In vitro assessment of the performance of a new multiband mucosectomy device for endoscopic resection of early upper gastrointestinal neoplasia

An endoscopic approach providing near-infrared laser-induced coagulation with accurate depth limits

This article investigates an endoscopic approach that utilizes negative pressure to achieve laser-induced thermal coagulation limited to the esophageal wall's mucosal and superficial submucosal layers. The study was built upon a series of studies combining numerical simulation based on the Monte-Carlo technique and ex vivo porcine tissue experiments, including apparatus design and histology analysis. An endoscopy apparatus was developed using 3D printing to validate the tissue stretching-based approach. A fiber-pigtailed diode was used as the near-infrared source, emitting 208.8 W/cm2 laser irradiance at 1.5 μm. Simulation results suggested that the approach successfully created a local heat well to prevent residual thermal effects (>65°C) from penetrating the deeper submucosal layer. Histology analysis of ex vivo tissues showed that at a fluence of 5.22 kJ/cm2, the depth of thermal coagulation was reduced by half compared to the control. With further preclinical studies, including endoscopy apparatus design, the approach can be applied to the larger esophageal surface.

Therapeutic Challenges for Gastric Neuroendocrine Neoplasms: Take It or Leave It?

Background and Objectives: Gastric neuroendocrine neoplasms (gNENs) represent rare but increasingly recognized tumors. They are distinguished into three main clinical types (type-1, type-2, and type-3) according to gastrin level and at histological evaluation in well-differentiated G1, G2, or G3 lesions, as well as poorly-differentiated lesions. Small type-1 and type-2 neoplasms with low proliferation indices demonstrated excellent survival without progression during an extended follow-up period, and for these reasons, active endoscopic observation or endoscopic resection are feasible options. On the other hand, surgery is the treatment of choice for more aggressive type-3, G3, or infiltrating neoplasms. The present study aims to comprehensively review and compare the available therapeutic strategies for gNENs. Materials and Methods: A computerized literature search was performed using relevant keywords to identify all of the pertinent articles with particular attention to gNEN endoscopic treatment. Results: In recent years, different endoscopic resective techniques (such as endoscopic mucosal dissection, modified endoscopic mucosal resection, and endoscopic full-thickness resection) have been developed, showing a high rate of complete resection for advanced and more aggressive lesions. Conclusions: Overall, gNENs represent a heterogeneous group of lesions with varying behavior which require personalized management. The non-operative approach for small type-1 gNENs seems to be feasible and should be promoted. A step-up approach with minimally invasive endoscopic therapies might be proposed, particularly for type-1 gNEN. On the other hand, it is important to recognize the negative prognostic factors in order to identify those rare cases requiring more aggressive approaches. A possible therapeutic algorithm for localized gNEN management is provided.

Multi-band mucosectomy for neoplasia in patients with Barrett's esophagus: in vivo comparison between two different devices

BACKGROUND

Multi-band mucosectomy (MBM) is effective and safe for Barrett's neoplasia. No studies have yet compared the efficacy and safety of the MBM devices commercially available: Duette™ (CookMedical) and Captivator™ (BostonScientific). Our aim is to compare the two devices.

METHODS

This is a dual-center retrospective case-control study (Rozzano, Portsmouth) comparing efficacy, safety, and histology of resected specimens between Duette™ (DUE) and Captivator™ (CAPT). Efficacy was assessed by R0 and local recurrence (LR) rate. Bleedings, perforations, and strictures were recorded as safety outcomes. Moreover, the specimens were re-examined by two pathologists, blinded about the study group, to assess the maximum thickness of both the whole specimens and the resected submucosal layer.

RESULTS

Seventy-six patients (38 per group) were included. The two groups did not differ in terms of baseline characteristics. R0 resection was achieved in 96.7% versus 96.3% (p = ns) and LR were recorded in 4/38 (10.5%) versus 3/38 (7.9%) in DUE and CAPT group, respectively (p = ns). Considering Duette™ versus Captivator™, 2 versus 3 patients developed a symptomatic stricture. Only one post-procedural bleeding occurred (Captivator™). Maximum medium thicknesses of specimens and of resected submucosa did not differ between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

MBM is safe and effective for resecting visible lesions using either of the two available devices.

Endoscopic resection for early esophageal carcinoma

Endoscopic resection for early esophageal cancer is a very precise endoscopic surgical technique and having experience in endoscopic resection is mandatory to perform these kinds of procedures safely. In case of adequate resection and favorable histological outcome, long-term prognosis of the patient is excellent. The basic principle for endoscopic treatment of early adenocarcinoma is based on the fact that the risk of lymph node metastasis gradually increases with the depth of invasion. Inspection and evaluation of all mucosal and submucosal lesions need to be done carefully before endoscopic resection. Endoscopic resection of mucosal (T1m1-3) and superficial submucosal (T1sm1) adenocarcinoma can be curative as well as for superficial mucosal (T1m1-m2) squamous cell carcinoma. In Paris type I lesions in Barrett's esophagus and for early squamous cell carcinoma endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is the preferred option. The risk of severe adverse events associated with endoscopic resection are low. Most adverse events are managed endoscopically and can be treated conservatively. Endoscopic radiofrequency ablation is the most widely used ablation technique for Barrett's epithelium and highly effective to achieve full remission of dysplasia and intestinal metaplasia. The role of radiofrequency ablation in the treatment armamentarium in squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus has still to be determined.

Comparison of two multiband mucosectomy devices for endoscopic resection of Barrett's esophagus-related neoplasia

Background

Esophageal adenocarcinoma carries a poor prognosis and therefore treatment of early neoplasia arising in the precursor condition Barrett’s esophagus (BE) is desirable. Visible lesions arising in BE need endoscopic mucosal resection for accurate staging and removal. Resection modalities include a cap-based system with snare and custom-made multiband mucosectomy (MBM) devices (Duette, Cook Medical Ltd). A new MBM device has recently become available (Captivator, Boston Scientific Ltd).

Objectives

A retrospective pilot study to compare the efficacy, safety, specimen size and histology of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) specimens resected with two MBM devices (Cook Duette and Boston Captivator) in treatment naive patients undergoing endoscopic therapy for BE neoplasia.

Methods

Consecutive EMR procedures carried out by a single experienced endoscopist were analysed. All visible lesions were marked and resected using one of the two MBM devices. All resected specimens were analysed by the same two experienced pathologists. The resected specimens in both groups were analysed for maximum diameter, minimum diameter, surface area and depth.

Results

Twenty consecutive patients were analysed (18M + 2F; mean age 74) in the Duette group and 20 (17M + 3F; mean age 72) in the Captivator group. A total of 58 specimens were resected in the Duette and 63 in the Captivator group. Min diameter, max diameter, surface area and depth of the ER specimens resected by the Captivator device were significantly larger than that by the Duette device [min diameter 9.89 mm vs 9.07 mm (p = 0.019); max diameter: 13.54 mm vs 12.38 mm (p = 0.024); surface area: 135.40 mm² vs 113.89 mm² (p = 0.005); depth 3.71 mm vs 2.89 (p = 0.001)].

Conclusions

These two MBM devices showed equivalent efficacy and safety outcomes, but the EMR Captivator device resected specimens with a larger area in the esophagus when compared with the Duette device. A possible advantage of this is in situations where en bloc resections with fewer EMRs are desirable for larger lesions.

Results of a two-phased clinical study evaluating a new multiband mucosectomy device for early Barrett's neoplasia: a randomized pre-esophagectomy trial and a pilot therapeutic pilot study

Background

Multiband mucosectomy (MBM) is the preferred technique for piecemeal resection of early neoplastic lesions in Barrett’s esophagus (BE). The currently most widely used device for MBM is the Duette device. Recently, the Captivator EMR device has come available which might have practical advantages over the Duette device.

Methods

Phase I was a randomized pre-esophagectomy trial with a non-inferiority design aiming to compare EMR specimens obtained with the Captivator and the Duette device. Primary outcome: max diameter of the EMR specimens, secondary outcomes: min diameter, max thickness of the EMR specimens and resected submucosal stroma. Phase II were clinical pilot cases aiming to evaluate the feasibility of EMR using the Captivator device. Primary outcome was the successful EMR rate and secondary outcomes included procedure time and adverse events.

Results

Phase I: 24 EMR specimens (12 pairs) were obtained from six patients. The median max diameter of EMR specimens obtained with the Captivator device was 16 mm [IQR 12–21] versus 18 mm [IQR 13–23] for the Duette device. Non-inferiority of the max diameter of the Captivator specimens could not be demonstrated (median difference 1 mm, 95% CI − 3.26 to + 5.26). However, when using paired analysis, no significant difference was found (p 0.573). In addition, no statistically significant differences were found in the min diameter, max thickness of EMR specimens, and max thickness of resected submucosal stroma. Phase II: 5 BE patients with early neoplastic lesions were included. Successful EMR was achieved in 100%. Median procedure time was 33 min (IQR 25–39). One patient developed transient dysphagia, without signs of stenosis on endoscopy.

Conclusions

EMR of early Barrett’s neoplasia using the Captivator device is comparable to Duette EMR when looking at size of resected specimens. In the first patients, EMR using the Captivator was feasible, resulting in successful resection without acute adverse events.

A prospective multicenter study using a new multiband mucosectomy device for endoscopic resection of early neoplasia in Barrett's esophagus

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Early neoplasia in Barrett's esophagus (BE) can be effectively and safely removed by endoscopic resection (ER) using multiband mucosectomy (MBM). This study aimed to document performance of a novel MBM device designed for improved visualization, easier passage of accessories, and better suction power compared with other marketed MBM devices.

METHODS

This international, single-arm, prospective registry in 14 referral centers (Europe, 10; United States, 3; Canada, 1) included patients with early BE neoplasia scheduled for ER. The primary endpoint was successful ER defined as complete resection of the delineated area in 1 procedure. Secondary outcomes were adverse events and procedure time.

RESULTS

A total of 332 lesions was included in 291 patients (248 men; mean age, 67 years [standard deviation, 9.6]). ER indication was high-grade dysplasia in 64%, early adenocarcinoma in 19%, lesion with low-grade dysplasia in 11%, and a lesion without definite histology in 6%. Successful ER was reached in 322 of 332 lesions (97%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 94.6%-98.4%). A perforation occurred in 3 of 332 procedures (.9%; 95% CI, .31%-2.62%), all were managed endoscopically, and patients were admitted with intravenous antibiotics during days 2, 3, and 9. Postprocedural bleeding requiring an intervention occurred in 5 of 332 resections (1.5%; 95% CI, .65%-3.48%). Dysphagia requiring dilatation occurred in 11 patients (3.8%; 95% CI, 2.1%-6.6%). Median procedure time was 16 minutes (interquartile range, 12.0-26.0).

CONCLUSIONS

In expert hands, the novel MBM device proved to be effective for resection of early neoplastic lesions in BE, with successful ER in 97% of procedures. Severe adverse events were rare and were effectively managed endoscopically or conservatively. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT02482701.).