ESD is an effective salvage management for local residual or recurrent colorectal lesions.

Efficacy and safety of salvage endoscopy in the treatment of residual or recurrent colorectal neoplasia after endoscopic resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review and meta-analyze the efficacy and safety of salvage endoscopy for residual or recurrence of colorectal tumors after endoscopic resection.

METHODS

Multiple databases including PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library were searched to screen for eligible studies and perform data extraction and pooled analysis.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies on salvage endoscopy for residual or recurrent colorectal cancer after endoscopic resection were included, covering approximately 994 patients. The results of the meta-analysis demonstrated that salvage endoscopic therapy for residual or recurrent colorectal tumors following endoscopic resection achieved an en bloc resection rate of 92% (95% CI 0.85-0.97; I2 = 91%) and an R0 resection rate of 82% (95% CI 0.75-0.87; I2 = 78%). The rates of intraoperative or postoperative bleeding and perforation were 10%/1% and 5%/2%, and the recurrence rate was 2%.

CONCLUSIONS

Salvage endoscopic resection is an effective and safe treatment strategy for residual or recurrent colorectal tumors after endoscopic resection.

Endoscopic full-thickness resection versus endoscopic submucosal dissection for challenging colorectal lesions: a randomized trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The optimal endoscopic resection method of challenging colorectal lesions (ie, adenomatous recurrences, nongranular laterally spreading tumors [LST-NGs], lesions without lifting sign <30 mm) is still under debate. The aim of this study was to directly compare endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) for the resection of challenging colorectal lesions in a randomized trial.

METHODS

A multicenter, prospective, randomized study was performed in 4 Italian referral centers. Consecutive patients referred for endoscopic resection of challenging lesions were randomly assigned to undergo EFTR or ESD. Primary outcomes were complete (R0) resection and en bloc resection of lesions. Technical success, procedure time, procedure speed, area of the resected specimen, adverse event rate, and local recurrence rate at 6 months were also compared.

RESULTS

Overall, 90 patients were included in the study, equally representing the 3 challenging lesion types. Age and sex were comparable in the 2 groups. En bloc resection was obtained in 95.5% of the EFTR group and in 93.3% of the ESD group. R0 resection rate was comparable in the 2 groups (EFTR vs ESD, 42 [93.3%] vs 36 [80%]; P = .06). The EFTR group exhibited a significantly shorter total procedure time (25.6 ± 10.6 minutes vs 76.7 ± 26.4 minutes, P ≤ .01), as well as overall procedure speed (16.8 ± 11.8 mm2/min vs 11.9 ± 9.2 mm2/min, P = .03). The EFTR group had a significantly smaller mean lesion size (21.6 ± 8.3 mm vs 28.7 ± 7.7 mm, P ≤ .01). Adverse events were reported less frequently in patients in the EFTR group (4.44% vs 15.5%, P = .04).

CONCLUSIONS

EFTR is comparable to ESD in the treatment of challenging colorectal lesions in terms of safety and efficacy. EFTR is considerably faster than ESD in the treatment of nonlifting lesions and adenoma recurrences. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT05502276.).

Decreasing rates of colectomy for benign neoplasms: A nationwide analysis

BACKGROUND

Despite advances in endoscopic techniques for management of benign colonic neoplasms, a rise in rates of surgical treatment has been reported. We used a nationally representative cohort to characterize temporal trends, patient characteristics, and outcomes associated with colectomy for colonic neoplasms.

METHODS

All patients undergoing elective partial colectomy for benign or malignant colonic neoplasms were identified using the 2012-2019 National Inpatient Sample. Those presenting with inflammatory bowel disease, or experiencing intestinal perforation were excluded. Patients with benign neoplasms were classified as the Benign cohort (others: Malignant). Trends, characteristics, and outcomes were assessed between groups.

RESULTS

Of 569,280 colectomy procedures included for analysis, 153,435 (27.0%) were performed for benign lesions. The proportion of Benign operations decreased from 28.6% in 2012 to 23.7% in 2019 (P for trend<0.001). While overall national incidence of colectomy for benign neoplasms decreased from 2012 to 2019 (IRD -1.19, 95%CI -1.20- -1.19), Black patients demonstrated an incremental increase (IRD +0.04, 95%CI +0.02-0.06). On average, Benign was younger (66 [57-72] vs 68 years [58-77], P<0.001), and demonstrated a lower Elixhauser comorbidity index (2 [1-3] vs 3 [2-4], P<0.001), relative to Malignancy. Following adjustment, Benign demonstrated lower odds of in-hospital mortality (AOR 0.61, 95%CI 0.50-0.74; P<0.001), stoma creation (AOR 0.46, 95%CI 0.43-0.50; P<0.001), and infectious complications (AOR 0.68, 95%CI 0.63-0.73; P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The present national study identifies a decrease in colectomy for benign polyps from 2012-2019. Future investigations should identify patients who would most benefit from surgical resection and address persistent inequities in access to screening and treatment for colonic neoplasms.

Treatment of adenoma recurrence after endoscopic mucosal resection

OBJECTIVE

Residual or recurrent adenoma (RRA) after endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs) of ≥20 mm is a major limitation. Data on outcomes of the endoscopic treatment of recurrence are scarce, and no evidence-based standard exists. We investigated the efficacy of endoscopic retreatment over time in a large prospective cohort.

DESIGN

Over 139 months, detailed morphological and histological data on consecutive RRA detected after EMR for single LNPCPs at one tertiary endoscopy centre were prospectively recorded during structured surveillance colonoscopy. Endoscopic retreatment was performed on cases with evidence of RRA and was performed predominantly using hot snare resection, cold avulsion forceps with adjuvant snare tip soft coagulation or a combination of the two.

RESULTS

213 (14.6%) patients had RRA (168 (78.9%) at first surveillance and 45 (21.1%) thereafter). RRA was commonly 2.5-5.0 mm (48.0%) and unifocal (78.7%). Of 202 (94.8%) cases which had macroscopic evidence of RRA, 194 (96.0%) underwent successful endoscopic therapy and 161 (83.4%) had a subsequent follow-up colonoscopy. Of the latter, endoscopic therapy of recurrence was successful in 149 (92.5%) of 161 in the per-protocol analysis, and 149 (73.8%) of 202 in the intention-to-treat analysis, with a mean of 1.15 (SD 0.36) retreatment sessions. No adverse events were directly attributable to endoscopic therapy. Further RRA after endoscopic therapy was endoscopically treatable in most cases. Overall, only 9 (4.2%, 95% CI 2.2% to 7.8%) of 213 patients with RRA required surgery.Thus 159 (98.8%, 95% CI 95.1% to 99.8%) of 161 cases with initially successful endoscopic treatment of RRA and follow-up remained surgery-free for a median of 13 months (IQR 25.0) of follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

RRA after EMR of LNPCPs can be effectively treated using simple endoscopic techniques with long-term adenoma remission of >90%; only 16% required retreatment. Therefore, more technically complex, morbid and resource-intensive endoscopic or surgical techniques are required only in selected cases.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS

NCT01368289 and NCT02000141.

Curriculum for training in endoscopic mucosal resection in the colon: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Position Statement

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is the standard of care for the complete removal of large (≥ 10 mm) nonpedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs). Increased detection of LNPCPs owing to screening colonoscopy, plus high observed rates of incomplete resection and need for surgery call for a standardized approach to training in EMR. 1 : Trainees in EMR should have achieved basic competence in diagnostic colonoscopy, < 10-mm polypectomy, pedunculated polypectomy, and common methods of gastrointestinal endoscopic hemostasis. The role of formal training courses is emphasized. Training may then commence in vivo under the direct supervision of a trainer. 2 : Endoscopy units training endoscopists in EMR should have specific processes in place to support and facilitate training. 3: A trained EMR practitioner should have mastered theoretical knowledge including how to assess an LNPCP for risk of submucosal invasion, how to interpret the potential difficulty of a particular EMR procedure, how to decide whether to remove a particular LNPCP en bloc or piecemeal, whether the risks of electrosurgical energy can be avoided for a particular LNPCP, the different devices required for EMR, management of adverse events, and interpretation of reports provided by histopathologists. 4: Trained EMR practitioners should be familiar with the patient consent process for EMR. 5: The development of endoscopic non-technical skills (ENTS) and team interaction are important for trainees in EMR. 6: Differences in recommended technique exist between EMR performed with and without electrosurgical energy. Common to both is a standardized technique based upon dynamic injection, controlled and precise snare placement, safety checks prior to the application of tissue transection (cold snare) or electrosurgical energy (hot snare), and interpretation of the post-EMR resection defect. 7: A trained EMR practitioner must be able to manage adverse events associated with EMR including intraprocedural bleeding and perforation, and post-procedural bleeding. Delayed perforation should be avoided by correct interpretation of the post-EMR defect and treatment of deep mural injury. 8: A trained EMR practitioner must be able to communicate EMR procedural findings to patients and provide them with a plan in case of adverse events after discharge and a follow-up plan. 9: A trained EMR practitioner must be able to detect and interrogate a post-endoscopic resection scar for residual or recurrent adenoma and apply treatment if necessary. 10: Prior to independent practice, a minimum of 30 EMR procedures should be performed, culminating in a trainer-guided assessment of competency using a validated assessment tool, taking account of procedural difficulty (e. g. using the SMSA polyp score). 11: Trained practitioners should log their key performance indicators (KPIs) of polypectomy during independent practice. A guide for target KPIs is provided in this document.

Difficult colorectal polypectomy: Technical tips and recent advances

Colonoscopy has been shown to be an effective modality to prevent colorectal cancer (CRC) development. CRC reduction is achieved by detecting and removing adenomas, which are precursors of CRC. Most colorectal polyps are small and do not pose a significant challenge for trained and skilled endoscopists. However, up to 15% of polyps are considered "difficult", potentially causing life-threatening complications. A difficult polyp is defined as any polyp that is challenging for the endoscopist to remove owing to its size, shape, or location. Advanced polypectomy techniques and skills are required to resect difficult colorectal polyps. There were various polypectomy techniques for difficult polyps such as endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), underwater EMR, Tip-in EMR, endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), or endoscopic full-thickness resection. The selection of the appropriate modality depends on the morphology and endoscopic diagnosis. Several technologies have been developed to aid endoscopists in performing safe and effective polypectomies, especially complex procedures such as ESD. These advances include video endoscopy system, equipment assisting in advanced polypectomy, and closure devices/techniques for complication management. Endoscopists should know how to use these devices and their availability in practice to enhance polypectomy performance. This review describes several useful strategies and tips for managing difficult colorectal polyps. We also propose the stepwise approach for difficult colorectal polyps.

Outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection in patients who develop metachronous superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma close to a post-endoscopic submucosal dissection scar

BACKGROUND

The presence of post-endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) scars renders complete metachronous superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma resection difficult. We aimed to identify the risk factors for incomplete resection of metachronous esophageal squamous cell carcinoma close to the post-ESD scar by ESD.

METHODS

We enrolled patients who developed post-ESD superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma at Hiroshima University Hospital between January 2006 and March 2020. We analyzed the outcomes and risk factors of incomplete resection between patients whose lesions were close to (close-to group) and away from (away-from group) the post-ESD scar.

RESULTS

We included 111 patients with 212 lesions. The close-to group had a significantly lower complete resection rate (88.6% [62/70] vs. 98.6% [69/70], p = 0.033), longer procedure time (80.2 ± 47.2 min vs. 60.4 ± 29.3 min, p < 0.01), higher proportion of lesions with severe fibrosis (72.9% [51/70] vs. 5.7% [4/70], p < 0.01), and higher intraoperative bleeding rate (78.6% [55/70] vs. 60.0% [42/70], p = 0.027) than the away-from group. There was no significant difference in the rate of local recurrence, muscle injury, perforation, and stenosis as well as the pathological tumor depth between the groups. Of the 92 lesions in the close-to group, the proportion of lesions located on the oral side of the post-ESD scar significantly affected the incidence of incomplete resection (91.7% [11/12] vs. 53.8% [43/80], p = 0.013).

CONCLUSIONS

Complete resection was more difficult for lesions located on the oral side of the post-ESD scar.

Repeat Cold Snare Polypectomy Can Be Performed for Recurrent Benign Lesions After Cold Snare Polypectomy

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Recurrence after cold snare polypectomy (CSP) sometimes occurs. We assessed the feasibility of repeat CSP for recurrence after CSP.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed recurrent lesions after CSP which were resected by repeat CSP from 2016 to 2021 in our institution and analyzed clinical outcomes of repeat CSP, comparing those of non-recurrent 454 lesions receiving standard CSP in 2016 and follow-up colonoscopy. We also analyzed the recurrent rate among cases receiving follow-up in both groups. Indication of repeat CSP was lesions diagnosed as benign tumors of ≤ 10 mm.

RESULTS

We analyzed 80 lesions receiving repeat CSP. The polyp size (mean ± standard deviation: SD) was 4.1 ± 2.3 mm (range 2-10 mm). The right-sided colon and non-polypoid morphology rates were 66.3% and 43.8%, respectively. Histopathological diagnosis was 66 adenomas, 12 sessile serrated lesions (SSLs), 1 SSL with dysplasia, and 1 high-grade dysplasia. The procedure time (min, mean ± SD) of repeat CSP was 0.9 ± 0.8. Regarding the comparison of repeat CSP/ standard CSP group, the en bloc resection and histopathological complete resection rates were 78.8%/ 98.0% (p < 0.001) and 43.8%/59.6% (p = 0.007) and the rates of perioperative hemorrhage requiring endoscopic clipping were 1.3%/ 1.0% (p = 0.646). There were no postoperative hemorrhage and perforation in both groups (p = 1.0). Among lesions receiving follow-up colonoscopy, the mean recurrence rates (number, median follow-up period: interquartile) of repeat CSP and standard CSP group were 2.0% (1/50, 12 months: 12-24) versus 0.7% (3/454, 12 months: 12-24) (p = 0.862).

CONCLUSIONS

Repeat CSP for benign recurrent lesions after CSP was safe and feasible.

Efficacy of the pocket-creation method with a traction device in endoscopic submucosal dissection for residual or recurrent colorectal lesions

Background/Aims

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for residual or recurrent colorectal lesions after incomplete resection is challenging because of severe fibrosis. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of the pocket-creation method (PCM) with a traction device (TD) with that of conventional ESD for residual or recurrent colorectal lesions.

Methods

We retrospectively studied 72 patients with residual or recurrent colorectal lesions resected using ESD. Overall, 31 and 41 lesions were resected using PCM with TD and conventional ESD methods, respectively. We compared patient background and treatment outcomes between the PCM with TD and conventional ESD groups, respectively. The primary endpoints were en bloc resection and R0 resection rates. The secondary endpoints were the dissection speed and incidence of adverse events.

Results

En bloc resection was feasible in all cases with PCM with TD, but failed in 22% of cases of conventional ESD. The R0 resection rates for PCM with TD and conventional ESD were 97% and 66%, respectively. Dissection was significantly faster in the PCM with TD group (13.0 vs. 7.9 mm²/min). Perforation and postoperative bleeding were observed in one patient in each group.

Conclusions

PCM with TD is an effective method for treating residual or recurrent colorectal lesions after incomplete resection.

Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgical Submucosal Dissection for Recurrent Rectal Adenomas

BACKGROUND

The local resection of recurrent rectal adenomas is a technically challenging task associated with increased local recurrence rate. Transanal endoscopic microsurgical submucosal dissection (TEM-ESD) uses traction to better expose the fibrotic submucosal layer, and therefore, is a valuable alternative for the treatment of such lesions. The aim of our study was to assess the feasibility and outcomes of TEM-ESD for the resection of recurrent rectal adenomas.

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed all TEM-ESD procedures performed in the Karlsruhe Municipal Hospital between 2012 and 2021 and isolated all cases of recurrent adenomas. Subsequently, we matched these cases 1:1 to TEM-ESD cases for primary rectal adenomas according to the size, localization, and histological type of the lesions and compared the outcomes between the two groups.

RESULTS

We identified 19 cases matching our criteria. The median diameter of the lesions was 25 mm and the median operating time 39 min. Macroscopic en bloc resection was achieved in 100% of the cases and histological complete en bloc resection in 78.9%. There was 1 case of conservatively treated postoperative bleeding. After a median follow-up period of 36 months, there was one local recurrence. After comparing those findings to the outcomes of TEM-ESD for primary rectal lesions, we found no significant differences on total operating time, complete en bloc resection rates, adverse events, and local recurrence.

CONCLUSION

TEM-ESD is a feasible therapeutic option for the resection of recurrent rectal adenomas, offering short operating times as well as high en bloc resection and low recurrence rates.

Endoscopic full-thickness resection of colorectal lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) is a novel endoscopic technique for the resection of GI lesions not amenable to standard endoscopic therapy. The primary aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate EFTR for the resection of colorectal lesions.

METHODS

Individualized searches were developed through October 2020 in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines. Random-effects models were used to determine pooled technical success, margin-negative (R₀) resection, adverse events, procedure duration, and rate of recurrence at follow-up. Subgroup analysis was used to assess the impact of specific procedure techniques and regression analyses to determine influence of lesion size. Heterogeneity was assessed with I² statistics and publication bias by funnel plots using Egger and Begg tests.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies (1936 subjects; 39.6% women) were included. Most EFTR lesions were located in the colon (75.8%) with the remaining in the rectum. Mean procedure duration was 45.4 ± 11.4 minutes. Pooled technical success was 87.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 85.1-89.8; I² = 33), R₀ resection rate was 78.8% (95% CI, 75.7-81.5; I² = 33), procedure-associated adverse events occurred in 12.2% (95% CI, 9.3-15.9; I² = 61), and recurrence rate was 12.6% (95% CI, 11.1-14.4; I² = 0) over an average weighted follow-up of 20.1 ± 3.8 weeks. Regression analyses revealed significantly lower R₀ resection (odds ratio, .3; 95% CI, .2-.6; I² = 61; P = .0003) and higher overall procedure-associated adverse event rates (odds ratio, 3.5; 95% CI, 1.8-7.2; I² = 55; P = .0004) for lesions >20 mm.

CONCLUSIONS

EFTR overall appears to be an effective modality with high technical success and R₀ resection rate with a relatively low risk of adverse events and recurrence, with greatest success when lesions are <20 mm.

Propensity score-matched analysis of endoscopic resection for recurrent colorectal neoplasms: A pilot study

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Local residual/recurrent colorectal lesions after endoscopic resection (ER) are difficult to treat with conventional ER. Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) are reportedly effective. We investigated the appropriate indications of ESD and UEMR for recurrent colorectal lesions.

METHODS

This single-center, retrospective, observational study was conducted at a tertiary cancer institute. Patients who underwent UEMR or ESD for residual/recurrent colorectal lesions after ER from October 2013 to February 2019 were enrolled. Propensity score matching was performed between the UEMR and ESD groups to compare the clinical characteristics, treatment, and outcomes.

RESULTS

In total, 30 UEMRs and 21 ESDs were performed. Median (range) diameter of the lesions was 8 mm (2-22 mm) in UEMR and 15 mm (2-58 mm) in ESD. Median procedure time in UEMR was significantly shorter than that of ESD (4 min [2-15 min] vs 70 min [17-193 min], P < 0.001). En bloc and complete resection rates of ESD were significantly higher than that of UEMR (73% vs 100%, 41% vs 81%, respectively). No adverse events occurred with UEMR, but there were two cases (10%) of delayed perforation with ESD. Neither group reported recurrence after treatment. Propensity score-matched cases showed significantly shorter procedure time and hospitalization period in UEMR than in ESD.

CONCLUSIONS

The outcomes of UEMR and ESD were comparable. UEMR could be a useful salvage therapy for small local residual/recurrent colorectal lesions after ER with shorter procedure time and hospitalization period.

Repeated Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Esophageal Neoplasia Located Close to a Previous Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection Scar

INTRODUCTION:

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) could become a standard treatment for early stage esophageal neoplasia. Recurrence sometimes develops close to a previous ESD scar. These lesions are predictably difficult to treat with ESD because of severe fibrosis. We evaluated the clinical outcomes of ESD for esophageal neoplasia located close to a previous ESD scar.

METHODS:

This was a retrospective observational study in a single institution. A total of 549 consecutive patients with 927 esophageal lesions were treated with ESD. The primary outcomes were resectability and adverse events of esophageal neoplasia located close to previous ESD scars (ESD scar group) than in primary esophageal ESD (primary group). Furthermore, predictive factors of perforation were examined.

RESULTS:

A total of 545 primary and 29 ESD scars in consecutive patients were evaluated. En bloc and complete (R0) resection rates in the ESD scar group were lower than those in the primary group (79.3% vs 98.3%, P < 0.01 and 75.9% vs 93.4%, P < 0.01). Perforations occurred more frequently in the ESD scar group (10.3% vs 2.0%, P = 0.03). The ESD scar group was a predictive factor for perforation (odds ratio = 10.37, 95% confidence interval: 2.15–49.94, P = 0.004). There were similar results for inverse probability of treatment weighting methods (odds ratio = 6.78, 95% confidence interval: 1.40–32.98, P = 0.018).

DISCUSSION:

ESD for esophageal neoplasia located close to a previous ESD scar was difficult to completely resect and increased the likelihood of perforation but could be a treatment option.

Salvage endoscopic submucosal dissection for local residual/recurrent colorectal tumor after endoscopic resection: Large multicenter 10-year study

OBJECTIVES

For local residual/recurrent and endoscopic resection (ER) interrupted colorectal tumors, endoscopic retreatment is often difficult due to severe submucosal fibrosis. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) can achieve en bloc resection, even for tumors with severe submucosal fibrosis, although it is a risk factor for incomplete resection and perforation. We aimed to determine the safety and efficacy of colorectal ESD for local residual/recurrent tumors including ER interrupted tumors from a large multicenter study.

METHODS

From January 2008 until December 2018, 3,937 colorectal tumors were resected by ESD at the Hiroshima GI Endoscopy Research Group. From this group, 81 local residual/recurrent tumors and 21 ER interrupted tumors were included. We analyzed ESD outcomes, particularly the difference between the early and late phases and re-recurrence after ESD for local residual/recurrent tumors.

RESULTS

For local residual/recurrent tumors, en bloc and R0 resection rates were 95% (77/81) and 90% (73/81), respectively. The intraoperative perforation rate was 6% (5/81), and one patient required surgery. The delayed perforation rate was 2% (2/81), and one patient required surgery. For ER interrupted tumors, both the en bloc and R0 resection rates were 86% (18/21), with no major adverse events. For local residual/recurrent and ER interrupted tumors, the intraoperative perforation rate was significantly lower in the late phase compared with the early phase. Following curative resection for local residual/recurrent tumors, no local re-recurrences occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

Colorectal ESD is an effective treatment for local residual/recurrent and ER interrupted tumors.

Safety and efficacy of endoscopic submucosal dissection for metachronous early cancer or precancerous lesions emerging at the anastomotic site after curative surgical resection of colorectal cancer

Background

The incidence of metachronous early cancer or precancerous lesions (MECPL) emerging at the anastomotic site (AS) after curative surgical resection of colorectal cancer (CRC) is so low that few study have been conducted to explore the clinical characteristics, diagnosis and treatment of these lesions. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is technically difficult for these lesions because of the presence of severe fibrosis and AS. The aim of this study was to explore the safety and efficacy of ESD for MECPL emerging at the AS after curative surgical resection of CRC.

Methods

The data used in the analysis were retrospectively collected from CICAMS in Beijing China between January 2013 and May 2019 and from all the patients who underwent ESD for MECPL emerging at the AS after curative surgical resection of CRC. The rates of en bloc resection (ER), complete resection (CR), curative resection (CuR) and incidence of complications were analyzed by SPSS software.

Results

A total of 11 patients were included. The rates of ER, CR and CuR were 63.6%, 54.5% and 54.5%, respectively. No additional surgery was performed, and no recurrences were found. Bleeding occurred in only one case and there was no perforation after the operation.

Conclusions

Overall, ESD is safe and effective in the treatment of MECPL emerging at the AS after curative surgical resection of CRC. Especially for patients with anastomotic recurrence close to anal margin, this method can avoid the risks of reoperation and improve the rate of anal preservation.

Case of Colorectal Cancer After Cold Snare Polypectomy Successfully Salvaged on Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection

Cold snare polypectomy is a well-established method for the resection of colorectal polyps measuring less than 10 mm in size. It may be performed in patients with early colorectal cancers because of the difficulty of endoscopic diagnosis. However, the therapeutic effect of cold snare polypectomy on cancers is unknown, and the need for appropriate surveillance and additional treatment for these patients remains to be fulfilled. Endoscopic submucosal dissection has been reported as a safe and effective method for treating recurrent or residual colorectal neoplasia following hot endoscopic mucosal resection. This report is of a case of a colorectal tumor measuring 8 mm that was treated using cold snare polypectomy and resulted in residual cancer. Endoscopic submucosal dissection was selected as salvage treatment for the residual lesion, and histopathological examination revealed free horizontal and vertical margins. We believe that performing endoscopic submucosal dissection at the site of the cancer resected with cold snare polypectomy ensured that there was no residual cancer left. It may be hypothesized that endoscopic submucosal dissection could evolve as the treatment of choice for patients with colorectal cancer after cold snare polypectomy.

Efficacy and safety of endoscopic full-thickness resection in the colon and rectum using an over-the-scope device: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Relevant publications were identified by searching PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Web of Science before December 1, 2019. Studies in which ≥ 10 cases of colorectal lesions were resected with endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) were included. Rates of efficacy (technical success (en bloc), full-thickness resection and R0 resection), rates of safety (bleeding, perforation and postpolypectomy syndrome) and rates of follow-up (residual/recurrent adenoma, fate of over-the-scope clip and surgery for any reason) were pooled and analyzed. Forest plots were graphed based on random effects models. Subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses were also performed if significant heterogeneity existed.

RESULTS

A total of 469 patients across 9 studies were eligible for analysis. The pooled rates of technical success, full-thickness resection and R0 resection were 94.0% (95% CI 89.8-97.3%), 89.5% (83.9-94.2%) and 84.9% (75.1-92.8%), respectively. The pooled estimates of bleeding, perforation and postpolypectomy syndrome were 2.2% (95% CI 0.4-4.9%), 0.19% (95% CI 0.00-1.25%) and 2.3% (95% CI 0.1-6.3%), respectively. Finally, the pooled rates of residual/recurrent adenoma, fate of OTSC and surgery for any reason were 8.5% (95% CI 4.1-14.0%), 80.3% (95% CI 67.5-90.8%) and 6.3% (2.4-11.7%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

EFTR for nonlifting, invasive lesions in the colon and rectum appears to be effective and safe. However, future studies are necessary to explore the role of EFTR in large colorectal lesions and specify its indications.

Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society guidelines for colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection/endoscopic mucosal resection

Suitable lesions for endoscopic treatment include not only early colorectal carcinomas but also several types of precarcinomatous adenomas. It is important to establish practical guidelines wherein preoperative diagnosis of colorectal neoplasia and selection of endoscopic treatment procedures are appropriately outlined and to ensure that actual endoscopic treatment is useful and safe in general hospitals when carried out in accordance with guidelines. In cooperation with the Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum, the Japanese Society of Coloproctology, and the Japanese Society of Gastroenterology, the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society compiled colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection/endoscopic mucosal resection guidelines by using evidence-based methods in 2014. The first edition of these guidelines was published 5 years ago. Accordingly, we have published the second edition of these guidelines based on recent new knowledge and evidence.

Risk factors for early and late adenoma recurrence after advanced colorectal endoscopic resection at an expert Western center

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Few large Western series examine risk factors for recurrence after endoscopic resection (ER) of large (≥20 mm) colorectal laterally spreading tumors. Recurrence beyond initial surveillance is seldom reported, and differences between residual/recurrent adenoma and late recurrence are not scrutinized. We report the incidence of recurrence at successive surveillance intervals, identify risk factors for recurrent/residual adenoma and late recurrence, and describe the outcomes of ER of recurrent adenomas.

METHODS

Recurrence was calculated for successive surveillance periods after colorectal ER. Multiple logistic regression was used to identify independent risk factors for recurrent/residual adenoma and late recurrence (≥12 months).

RESULTS

Six hundred twenty colorectal ERs were performed, and 456 eligible patients (98%) had completed 3- to 6-month surveillance. Residual/recurrent adenoma (3-6 months) was detected in 8.3%, at 12 months in 6.1%, between 24 and 36 months in 6.4%, and after 36 months in 13.5%. Independent risk factors for residual/recurrent adenoma were piecemeal resection (odds ratio [OR], 13.0; P = .01), adjunctive argon plasma coagulation (OR, 2.4; P = .01), and lesion occupying ≥75% of the luminal circumference (OR, 5.6; P < .001) and for late recurrence were lesion size >60 mm (OR, 6.3; P < .001) and piecemeal resection (OR, 4.4; P = .04). Of 66 patients with recurrence, 5 required surgery, 8 left the treatment pathway, 20 are still receiving ER or surveillance, and 33 had ER with normal subsequent surveillance.

CONCLUSIONS

Recurrence occurs at successive periods of surveillance after ER even beyond 3 years. Aside from piecemeal resection, risk factors for residual/recurrent adenoma and late recurrence are different. Recurrence can be challenging to treat, but surgery is rarely required.

Endoscopic full-thickness resection of colorectal lesions with the full-thickness resection device: clinical experience from two referral centers in Greece

Background:

Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) using the full-thickness resection device (FTRD^®) is an invasive treatment for colorectal lesions not resectable by conventional endoscopic techniques. This study presents the first Greek experience of the FTRD^® procedure, assessing the efficacy and safety of EFTR.

Methods:

We conducted a retrospective analysis of 17 consecutive patients treated with the FTRD^® at 2 referral centers from October 2015 through December 2018. The indications included difficult adenomas (non-lifting and/or at difficult locations), early adenocarcinomas and subepithelial tumors. Primary endpoints were technical success and R0 resection.

Results:

Technical success and R0 resection were achieved in 82.3% procedures (14/17) and in 87.5% of those with difficult adenomas (8 patients). In the subgroup with carcinomas (n=3), the rate of technical success and R0 resection was 66.6%, while in the subgroup with subepithelial tumors (n=6) the rate was 83.3%. Technical success and R0 resection were significantly lower for lesions >20 mm vs. ≤20 mm (P=0.0429). In the 17 patients a total of 3 adverse events occurred (17.6%) and one of the patients underwent laparoscopic appendectomy because of EFTR around the appendix.

Conclusions:

Our study showed favorable results concerning EFTR feasibility, efficacy and safety, especially for lesions ≤20 mm, non-lifting adenomas, and subepithelial tumors. Technical success, R0 resection, and adverse events rates were comparable with previously published data. Larger randomized studies are needed to better define the clinical benefit and long-term outcomes of EFTR in selected patients.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection in management of colorectal tumors near or involving a diverticulum: a retrospective case series

Background and study aims  Surgery is the standard treatment for colon tumors associated with diverticulum. U se of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) to treat such tumors is controversial. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and feasibility of ESD in treating superficial colorectal tumors situated near or involving diverticulum. Patients and methods  Consecutive patients from two referral centers who had colorectal tumors near or involving diverticulum treated by ESD were retrospectively studied. Clinicopathological characteristics and clinical outcomes were analyzed. Results  Of the 12 patients studied, six had tumors near diverticulum and six had tumors involving diverticulum. The overall en-bloc R0 resection rate, median tumor size and procedure time were 67 %, 26.5 mm (range, 15 - 80 mm) and 110 minutes (range, 50 - 220 minutes), respectively. For tumors near diverticulum group, the en-bloc R0 resection rate was 100 % and no adverse events (AEs) or residual/recurrent tumors were observed. In contrast, for intradiverticular tumors group, the en-bloc R0 resection rate was low at 33 %, and one AE (perforation) was observed. The diverticula were ≥ 6 mm in diameter in the patients with incomplete resection. However, all but one diverticulum was unrecognized before ESD. Two residual tumors were detected at the 12-month surveillance and one required surgery. Conclusions  This case series indicates that ESD is safe and feasible for treating colorectal tumors near a diverticulum and might be feasible for tumors involving a diverticulum smaller than 6 mm. Selection for smaller diverticulum size may contribute to higher en-bloc R0 resection rates.

Colo-rectal endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) with the over-the-scope device (FTRD®): A multicenter Italian experience

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Endoscopic full-thickness resection(EFTR) with FTRD^® in colo-rectum may be useful for several indications.The aim was to assess its efficacy and safety.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In this retrospective multicenter study 114 patients were screened; 110 (61M/49F, mean age 68 ± 11 years, range 20-90) underwent EFTR using FTRD^®. Indications were:residual/recurrent adenoma (39), incomplete resection at histology (R1 resection) (26), non-lifting lesion (12), adenoma involving the appendix (2) or diverticulum (2), subepithelial lesions(10), suspected T1 carcinoma (16), diagnostic resection (3). Technical success (TS: lesion reached and resected), R0 resection (negative lateral and deep margins),EFTR rate(all layers documented in the specimen) and safety have been evaluated.

RESULTS

TS was achieved in 94.4% of cases. EFTR was achieved in 91% with lateral and deep R0 resection in 90% and 92%. Mean size of specimens was 20 mm (range 6-42). In residual/recurrent adenomas, final analysis revealed: low-risk T1 (11), adenoma with low-grade dysplasia (LGD) (24) and high-grade dysplasia (HGD) (3), scar tissue (1). Histology reports of R1 resections were: adenoma with LGD (6), with HGD (1), low-risk (6) and high-risk (1) T1, scar tissue (12). Non-lifting lesions were diagnosed as: adenoma with HGD (3), low-risk (7) and high risk (2) T1. Adverse clinical events occurred in 12 patients (11%),while adverse technical events in11%. Three-months follow-up was available in 100 cases and residual disease was evident in only seven patients.

CONCLUSIONS

EFTR using FTRD^® seems to be a feasible, effective and safe technique for treating selected colo-rectal lesions. Comparative prospective studies are needed to confirm these promising results.

Management of local recurrence after endoscopic resection of neoplastic colonic polyps

A proportion of neoplastic polyps are incompletely resected, resulting in local recurrence, especially after resection of large polyps or piecemeal resection. Local recurrences that develop after endoscopic resection of intramucosal neoplasms that lacked risk factors for lymph node metastasis or positive vertical margins are usually treated endoscopically. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is indicated for local residual or recurrent early carcinomas after endoscopic resection. However, ESD for such recurrent lesions is technically difficult and is typically a lengthy procedure. Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR), which was developed in 2012, is suitable for recurrent or residual lesions and reportedly achieves superior en bloc resection rates and endoscopic complete resection rates than conventional EMR. However, a large recurrent lesion is a negative independent predictor of successful en bloc resection and of complete endoscopic removal. We therefore perform UEMR for relatively small (≤ 10-15 mm) recurrent lesions and ESD for larger lesions.

Complete polypectomy and early detection and management of residual disease to reduce the risk of interval colorectal cancers

Advances in colorectal polyp detection and resection methods aim to reduce interval cancer rates. Complete polypectomy is essential to reduce the risk of early recurrence and the development of interval cancers. To achieve this, polyps must first be correctly identified and then completely excised. This article reviews current adenoma detection methods in use and the management of residual disease.

Endoscopic full-thickness resection of polyps involving the appendiceal orifice: a prospective observational case study

Background and study aims  Colorectal polyps involving the appendiceal orifice (AO) are difficult to resect with conventional polypectomy techniques and therefore often require surgical intervention. These appendiceal polyps could potentially be removed with endoscopic full-thickness resection (eFTR) performed with a full-thickness resection device (FTRD). The aim of this prospective observational case study was to evaluate feasibility, technical success and safety of eFTR procedures involving the AO. Patients and methods  This study was performed between November 2016 and December 2017 in a tertiary referral center by two experienced endoscopists. All patients referred for eFTR with a polyp involving the AO that could not be resected by EMR due to more than 50 % circumferential involvement of the AO or deep extension into the AO were included. The only exclusion criterion was lesion diameter > 20 mm. Results  Seven patients underwent eFTR for a polyp involving the AO. All target lesions could be reached with the FTRD and retracted into the device. Technical success with an endoscopic radical en-bloc and full-thickness resection was achieved in all cases. Histopathological R0 resection was achieved in 85.7 % of patients (6/7). One patient who previously underwent an appendectomy developed a small abscess adjacent to the resection site, which was treated conservatively. Another patient developed secondary appendicitis followed by a laparoscopic appendectomy. Conclusion  This small exploratory study suggests that eFTR of appendiceal polyps is feasible and can offer a minimally invasive approach for radical resection of these lesions. However, more safety and long-term follow-up data are needed to evaluate this evolving technique.

Current status and future perspectives of endoscopic full-thickness resection

Flexible endoscopy has developed from a diagnostic tool for tissue biopsy sampling to a treatment tool for endoscopic resection of neoplasms in the digestive tract. In the near future, one of the advanced endoscopic techniques, endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR), is expected to be a feasible endoscopic procedure. In the present review, systematic review of conventional exposed EFTR was carried out. Search queries were (endoscopic full-thickness resection or EFTR) (over-the-scope clip or OTSC) (Overstitch System) from 2015 to 2017. Four retrospective, single-center studies with regard to conventional EFTR were identified. With regard to indication for conventional exposed EFTR, gastrointestinal stromal tumor was a good indication for EFTR. Mean tumor size of all four studies was 20.71 mm. In two studies, endoclips were used to close the resected opening without any complications, but the other two studies reported complications such as delayed perforation even using OTSC. Procedure times were reported from a minimum of 40 min to a maximum of 105 min. We also refer to introduction of a newly developed procedure of EFTR (non-exposed EFTR), and development of a new suturing device in Japan.

Volume of surgery for benign colorectal polyps in the last 11 years

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Traditionally large, complex colorectal polyps were managed by surgical resection (SR), and in recent years endoscopic resection (ER) has progressed significantly. However, to what extent ER has replaced SR remains largely unknown. We performed a multicenter retrospective cohort study to assess the volume and volume changes of SR for benign colorectal polyps over the past decade.

METHODS

Patients who underwent SR for a benign colorectal polyp in the Netherlands between 2005 and 2015 were selected from the prospective nationwide Dutch Pathology Registry (PALGA database). Clinical characteristics were obtained from the charts of patients who underwent SR in the province of Noord-Holland.

RESULTS

A total of 5937 patients were treated with SR for a colorectal polyp and the absolute (454-739 per year) and relative volumes (0.20%-0.37% per colonoscopy per year) of SR remained stable. In the province of Noord-Holland, 928 patients (15.6%) underwent SR. In these patients, submucosal lifting and ER were attempted in 19.9% (n = 175) and 15.0% (n = 134). After 2010, patients were more likely to undergo lifting (27.7% vs 11.4%, P < .001) and ER attempts (18.8% vs 10.9%, P = .001) before definitive SR. Twenty-two patients (2.4%) had been referred to another endoscopy clinic.

CONCLUSIONS

SR for large, complex colorectal polyps is still frequently performed and has remained stable. A small percentage of patients underwent ER attempts before SR, and referral for an additional ER attempt only occurred in a minority of cases. To increase ER attempts, implementation of a regional multidisciplinary referral network should be considered.

Safe and successful resection of difficult GI lesions using a novel single-step full-thickness resection device (FTRD®)

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Classic endoscopic resection techniques (EMR and ESD) are limited to mucosal lesions. In the case of deeper growth into the gut wall and anatomic sites prone to perforation, the novel full-thickness resection device (FTRD®) opens a new dimension of possibilities for endoscopic resection.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Sixty patients underwent endoscopic full-thickness resection (eFTR) at our institution. Safety, learning curve, R0 resection rate, and clinical outcome were studied.

RESULTS

In 97% (58/60) of the interventions, the FTRD®-mounted endoscope reached the previously marked lesion and eFTR was performed (technical success). Full-thickness resection was achieved in 88% of the cases, with an R0 resection on histological examination in 79%. The clinical success rate based on follow-up histology was even higher (88%). Adverse events occurred in 7%. Appendicitis of the residual cecal appendix after eFTR of an adenoma arising in the appendix led to the only post-eFTR surgery (1/58, 2%). Minor bleeding at the eFTR site (2/58, 3%) and an eFTR performed accidently without proper prior deployment of the OTSC® (1/58, 2%) were successfully treated endoscopically. There was no secondary perforation or eFTR-associated mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

After specific training, eFTR is a feasible, safe, and promising all-in-one endoscopic resection technique. Our data show that eFTR allows complete resection of lesions affecting layers of the gut wall beneath the mucosa with a low risk of adverse events. However, our preliminary results need to be confirmed in larger, controlled studies.

Endoscopic Resection of Cecal Polyps Involving the Appendiceal Orifice: A KASID Multicenter Study

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic resection of polyps located at the appendiceal orifice (AO) is challenging, and the feasibility and outcomes of endoscopic resection for cecal polyps involving AO are unconfirmed.

AIMS

We evaluated the feasibility and outcomes of endoscopic resection for cecal polyps involving AO.

METHODS

In this retrospective, multicenter study involving nine tertiary referral centers, we evaluated 131 patients who underwent endoscopic resection for cecal polyps involving AO.

RESULTS

The median size of polyps resected was 10 mm (range 3-60 mm). Endoscopic mucosal resection, endoscopic piecemeal mucosal resection, and endoscopic submucosal dissection were performed in 75 (57.3%), 31 (23.7%), and 5 (3.8%) patients, respectively. The en bloc resection rate was 68.7%. Endoscopic complete resection was achieved in 123 lesions (93.9%). Intraprocedural and delayed bleeding occurred in 14 (10.7%) and three patients (2.3%), respectively, and perforation occurred in two patients (1.5%). Seven patients (5.3%) underwent additional surgery because of treatment failure or recurrence. Polyps of ≥20 mm in size showed significantly higher rates of perforation and additional surgery (p < 0.05), and a lower rate of en bloc resection (p < 0.005). Patients with polyps involving ≥75% of AO circumference exhibited a significantly lower rate of en bloc resection (p < 0.001), and significantly higher rates of surgery and recurrence (p < 0.05). Recurrence during follow-up occurred in 12 patients (15.6%); polyps involving ≥75% of AO circumference were an independent risk factor for recurrence.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic resection of cecal polyps involving AO is safe and effective in select patients.

Local recurrence and subsequent endoscopic treatment after endoscopic piecemeal mucosal resection with or without precutting in the colorectum

Background/Aims

Precutting before endoscopic piecemeal mucosal resection (EPMR) may increase colorectal polyp resection effectiveness. We aimed to identify risk factors for recurrence after conventional EPMR (CEPMR) and precut EPMR (PEPMR) and investigated endoscopic treatment outcomes for recurrent cases.

Methods

The medical records of patients with colorectal polyps treated by EPMR were analyzed. Patients without follow-up surveillance colonoscopies were excluded.

Results

Among 359 lesions, the local recurrence rate on the first surveillance colonoscopy was 5.8% (18/312) and 6.4% (3/47) after CEPMR and PEPMR, respectively. Among lesions without recurrence at the first surveillance colonoscopy, the rates of late recurrence on subsequent surveillance colonoscopy were 3.9% (6/152) and 0% after CEPMR and PEPMR, respectively. Larger tumor size was the only independent risk factor for recurrence (odds ratio, 7.93; 95% confidence interval, 1.95–32.30; P<0.001). Endoscopic treatment was performed for all 27 recurrences. A combination of ≥2 endoscopic treatment modalities was used in 19 of 27 recurrences (70.4%). Surveillance colonoscopies were performed in 20 of 27 recurrences after endoscopic treatment. One (5.0%) had a re-recurrence and was treated by surgical resection because recurrence occurred at the appendiceal orifice. Nineteen of 20 lesions (95.0%) could be cured endoscopically, although 3 of the 19 showed second or third recurrences and were treated by repeat endoscopic resection.

Conclusions

The local recurrence rates after CEPMR and PEPMR were similar. Larger tumor size was an independent risk factor for local recurrence after EPMR. Endoscopic treatment of recurrences resulted in high cure rates, although combination methods were necessary in many cases.

Endoscopic full-thickness resection of superficial colorectal neoplasms using a new over-the-scope clip system: A single-centre study

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) provides complete en-bloc resection with a histopathological evaluation of submucosal, muscular, and serosal layers. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of a novel over-the-scope device for colorectal EFTR.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In this retrospective, observational, open-label case study, a total of 20 patients with superficial colorectal neoplasms, underwent EFTR using a new endoscopic full-thickness resection device (FTRD; Ovesco Endoscopy, Tübingen, Germany). Endoscopic treatment outcomes (technical success, rate of EFTR, adverse events) and early follow-up at three months, were analyzed.

RESULTS

We reported a 100% of technical success, defined as full-thickness resection. Among the R1 resections, histology was negative for neoplasm. Non-lifting adenomas had histology positive for adenocarcinoma: seven T1/G1/sm1; one T1/G1/sm2; one, who underwent a surgical resection, T1/G1/sm3. Mean size of the resected lesions was 26mm, ranging from 10 to 42mm. One (5%) patient developed abdominal pain, fever and leukocytosis and was treated conservatively with medical therapy. In all specimens, histological complete resection was confirmed.

CONCLUSIONS

EFTR is a feasible and effective technique that could become a valid alternative to EMR and ESD in the management of recurrent adenomas, no-lifting lesions and scars of R1 resections. However, prospective studies are needed to further evaluate the device and technique.

Endoscopic treatment outcomes of laterally spreading tumors with a skirt (with video)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

A "skirt" is a slightly elevated flat lesion with wide pits occasionally observed at the margin of laterally spreading tumors (LSTs). However, the endoscopic treatment outcomes of LSTs with skirts have not been clarified. The aim of this study was to evaluate the endoscopic treatment outcomes of LSTs with skirts.

METHODS

Between February 2006 and March 2014, 996 LSTs were retrospectively examined to assess the clinicopathologic characteristics, procedure time, en bloc resection rate, R0 resection rate, adverse events, and local recurrence rate of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and of endoscopic resection.

RESULTS

Endoscopic treatment was performed in 35 cases of LSTs with skirts (ratio of ESD to endoscopic piecemeal mucosal resection [EPMR], 32:3) and 961 cases of LSTs without skirts (ratio of ESD to EMR to EPMR to polypectomy, 381:275:114:191). LSTs with a skirt were associated with a significantly higher recurrence rate (P < .01). In both ESD and EPMR, LSTs with a skirt were associated with a higher recurrence rate when compared with LSTs without a skirt (odds ratio, 12.7; P = .032, and odds ratio, 12.3; P = .061, respectively). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that the presence of the skirt and piecemeal resection were significant predictors of local recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

LSTs with skirts had a significantly higher local recurrence rate after endoscopic treatment compared with LSTs without skirts, especially after EPMR. Therefore, ESD should be recommended as an endoscopic treatment for LSTs with skirts to minimize local recurrence.

Endoscopic full thickness resection (EFTR) of colorectal neoplasms with the Full Thickness Resection Device (FTRD): Clinical experience from two tertiary referral centers in Switzerland

Background

Endoscopic full thickness resection (EFTR) by the Full Thickness Resection Device (FTRD) has recently been introduced as a method to allow resection of certain lesions such as adenomatous polyps that would not be resectable by standard polypectomy techniques. We report our clinical experience with FTRD procedures, assessing technical success, completeness of resection (R0 status), rate of histologically proven FTR and safety.

Patients and methods

We conducted a retrospective analysis of 33 consecutive patients with colonic polyps treated with FTRD from May 2015 to November 2016.

Results

Indications mainly were adenoma recurrence or residual adenoma with nonlifting sign after previous polypectomy. In the 31 cases amenable to EFTR, resection was en bloc and histologically complete (R0) in 87.9% (29/33) of patients. Histologically confirmed complete full thickness resection (FTR) was achieved in 80.6% (25/31). Three post-procedure bleedings and one perforation were seen.

Conclusion

FTRD offers an additional endoscopic approach to treat nonlifting colorectal lesions. EFTR by FTRD appears to be feasible and efficacious in the resection of benign neoplasms of up to 30 mm in diameter and may be an alternative to surgery in selected patients. Given a significant rate of complications, safety is a concern and needs to be assessed in larger prospective studies.

Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: patient selection and special considerations

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) enables en bloc resection of large complex colorectal superficial neoplastic lesions, resulting in very low rates of local recurrence, high-quality pathologic specimens for accurate histopathologic diagnosis and potentially curative treatment of early adenocarcinoma without resorting to major surgical resection. The safety and efficacy of the technique, which was pioneered in the upper gastrointestinal tract, has been established by the consistently impressive outcomes from expert centers in Japan and some other eastern countries. However, ESD is challenging to perform in the colorectum and there is a significant risk of complications, particularly in the early stages of the learning curve. Early studies from western centers raised concerns about the high complication rates, and the impressive results from Japanese centers were not replicated. As a result, many western endoscopists are skeptical about the role of ESD and few centers have incorporated the technique into their practice. Nevertheless, although the distribution of expertise, referral centers and modes of practice may differ in Japan and western countries, ESD has an important role and can be safely and effectively incorporated into western practice. Key to achieving this is meticulous lesion assessment and selection, appropriate referral to centers with the necessary expertise and experience and application of the appropriate technique individualized to the patient. This review discusses the advantages, risks and benefits of ESD to treat colorectal lesions and the importance of preprocedure lesion assessment and in vivo diagnosis and outlines a pragmatic rationale for appropriate lesion selection as well as the patient, technical and institutional factors that should be considered.

Hybrid endoscopic mucosal resection and full-thickness resection: a new approach for resection of large non-lifting colorectal adenomas (with video)

BACKGROUND

Clip-assisted endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) with an over-the-scope device has been recently described to be feasible and effective for the resection of non-lifting adenomas in the lower gastrointestinal tract. However, tumor size is the major limitation of that technique. We describe a hybrid technique using endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) in ten patients with large non-lifting colorectal adenomas to reduce tumor size and facilitate clip-assisted EFTR.

METHODS

Data of ten consecutive patients (median age 72.5 years, SD 8.86) who underwent combined EMR and EFTR in the colon were analyzed retrospectively. The main outcome measures were technical success, histological confirmation of full-thickness resection, and adverse events.

RESULTS

All lesions (median size 35.5 mm, SD 5.99) could be resected successfully. No immediate or delayed adverse events were observed. Histology confirmed full-thickness resection in all cases. Three-month follow-up showed no residual or recurrent adenomas.

CONCLUSIONS

Hybrid EMR-EFTR in the colon seems to be an effective approach for large non-lifting lesions with positive lateral lifting signs. Prospective studies are needed to further evaluate efficacy, safety, rate of recurrence, and long-term outcome of this technique.

Endoscopic Full-Thickness Resection of Synchronous Adenocarcinomas of the Distal Rectum

Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) with an innovative full-thickness resection device (FTRD; Ovesco Endoscopy, Tübingen, Germany) allows a safe and complete full-thickness resection of early colorectal cancer. We present the first case of two EFTR performed at the same time to treat synchronous rectal adenocarcinomas.

Clinical impact of endoscopic clip closure of perforations during endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal tumors

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Despite advances in endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), perforation can still occur. The purpose of this study is to determine the clinical course and effectiveness of endoscopic closure in addition to the clinicopathologic features related to perforation.

METHODS

A total of 935 lesions in 900 consecutive patients between February 1998 and February 2013 underwent ESD for colorectal tumors at our institution. We studied the clinical course and histologic features of perforation through a matched case-control study that included 24 patients with intraprocedural perforation and 240 matched patients without perforation as a control group. Endoscopic closure by using through-the-scope endoclips was attempted in all cases of intraprocedural perforations immediately after perforation was recognized during the procedure.

RESULTS

Perforation occurred in 25 cases (2.7%), including 24 intraprocedural perforation and 1 delayed perforation. All but 1 patient with intraprocedural perforation was conservatively managed by endoscopic closure. One patient with unsuccessful endoscopic closure required emergency surgery. Analysis of clinical courses revealed statistically significant differences (P < .01) between the patients with perforation and the case-controlled, nonperforation patients in total procedure time, white blood cell count, and level of serum C-reactive protein on the day after the procedure, admission period, and fasting period. Both location (P = .027) and submucosal fibrosis (P = .04) of the lesion were significantly associated with perforation. Multivariate analysis revealed that fibrosis was a significant risk factor associated with perforation (odds ratio 2.86; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-7.90).

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic closure allows effective nonsurgical management in cases of intraprocedural perforation during ESD.

[Endoscopic full-thickness resection]

Conventional endoscopic resection techniques such as endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) or endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) are powerful tools for the treatment of gastrointestinal (GI) neoplasms. However, those techniques are limited to the superficial layers of the GI wall (mucosa and submucosa). Lesions without lifting sign (usually arising from deeper layers) or lesions in difficult anatomic positions (appendix, diverticulum) are difficult - if not impossible - to resect using conventional techniques, due to the increased risk of complications. For larger lesions (>2 cm), ESD appears to be superior to the conventional techniques because of the en bloc resection, but the procedure is technically challenging, time consuming, and associated with complications even in experienced hands. Since the development of the over-the-scope clips (OTSC), complications like bleeding or perforation can be endoscopically better managed. In recent years, different endoscopic full-thickness resection techniques came to the focus of interventional endoscopy. Since September 2014, the full-thickness resection device (FTRD) has the CE marking in Europe for full-thickness resection in the lower GI tract. Technically the device is based on the OTSC system and combines OTSC application and snare polypectomy in one step. This study shows all full-thickness resection techniques currently available, but clearly focuses on the experience with the FTRD in the lower GI tract.

Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection from a Western perspective: Today’s promises and future challenges

Over the last few years, endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has shown to be effective in the management of early colorectal neoplasms, particularly in Asian countries where the technique was born. In the Western world, its implementation has been slow and laborious. In this paper, the indications for ESD, its learning model, the available methods to predict the presence of deep submucosal invasion before the procedure and the published outcomes from Asia and Europe will be reviewed. Since ESD has several limitations in terms of learning achievement in the West, and completion of the procedure for the first cases is difficult in our part of the world, a short review on colorectal assisted ESD has been included. Finally, other endoscopic and surgical treatment modalities that are in competition with colorectal ESD will be summarized.

British Society of Gastroenterology/Association of Coloproctologists of Great Britain and Ireland guidelines for the management of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps

These guidelines provide an evidence-based framework for the management of patients with large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs), in addition to identifying key performance indicators (KPIs) that permit the audit of quality outcomes. These are areas not previously covered by British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) Guidelines.A National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) compliant BSG guideline development process was used throughout and the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) tool was used to structure the guideline development process. A systematic review of literature was conducted for English language articles up to May 2014 concerning the assessment and management of LNPCPs. Quality of evaluated studies was assessed using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) Methodology Checklist System. Proposed recommendation statements were evaluated by each member of the Guideline Development Group (GDG) on a scale from 1 (strongly agree) to 5 (strongly disagree) with >80% agreement required for consensus to be reached. Where consensus was not reached a modified Delphi process was used to re-evaluate and modify proposed statements until consensus was reached or the statement discarded. A round table meeting was subsequently held to finalise recommendations and to evaluate the strength of evidence discussed. The GRADE tool was used to assess the strength of evidence and strength of recommendation for finalised statements.KPIs, a training framework and potential research questions for the management of LNPCPs were also developed. It is hoped that these guidelines will improve the assessment and management of LNPCPs.

Outcomes of endoscopic treatment of second recurrences of large nonpedunculated colorectal adenomas

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of large nonpedunculated colorectal adenomas is associated with significant recurrence rates. After salvage endoscopic treatment of recurrences, there is a significant rate of second recurrences. There is a paucity of data on the efficacy and safety of continued endoscopic treatment after a second recurrence.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with recurrent adenomas after initial piecemeal EMR of nonpedunculated colorectal adenomas >2 cm were reviewed. We assessed the feasibility, safety and efficacy of continued endoscopic treatment in these patients.

RESULTS

Sixty-four patients with 70 recurrent lesions were identified. All were retreated endoscopically. Follow-up colonoscopy (mean interval 6.4 months) was performed on 62/70 lesions (89 %), and a second recurrence was found in 21/62 (34 %). One patient underwent surgery for a circumferential adenoma of the ileocecal valve. The other 20 lesions were treated endoscopically. Follow-up colonoscopy was performed on 15/20 (75 %) and demonstrated a third recurrence in 3/15 (20 %). One was a deep T1 cancer; curative surgery was performed. The other two patients each had one additional endoscopic treatment and both had no recurrence on subsequent colonoscopy. There were two complications: Both were delayed bleeds after treatment of the first recurrence. A mean of 1.3 endoscopic procedures was required to achieve a cure (range 1-3) for recurrent adenomas after piecemeal EMR.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic treatment of patients with second recurrences is safe and effective, but is associated with a significant rate of additional recurrences. Continued endoscopic treatment of patients with multiple recurrences is associated with high cure rates, low complication rates and a low risk of progression to malignancy.

JGES guidelines for colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection/endoscopic mucosal resection

Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has become common in recent years. Suitable lesions for endoscopic treatment include not only early colorectal carcinomas but also many types of precarcinomatous adenomas. It is important to establish practical guidelines in which the preoperative diagnosis of colorectal neoplasia and the selection of endoscopic treatment procedures are properly outlined, and to ensure that the actual endoscopic treatment is useful and safe in general hospitals when carried out in accordance with the guidelines. In cooperation with the Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum, the Japanese Society of Coloproctology, and the Japanese Society of Gastroenterology, the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society has recently compiled a set of colorectal ESD/endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) guidelines using evidence-based methods. The guidelines focus on the diagnostic and therapeutic strategies and caveat before, during, and after ESD/EMR and, in this regard, exclude the specific procedures, types and proper use of instruments, devices, and drugs. Although eight areas, ranging from indication to pathology, were originally planned for inclusion in these guidelines, evidence was scarce in each area. Therefore, grades of recommendation were determined largely through expert consensus in these areas.

Efficacy of endoscopic submucosal dissection for residual or recurrent superficial colorectal tumors after endoscopic mucosal resection

OBJECTIVE

Superficial colorectal tumors can be treated effectively by endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). Few data are available on using ESD for residual or recurrent tumors after the first endoscopic resection. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of ESD for these lesions.

METHODS

In all, 28 patients with residual or recurrent superficial colorectal tumors were referred to the Kobe University Hospital for ESD. The therapeutic outcomes and the possible factors predictive of procedure difficulties for ESD were analyzed.

RESULTS

In total, 27 (96.4%) patients were successfully treated using ESD. There was no related immediate complication. One patient had a delayed perforation which was then treated surgically. En bloc R0 resection was possible in all the patients and curative resection in 26 patients (92.9%). One invasive cancer was treated surgically. More than one previous endoscopic resection was the only significant predictive factor for the difficulty in performing ESD. None of the patients experienced recurrence during a follow-up of 22 months (range 3-41 months).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of ESD allowed a high rate of en bloc resection for residual or locally recurrent colorectal tumors. Furthermore, these lesions should be treated by ESD as a first-line treatment.

Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection for recurrences after previous piecemeal resection of colorectal polyps (with video)

BACKGROUND

Conventional endoscopic treatment of a recurrent adenoma after piecemeal EMR (PEMR) of a colorectal laterally spreading tumor (LST) is technically difficult with low en bloc resection rates because of the inability to snare fibrotic residual.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the feasibility of salvage underwater EMR (UEMR) for the treatment of recurrent adenoma after PEMR of a colorectal LST.

DESIGN

Retrospective, cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Single, tertiary-care referral center.

PATIENTS

Patients who have recurrent adenoma after PEMR of colorectal LST (≥2 cm).

INTERVENTIONS

UEMR versus EMR.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENT

En bloc resection rate, endoscopic complete removal rate, recurrence rate on follow-up colonoscopy, adjunctive ablation rate with argon plasma coagulation (APC) during salvage procedure, and independent predictive factors for successful en bloc resection and endoscopic complete removal.

RESULTS

Eighty salvage procedures (36 UEMRs vs 44 EMRs) were analyzed. En bloc resection rate (47.2% vs 15.9%, P = .002) and endoscopic complete removal rate (88.9% vs 31.8%, P < .001) were higher in the UEMR group than in the EMR group. APC ablation of visible residual during salvage procedure was lower in UEMR group than EMR group (11.1% vs 65.9%, P < .001). Recurrence rate on follow-up colonoscopy was significantly lower in the UEMR group than the EMR group (10% vs 39.4%, P = .02). UEMR was an independent predictor of successful en bloc resection and endoscopic complete removal.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective, single-center study.

CONCLUSIONS

UEMR can be a useful and feasible technique as a salvage procedure for recurrent colorectal adenoma after PEMR.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal neoplasms: A review

The introduction of colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has expanded the application of endoscopic treatment, which can be used for lesions with a low metastatic potential regardless of their size. ESD has the advantage of achieving en bloc resection with a lower local recurrence rate compared with that of piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection. Moreover, in the past, surgery was indicated in patients with large lesions spreading to almost the entire circumference of the rectum, regardless of the depth of invasion, as endoscopic resection of these lesions was technically difficult. Therefore, a prime benefit of ESD is significant improvement in the quality of life for patients who have large rectal lesions. On the other hand, ESD is not as widely applied in the treatment of colorectal neoplasms as it is in gastric cancers owing to the associated technical difficulty, longer procedural duration, and increased risk of perforation. To diversify the available endoscopic treatment strategies for superficial colorectal neoplasms, endoscopists performing ESD need to recognize its indications, the technical issues involved in its application, and the associated complications. This review outlines the methods and type of devices used for colorectal ESD, and the training required by endoscopists to perform this procedure.