Endoscopic mucosal resection

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Curative criteria for endoscopic treatment of oesophageal adenocarcinoma

The incidence of oesophageal adenocarcinoma has been increasing rapidly in the Western world. A well-known risk factor for developing this type of tumour is reflux disease, which can cause metaplasia from the squamous cell mucosa to columnar epithelium (Barrett's Oesophagus) which can progress to dysplasia and eventually adenocarcinoma. With the rise of the incidence of oesophageal adenocarcinoma, research on the best way to manage this disease is of great importance and has changed treatment modalities over the last decades. The gold standard for superficial adenocarcinoma has shifted from surgical to endoscopic management when certain criteria are met. This review will discuss the different curative criteria for endoscopic treatment of oesophageal adenocarcinoma.

Cold Endoscopic Mucosal Resection (c-EMR) of Nonpedunculated Colorectal Polyps ≥20 mm: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There is increasing evidence that cold endoscopic mucosal resection (c-EMR) can effectively treat large colorectal polyps. We aim to appraise the current literature and evaluate outcomes following c-EMR for nonpedunculated colonic polyps ≥20 mm.

METHODS

Major databases were searched. Primary outcomes included recurrence rate and adverse events. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Nine articles were included in the final analysis, which included 817 patients and 1077 colorectal polyps. Average polyp size was 28.8 (±5.1) mm. The pooled recurrence rate of polyps of any histology at 4 to 6 months was 21.0% (95% CI: 9.0%-32.0%, P<0.001, I2=97.3, P<0.001). Subgroup analysis showed that recurrence was 10% for proximal lesions (95% CI: 0.0%-20.0%, P=0.054, I2=93.7%, P=0.054) and 9% for distal lesions (95% CI: 2.0%-21.0%, P=0.114, I2=95.8%, P=0.114). Furthermore, subgroup analysis showed that recurrence was 12% for adenoma (95% CI: 4.0%-19.0%, P=0.003, I2=98.0%, P=0.003), and 3% for sessile serrated polyps (95% CI: 1.0%-5.0%, P=0.002, I2=34.4%, P=0.002). Post-polypectomy bleeding occurred in 1% (n=8/817) of patients, whereas abdominal pain occurred in 0.2% (n=2/817) of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

C-EMR for nonpedunculated colorectal polyps ≥20 mm shows an excellent safety profile with a very low rate of delayed bleeding as well as significantly less recurrence for sessile serrated polyps than adenomas.

Management of small subepithelial tumors by endoscopic banding without resection and single-incision needle-knife-assisted biopsy sampling: a prospective multicenter study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic band ligation (EBL) without resection combined with single-incision needle-knife (SINK) biopsy sampling may have a positive impact on small GI subepithelial tumor (SET) management, but the method needs to be tested. The aim was to evaluate the feasibility of this strategy in small-sized SETs.

METHODS

This prospective multicenter observational cohort study in 7 centers included patients with SETs ≤15 mm (confirmed by EUS) between March 2017 and March 2020. The primary outcome was clinical success at 4 weeks, defined as complete SET disappearance on EUS. Secondary outcomes were long-term (1-year) clinical success, technical difficulty level, clinical impact, yield pathology, and safety.

RESULTS

Of 273 patients screened, 122 (62.3% women; mean age, 60.9 ± 13.2 years) were included with SETs (mean size, 9 ± 2.8 mm; gastric location, 77%; superficial layer dependence, 63%). The primary endpoint was achieved in 73.6% of patients (95% confidence interval [CI], 64.8-81.2). At the 1-year follow-up, the success rate was 68.4% (95% CI, 59.1-76.8). A favorable clinical impact was observed in 97 cases (79.5%; 95% CI, 71.3-86.3). Pathology diagnosis was known in 70%. Potentially malignant lesions were present in 24.7%. The related adverse events rate was 4.1% (95% CI, 1.3-9.3; all mild: 2 bleeding, 2 abdominal pain). On multivariable analysis, the ≤10-mm SET group was associated with a greater success rate (1 year, 87%; relative risk, 5.07; 95% CI, 2.63-9.8) and clinical impact rate (92.7%; relative risk, 6.15; 95% CI, 2.72-13.93).

CONCLUSIONS

EBL plus SINK biopsy sampling seems to be feasible and safe, and it may offer a favorable clinical impact in small-sized SETs. In particular, SETs ≤10 mm are the best candidates. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03247231.).

Using of endoscopic polypectomy in patients with diagnosed malignant colorectal polyp - The cross-sectional clinical study

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of endoscopic polypectomy as a therapeutic treatment for malignant alteration of colorectal polyps. In a 5-year research, 89 patients were included, who were tested and treated at the University Clinical Center Kragujevac, Kragujevac, Serbia, with the confirmed presence of malignant alteration polyps of the colon by colonoscopy, which were removed using the method of endoscopic polypectomy and confirmed by the histopathological examination of the entire polyp. After that, the same group of patients was monitored endoscopically within a certain period, controlling polypectomy locations and the occurrence of a possible remnant of the polyp, in the period of up to 2 years of polypectomy. We observed that, with an increasing size of polyps, there is also an increase in the percentage of the complexity of endoscopic resection and the appearance of remnant with histological characteristics of the invasive cancer. The highest percentage of incomplete endoscopic resection and the appearance of remnant with histological characteristics of the invasive cancer were shown at malignant altered polyps in the field of tubulovillous adenoma. Eighteen patients in total underwent the surgical intervention. In conclusion, our data support the high efficacy of endoscopic polypectomy for the removal of the altered malignant polyp.

Safety and efficacy of underwater versus conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for colorectal polyps: Systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs

Background and study aims Conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (C-EMR) is limited by low en-bloc resection rates, especially for large (> 20 mm) lesions. Underwater EMR (U-EMR) has emerged as an alternative for colorectal polyps and is being shown to improve en-bloc resection rates. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the two techniques. Methods Multiple databases were searched through November 2022 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing outcomes of U-EMR and C-EMR for colorectal polyps. Meta-analysis was performed to determine pooled proportions and relative risks (RRs) of R0 and en-bloc resection, polyp recurrence, resection time, and adverse events. Results Seven RCTs with 1458 patients (U-EMR: 739, C-EMR: 719) were included. The pooled rate of en-bloc resection was significantly higher with U-EMR vs C-EMR, 70.17% (confidence interval [CI] 46.68-86.34) vs 58.14% (CI 31.59-80.68), respectively, RR 1.21 (CI 1.01-1.44). R0 resection rates were higher with U-EMR vs C-EMR, 58.1% (CI 29.75-81.9) vs 44.6% (CI 17.4-75.4), RR 1.25 (CI 0.99-1.6). For large polyps (> 20 mm), en-bloc resection rates were comparable between the two techniques, RR 1.24 (CI 0.83-1.84). Resection times were comparable between U-EMR and C-EMR, standardized mean difference -1.21 min (CI -2.57 to -0.16). Overall pooled rates of perforation, and immediate and delayed bleeding were comparable between U-EMR and C-EMR. Pooled rate of polyp recurrence at surveillance colonoscopy was significantly lower with U-EMR than with C-EMR, RR 0.62 (CI 0.41-0.94). Conclusions Colorectal U-EMR results in higher en-bloc resection and lower recurrence rates when compared to C-EMR. Both techniques have comparable resection times and safety profiles.

The meaning of R1 resection after endoscopic removal of gastric, duodenal and rectal neuroendocrine tumors

INTRODUCTION

Well-differentiated gastric, duodenal, and rectal neuroendocrine neoplasms (NETs) are rare diseases usually managed by endoscopic treatment. Although several endoscopic techniques are available, the number of patients with incomplete (R1) resection is significant.

AREAS COVERED

This review focuses on the meaning of incomplete R1 findings after endoscopic resection in type I gastric NETs; nonfunctioning, non-ampullary duodenal NETs; and small rectal NETs. Data were identified by MEDLINE database search without publication date limitation.

EXPERT OPINION

An incomplete R1 finding may have no significant impact on a patient's clinical outcome, particularly in small G1 type I gastric NETs, which have an indolent course. A 'stepwise approach,' which uses more advanced endoscopic techniques, or minimally invasive surgery may be justified to achieve complete margin-free resection. This approach must balance the tumor features and the procedure-related risk of complications, particularly in the duodenum, where the role of deep endoscopic resections is limited due to the thin duodenal wall. Gastric and rectal NETs that are incompletely removed after initial resection are more easily amenable to deep endoscopic techniques. However, this might not be necessary for patients with comorbidities, elderly, or both due to the uncertainty of how R1 finding impacts a patient's clinical outcome.

Unlocking quality in endoscopic mucosal resection

A review of the development of the key performance metrics of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), learning from the experience of the establishment of widespread colonoscopy quality measurements. Potential future performance markers for both colonoscopy and EMR are also evaluated to ensure continued high quality performance is maintained with a focus service framework and predictors of patient outcome.

Recent advances in endoscopic management of gastric neoplasms

The development and clinical application of new diagnostic endoscopic technologies such as endoscopic ultrasonography with biopsy, magnification endoscopy, and narrow-band imaging, more recently supplemented by artificial intelligence, have enabled wider recognition and detection of various gastric neoplasms including early gastric cancer (EGC) and subepithelial tumors, such as gastrointestinal stromal tumors and neuroendocrine tumors. Over the last decade, the evolution of novel advanced therapeutic endoscopic techniques, such as endoscopic mucosal resection, endoscopic submucosal dissection, endoscopic full-thickness resection, and submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection, along with the advent of a broad array of endoscopic accessories, has provided a promising and yet less invasive strategy for treating gastric neoplasms with the advantage of a reduced need for gastric surgery. Thus, the management algorithms of various gastric tumors in a defined subset of the patient population at low risk of lymph node metastasis and amenable to endoscopic resection, may require revision considering upcoming data given the high success rate of en bloc resection by experienced endoscopists. Moreover, endoscopic surveillance protocols for precancerous gastric lesions will continue to be refined by systematic reviews and meta-analyses of further research. However, the lack of familiarity with subtle endoscopic changes associated with EGC, as well as longer procedural time, evolving resection techniques and tools, a steep learning curve of such high-risk procedures, and lack of coding are issues that do not appeal to many gastroenterologists in the field. This review summarizes recent advances in the endoscopic management of gastric neoplasms, with special emphasis on diagnostic and therapeutic methods and their future prospects.

Prognostic analysis and nomogram establishment in patients with early esophageal cancer receiving endoscopic therapy: a population-based study

Background

The growing numbers of early esophageal cancer (EEC) have increased the demand for endoscopic therapy.

Objectives

To clarify the influential factors for the prognosis of patients with EEC receiving endoscopic surgery, and to construct a nomogram to evaluate the prognostic value of endoscopic therapy.

Design

Prognostic analysis study.

Methods

Clinical data of EEC patients who received endoscopic therapy between 2004 and 2015 were collected from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database and used to construct the nomogram. The prognosis was analyzed by R language; the nomogram was constructed by Cox survival analysis; and the accuracy of the nomogram was verified by C index and the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) and calibration curves. X-Tile software was used to stratify the risk of patients.

Results

Our study constructed the nomogram of the prognosis of patients with EEC treated by endoscopic surgery, including 1118 patients and 5 independent prognostic factors of esophageal cancer-specific survival. The C index and the area under the ROC curve (AUC) of the training and verification cohorts were all >0.75. The calibration curve also reflected the good consistency of the model in predicting survival. Significant difference in the risk of patients from different stratifications with the same T staging existed, and the model had a better C index than that of the T staging.

Conclusion

Our study reports potential influential factors affecting the prognosis of EEC patients who received endoscopic therapy and establishes a reliable nomogram to predict the risk and prognosis, which has certain advantages compared with traditional TNM staging system.

Can white-light endoscopy or narrow-band imaging avoid biopsy of colorectal endoscopic mucosal resection scars? A multicenter randomized single-blind crossover trial

BACKGROUND : Current guidelines suggest that routine biopsy of post-endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) scars can be abandoned, provided that a standardized imaging protocol with virtual chromoendoscopy is used. However, few studies have examined the accuracy of advanced endoscopic imaging, such as narrow-band imaging (NBI) vs. white-light endoscopy (WLE) for prediction of histological recurrence. We aimed to assess whether NBI accuracy is superior to that of WLE and whether one or both techniques can replace biopsies. METHODS : The study was a multicenter, randomized, pathologist-blind, crossover trial, with consecutive patients undergoing first colonoscopy after EMR of lesions ≥ 20 mm. Computer-generated randomization and opaque envelope concealed allocation. Patients were randomly assigned to scar examination with NBI followed by WLE (NBI + WLE), or WLE followed by NBI (WLE + NBI). Histology was the reference method, with biopsies being performed for all tissues. RESULTS : The study included 203 scars (103 in the NBI + WLE group, 100 in the WLE + NBI group). Recurrence was confirmed histologically in 29.6 % of the scars. The diagnostic accuracy of NBI was not statistically different from that of WLE (95 % [95 %CI 92 %-98 %] vs. 94 % [95 %CI 90 %-97 %]; P = 0.48). The negative predictive values (NPVs) were 96 % (95 %CI 93 %-99 %) for NBI and 93 % (95 %CI 89 %-97 %) for WLE (P = 0.06). CONCLUSIONS : The accuracy of NBI for the diagnosis of recurrence was not superior to that of WLE. Endoscopic assessment of EMR scars with WLE and NBI achieved an NPV that would allow routine biopsy to be avoided in cases of negative optical diagnosis.

ACG Clinical Guideline: Diagnosis and Management of Gastrointestinal Subepithelial Lesions

Subepithelial lesions (SEL) of the GI tract represent a mix of benign and potentially malignant entities including tumors, cysts, or extraluminal structures causing extrinsic compression of the gastrointestinal wall. SEL can occur anywhere along the GI tract and are frequently incidental findings encountered during endoscopy or cross-sectional imaging. This clinical guideline of the American College of Gastroenterology was developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation process and is intended to suggest preferable approaches to a typical patient with a SEL based on the currently available published literature. Among the recommendations, we suggest endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) with tissue acquisition to improve diagnostic accuracy in the identification of solid nonlipomatous SEL and EUS fine-needle biopsy alone or EUS fine-needle aspiration with rapid on-site evaluation sampling of solid SEL. There is insufficient evidence to recommend surveillance vs resection of gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) <2 cm in size. Owing to their malignant potential, we suggest resection of gastric GIST >2 cm and all nongastric GIST. When exercising clinical judgment, particularly when statements are conditional suggestions and/or treatments pose significant risks, health-care providers should incorporate this guideline with patient-specific preferences, medical comorbidities, and overall health status to arrive at a patient-centered approach.

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

BACKGROUND

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

AIM

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

EMR combined with hybrid argon plasma coagulation to prevent recurrence of large nonpedunculated colorectal polyps (with videos)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EMR is the mainstay of therapy for large colorectal polyps. Local recurrence after EMR is common and can be reduced using margin ablation. Our aim was to evaluate recurrence rates when using hybrid argon plasma coagulation (h-APC) ablation after EMR.

METHODS

Adult patients (aged 18-89 years) undergoing EMR of nonpedunculated colorectal polyps ≥20 mm were enrolled in a prospective multicenter study. h-APC was used to ablate all defect margins and also the resection surface in selected cases. The primary study outcome was recurrence rates found during the first follow-up colonoscopy. Secondary outcomes were technical success and adverse event rates.

RESULTS

EMR with h-APC ablation was used in 101 polyps (84 patients, 46.4% women). EMR with h-APC ablation was technically successful in all cases (median EMR time, 15 minutes; median h-APC ablation time, 4 minutes). Median polyp size was 30 mm (range, 20-60). Resected polyps were either adenomas (68/101 [67.3%]), sessile serrated lesions (27/101 [27%]), or adenocarcinomas (6/101 [6%]). The post-EMR recurrence rate was 2.2% (2/91) (95% confidence interval, .27-7.71). All 6 patients with cancer (intramucosal cancer, 4; T1sm cancer, 2) were found to have complete eradication of the primary tumor after EMR with h-APC, and none had lymph node metastasis. Four serious adverse events occurred in 3 patients (2 delayed bleeding [2.4%], 1 abdominal pain [1.2%], and 1 microperforation [1.2%]. All serious adverse events resolved with either endoscopic or antibiotic treatment only.

CONCLUSIONS

EMR with h-APC showed a high technical success rate, low adverse event rate, and very low post-EMR recurrence rates. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT04015765.).

Hetastarch induced volume changes of starving adenoma and suggested mechanism of action

Submucosal injection is often required step during endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). In clinical practice we have observed that the EMR injection solution containing hetastarch (HES) lead to selective increase of the neoplasms volume, facilitating their resection. The aim of this study was to explore the possible mechanisms of such behaviour, which was not reported elsewhere. The HCT116 cell line of human colon cancer was exposed to the same EMR solution in vitro. The significant volume increase of HCT116 cells was observed, but only for starving cell culture, suggesting that the starving is essential for the neoplasms-specific volume change. We suggest, that for the iso-oncotic composition of the EMR submucosa injection solution the HES component is crucial, as it can be subject of the starch hydrolysis followed by facilitated transport of resulting monosaccharides from the submucosa into the neoplastic tissue.

Clinical outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal neoplasms: A single-center experience in Southern Taiwan

Background and aims

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) as an advanced endoscopic procedure can be considered for the removal of colorectal lesions with high suspicion of limited submucosal invasion or cannot be optimally removed by snare-based techniques. We aimed to analyze the clinical outcomes of ESD for colorectal neoplasms in our hospital.

Methods

We retrospectively enrolled 230 patients with 244 colorectal neoplasms who received ESD procedures from April 2012 to October 2020 at Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital. Clinicopathological data were collected by chart review. We also recorded ESD-related complications and clinical outcomes.

Results

The average age was 64 years old, with a mean follow-up time of 22.59 months. There was a loss of follow-up in 34 lesions. Most lesions were lateral spreading tumors of the non-granular type. The average ESD time was 51.9 minutes. Nine cases (3.7%) had procedure-related complications, including two intra-procedure perforations (0.8%) and seven delayed bleeding (2.9%) without procedure-related mortality. 241 lesions (98.8%) achieved en-bloc resection, while 207 lesions (84.8%) achieved R0 resection. Most lesions were tubulo-(villous) adenoma. Malignancy included 35 adenocarcinomas and 5 neuroendocrine tumors. No local recurrence was developed during follow-up. Multivariate analysis for long ESD time revealed significance in size ≥ 10 cm² and endoscopist’s experience < 3 years. Pre-ESD endoscopic ultrasound revealed good prediction in discrimination of mucosal (sensitivity: 0.90) and submucosal lesion (specificity: 0.67).

Conclusions

ESD for colorectal neoplasms is an effective and safe technique. Size ≥ 10 cm² and endoscopist’s experience < 3 years were significantly associated with long procedure time. Pre-ESD EUS provided a good prediction for colorectal neoplasms in invasion depth.

Advanced Endoscopic Resection Techniques in Cirrhosis-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Outcomes

BACKGROUND/AIMS

While safety and effectiveness of advanced endoscopic resection techniques such as endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been well established in general population, data regarding their utility in patients with cirrhosis is limited.

METHODS

We searched multiple databases from inception through July 2021 to identify studies that reported on outcomes of EMR and/or ESD in patients with cirrhosis. Meta-analysis was performed to determine pooled rates of immediate and delayed bleeding, perforation, death as well as rates of successful en bloc and R0 resection. Pooled relative risk (RR) was calculated for each outcome between patients with and without cirrhosis.

RESULTS

Ten studies with a total of 3244 patients were included in the final analysis. Pooled rates of immediate & delayed bleeding, perforation, and death during EMR and/or ESD in patients with cirrhosis were 9.5% (CI 4.0-21.1), 6.6% (CI 4.2-10.3), 2.1% (CI 1.1-3.9) and 0.6% (CI 0.2-1.7), respectively. Pooled rates of successful en bloc and R0 resection were 93% (CI 85.9-96.7) and 90.8% (CI 86.5-93.8), respectively. While incidence of immediate bleeding was higher in patients with cirrhosis, there was no statistically significant difference in any of the other outcomes between the patient groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows that performing EMR and ESD for gastrointestinal lesions in patients with cirrhosis is both safe and effective. The risks of procedural complications parallel those reported in general population.

Bulking agents in gastrointestinal endoscopy: present applications and future advances

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Bulking agents are inert materials injected into an organ to affect the physical properties of the organ for a therapeutic purpose. Various agents have been developed to aid in the treatment of diseases like gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), fecal incontinence, obesity, malignancy, hemostasis, and tissue dissection. Here, we review the state of the art in bulking agents in gastrointestinal endoscopy, past failures, current limitations, and where we see the field heading in the future.

RECENT FINDINGS

Though bulking agents have been trialed for various different gastrointestinal diseases, there are currently limited uses in gastrointestinal endoscopy. Though various agents have been trialed for GERD, numerous complications and adverse events have limited its current use. However, for the treatment of fecal incontinence endoscopic bulking agent therapy is a reasonable option. Though in early stages of exploration, bulking agent therapy for enteric protection from radiotherapy may be a promising tool to improve treatment of pancreatic cancer. Bulking agents for tissue dissection have substantially improved lifting agents and complex polyp removal. Bulking agent therapy has not really been explored for endoscopic bariatric therapy or hemostasis but may be a fruitful area for exploration in the future.

SUMMARY

Bulking agent therapy has been trialed for various gastrointestinal diseases with mixed success. There is currently a therapeutic roll in the endoscopic management of fecal incontinence and tissue dissection. A future role in the treatment of GERD, obesity, malignancy, and hemostasis seem feasible.

Endoscopic Full-Thickness Resection for Colorectal Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) with an over-the-scope full-thickness resection device is a relatively new technique for the resection of colorectal lesions. Multiple centers have published the results of case series and observational cohorts regarding the use of this technique for managing difficult polyps. This study aims to aggregate the results of these studies to determine the effectiveness and safety of this technique in the resection of these technically challenging colonic lesions.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL were searched. Articles were included if they reported technical success rate for EFTR of colonic lesions. The primary outcome was technical success rate and secondary outcomes included rate of R0 resection and overall 30-d morbidity. DerSimonian and Laird random-effects meta-analysis of proportions was used to generate effect sizes for pooled outcomes.

RESULTS

From 2211 citations, 21 studies with 1539 patients (mean age 67.2 y, 39.5% female) undergoing 1551 procedures were included. Difficult to resect benign lesions were the most commonly excised lesions (hyperplastic: 35.9%; adenomas: 30.2%), followed by T1 adenocarcinomas (25.6%) and neuroendocrine tumors (6.1%). Technical success rate was 89% (95% confidence interval [CI] 87-92), and R0 resection rate was 79% (95% CI 76-82). Mean procedure time was 53.5 min and mean specimen size was 17.5 mm. Overall 30-d morbidity was 11% (95% CI 7-13), and incidences of perforation and postpolypectomy bleeding were 2% (95% CI 1-2) and 5% (95% CI 3-7), respectively. Lesion recurrence at 3-mo follow-up was 8%.

CONCLUSIONS

EFTR requires further large sample size, comparative studies with reporting of long-term oncologic data. However, preliminary findings indicate that it is a safe and effective technique with high rates of technical success and acceptable rates of R0 resection when employed by experienced endoscopists for high-risk colonic lesions.

Endoscopic Management of Esophageal Cancer

Advances in technology and improved understanding of the pathobiology of esophageal cancer have allowed endoscopy to serve a growing role in the management of this disease. Precursor lesions can be detected using enhanced diagnostic modalities and eradicated with ablation therapy. Furthermore, evolution in endoscopic resection has provided larger specimens for improved diagnostic accuracy and offer potential for cure of early esophageal cancer. In patients with advanced esophageal cancer, endoluminal therapy can improve symptom burden and provide therapeutic options for complications such as leaks, perforations, and fistulas. The purpose of this review article is to highlight the role of endoscopy in the diagnosis, treatment, and palliation of esophageal cancer.

Esophageal retention cyst: Esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction (EGJOO) as a potential etiology and management with endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR)

INTRODUCTION AND IMPORTANCE

Esophageal retention cysts are acquired cysts with no known etiology. They are characterized by dilation of the submucosal glands. Symptomatic cysts are traditionally managed by surgical resection.

CASE PRESENTATION

We present a case of progressive dysphagia and chest pain secondary to esophageal retention cysts in the mid and distal esophagus with associated esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction (EGJOO) and jackhammer esophagus on high resolution manometry (HRM). The patient underwent staged endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) with subsequent improvement in her symptoms. However, EGJOO persisted after resection, suggesting it was the primary pathology and not a consequence of the obstruction from the cysts.

CLINICAL DISCUSSION

Esophageal retention cysts are rarely reported in the literature with most descriptions coming from incidental post-mortems. The presented case suggests EGJOO as a potential etiology of retention cysts. The proposed mechanism is that a significant rise in esophageal intraluminal pressure creates a state of stasis in the esophagus, ideal for the development of these cysts. Symptomatic or malignant retention cysts should be resected. We demonstrate the feasibility of EMR as an alternative to surgical resection.

CONCLUSION

Esophageal retention cyst is a rare entity, which may arise as a result of EGJOO. The natural history and malignant potential of these cysts are unknown, and no formal guidelines have been established for follow-up for patients with asymptomatic retention cysts. Endoscopic mucosal resection can be used to successfully manage these cysts.

Safety and efficacy of common endoscopic treatments in patients with decompensated liver cirrhosis

INTRODUCTION

The safety and efficacy have always been a concern, when patients with decompensated liver cirrhosis (DLC) receive endoscopic treatments.

METHODS

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of common endoscopic treatments including endoscopic resection (ER) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) applying to patients with DLC, we performed a retrospective study finally including 81 patients receiving ER (43 endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and 38 endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD)) and 131 patients treated by ERCP.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in the rate of degeneration and invariability of Child-Pugh (CP) class and the overall rate of adverse events between two groups (93.8%/8.6% ER vs. 96.2%/15.3% ERCP). Both the degeneration rate of CP class (35.4%) and the rate of adverse events (27.1%) in subgroup CP class C of ERCP group were significantly higher (P=0). The rate of poor outcomes was higher in ERCP group (12.2%) than that in ER group (2.5%) (P=0.02). And subgroup CP class C of ERCP group had a higher poor outcome rate (27.1%) (P=0).

CONCLUSION

ER and ERCP could remove focal lesions or relieve symptoms induced by targeted diseases without significant changes of CP class. Significant benefits and risks coexisted in CP class C patients with DLC when receiving ERCP.

Depth of the cutting plane with underwater and conventional endoscopic mucosal resection: Post-hoc analysis of a randomized study

BACKGROUND AND AIM

A multicenter randomized controlled trial reported a better R0 resection rate for intermediate-sized (10-20 mm) colorectal polyps with underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) than conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (CEMR). To clarify whether UEMR removes enough submucosal tissue in the removal of unpredictable invasive cancers, we investigated the cutting plane depth with UEMR versus CEMR.

METHODS

This was a post-hoc analysis of a randomized controlled trial in which 210 intermediate-sized colorectal polyps were removed in five Japanese hospitals. One pathologist and two gastroenterologists independently reviewed all resected specimens and measured the cutting plane depth. The cutting plane depth was evaluated as (i) maximum depth of submucosal layer and (ii) mean depth of submucosal layer, calculated using a virtual pathology system.

RESULTS

We identified 168 appropriate specimens for the evaluation of the cutting plane depth, resected by UEMR (n = 88) and CEMR (n = 80). The median resection depth was not significantly different between UEMR and CEMR specimens, regardless of the measurement method ([i] 1317 vs 1290 μm, P = 0.52; [ii] 619 vs 545 μm, P = 0.32). All specimens in the UEMR and CEMR groups contained substantial submucosa and no muscularis propria.

CONCLUSIONS

The cutting plane depth with UEMR was comparable with that with CEMR. UEMR can be a viable alternative method that adequately resects the submucosal layer for the histopathological assessment of unpredictable submucosal invasive cancers.

Polypectomy for Large Polyps with Endoscopic Mucosal Resection

Beginning in 1955, when the saline injection was first described to prevent transmural injury during polyp fulguration, endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) has grown exponentially, both in scope and in practice. Because EMR is an organ-preserving technique even for large polyps, this allows for comparable outcomes to surgery, but substantially improved cost savings and significantly reduced morbidity and mortality. To achieve this, however, one must master the 4 fundamental components that are critical to the success of EMR- time, team, tools, and technique. This article aims to provide a compendium of state of the art updates within the field of endoluminal resection.

Impact of including epinephrine in the submucosal injectate for colorectal EMR on postprocedural pain: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EMR is first-line therapy for colorectal laterally spreading lesions. Some colonoscopists include epinephrine in the submucosal injectate, which we observed increased postprocedure discomfort. Our aim was to determine whether inclusion of epinephrine in the submucosal injectate increases postprocedure pain after EMR.

METHODS

We performed a randomized, controlled, double-blind trial comparing epinephrine in submucosal injectate versus injectate alone for abdominal pain at 30 and 60 minutes after EMR.

RESULTS

Mean polyp diameter in both arms was >40 mm. There were no differences in procedure times or amounts of fluid injected. Mean pain was higher on a visual analog scale in the epinephrine group at 30 minutes (47 vs 14, P = .022) and at 60 minutes (44 vs 13, P = .035). Recovery room stay was longer in the epinephrine group (68 vs 53 minutes, P = .034).

CONCLUSIONS

Epinephrine in the submucosal injectate for EMR increases postprocedural pain, which could cause diagnostic confusion and prolong observation time in the recovery area. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT04065451.).

Colorectal Cancer in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Mechanisms and Management

Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are at increased risk of developing colorectal cancer (CRC), despite decreases in CRC incidence in recent years. Chronic inflammation is the driver of neoplastic progression, resulting in dysplastic precursor lesions that may arise in multiple areas of the colon through a process of field cancerization. Colitis-associated CRC shares many molecular similarities with sporadic CRC, and preclinical investigations have demonstrated a potential role for the microbiome in concert with the host immune system in the development of colitis-associated colorectal cancer (CAC). Some unique molecular differences occur in CAC, but their role in the pathogenesis and behavior of inflammation-associated cancers remains to be elucidated. Nonconventional types of dysplasia have been increasingly recognized, but their natural history is not well defined, and they have not been incorporated into surveillance algorithms. The concept of cumulative inflammatory burden highlights the importance of considering histologic inflammation over time as an important risk factor for CAC. Dysplasia is arguably the most important risk factor for developing CAC, and advances have been made in the endoscopic detection and removal of precancerous lesions, thereby deferring or avoiding surgical resection. Some of the agents used to treat IBD are chemopreventive. It is hoped that by gaining better control of the underlying inflammation with newer medications and better endoscopic detection and management, a more sophisticated appreciation of clinicopathologic risk factors, and growing awareness of the genetic, immunologic, and environmental causes of colitis- associated neoplasia, that colitis-associated colorectal neoplasia will become even more predictable and manageable in the coming years.

Endoscopic Management of Complex Colorectal Polyps: Current Insights and Future Trends

Most colorectal cancers arise from adenomatous polyps and sessile serrated lesions. Screening colonoscopy and therapeutic polypectomy can potentially reduce colorectal cancer burden by early detection and removal of these polyps, thus decreasing colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. Most endoscopists are skilled in detecting and removing the vast majority of polyps endoscopically during a routine colonoscopy. Polyps can be considered “complex” based on size, location, morphology, underlying scar tissue, which are not amenable to removal by conventional endoscopic polypectomy techniques. They are technically more challenging to resect and carry an increased risk of complications. Most of these polyps were used to be managed by surgical intervention in the past. Rapid advancement in endoscopic resection techniques has led to a decreasing role of surgery in managing these complex polyps. These endoscopic resection techniques do require an expert in the field and advanced equipment to perform the procedure. In this review, we discuss various advanced endoscopic techniques for the management of complex polyps.

Endoscopic mucosal resection of colorectal polyps: results, adverse events and two-year outcome

Background and study aims

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is the first-line treatment for large sessile and flat colorectal polyps in Western centres, however recurrence after EMR continues to be a challenge. The aim of this study is to assess efficacy, safety and recurrence rate of EMR in a tertiary centre and to identify risk factors for recurrence at first surveillance endoscopy (SE1).

Patients and methods

We performed a retrospective study of 165 sessile and flat colorectal lesions ≥15 mm, treated by EMR between 2017-2019. We used multivariate logistic regression to identify independent risk factors for recurrence at SE1.

Results

EMR was performed for 165 colorectal polyps in 142 patients with technical success in 158 cases (95,2%). SE1 data for 117 of 135 eligible cases (86,7%) showed recurrent adenoma in 19 cases (16,2%) after a median time of 6,2 months (IQR 5-9,9). This was primarily treated endoscopically (78,9%). Independent risk factors for recurrence at SE1 were lesion size ≥40 mm (OR 4,03; p=0,018) and presence of high-grade dysplasia (HGD) (OR 3,89; p=0,034). Early adverse event occurred in 4 patients (2,4%), with 3 bleeding complications and one perforation. Twelve patients (7,2%) presented with delayed bleeding of which 3 required transfusion, with radiological intervention in one case. All other complications were managed either conservatively (n=8) or endoscopically (n=5).

Conclusions

EMR is a safe and effective treatment for large sessile and flat colorectal lesions with low recurrence rates. Lesion size ≥40 mm and presence of HGD were identified as risk factors for early recurrence, highlighting the importance of compliance to follow-up in these cases.

Advances in gastrointestinal surgical endoscopy

Surgeons have a role in observing, detect abnormalities, disease, and other deficiencies in function which could be treated. Diagnosing and treating back days were challenging for many reasons. However, technology's innovation enhances surgeons' ability to treat their patients. The term endoscopy refers to the Greek prefix endo- ("within") and the verb skopein ("to view or observe"). Endoscopy is practical both in the diagnosis and treatment of various pathologies. Technological advances, especially in endoscopy, gradually progress and discover many possibilities which allow rapid advancement. Endoscopy development aims to assess human orifice that has not been inspected, probed, and examined over the centuries. Endoscopy over these decades is improving, which led to new problem solving using advanced technological approaches. Thus, a surgeon can solve any issues from examination, diagnosis, and treatment using progressive endoscopy evolution. This review delivers a brief history of advances in surgical endoscopy and describes current endoscopy development.

Efficacy and histologic accuracy of underwater versus conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for large (>20 mm) colorectal polyps: a comparative review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Major limitations with conventional EMR (C-EMR) include high rates of polyp recurrence and low en-bloc resection rates, especially for lesions >20 mm in size. Underwater EMR (U-EMR) has emerged as an alternate technique for en-bloc resection of larger lesions. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the efficacy and safety of the 2 techniques.

METHODS

Multiple databases were searched through June 2020 for studies that compared outcomes of U-EMR and C-EMR for colorectal lesions. Meta-analysis was performed to determine pooled odds ratios (ORs) of successful R0, en-bloc, and piecemeal resection of colorectal lesions. We compared the rates of polyp recurrence at follow-up, diagnostic accuracy for colorectal cancer, and adverse events with the 2 techniques.

RESULTS

Eleven studies, including 4 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 1851 patients were included in the final analysis. A total of 1071 lesions were removed using U-EMR, and 1049 lesions were removed using C-EMR. Although U-EMR had an overall superior en-bloc resection rate compared with C-EMR (OR, 1.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1-3.5; P = .04), both techniques were comparable in terms of polyps >20 mm in size (OR, 0.8; 95% CI, 0.3-2.1; P = .75), R0 resection (OR, 3.1; 95% CI, 0.74-12.6; P = .14), piecemeal resection (OR, 3.1; 95% CI, 0.74-12.6; P = .13), and diagnostic accuracy for colorectal cancer (OR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.6-1.8; P = .82). There were lower rates of polyp recurrence (OR, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.1-0.8; P = .01) and incomplete resection (OR, 0.4; 95% CI, 0.2-0.5; P = .001) with U-EMR. Both techniques have comparable resection times and safety profiles.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results support the use of U-EMR over C-EMR for successful resection of colorectal lesions. Further randomized controlled trials are needed to evaluate the efficacy of U-EMR for resecting polyps >20 mm in size.

Education and gastroenterology fellow knowledge about endoscopic mucosal resection of colon adenomas: a survey-based study

Background and study aims  Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is an effective way to remove large (> 2 cm) colon adenomas. Training about it has not been standardized in fellowship programs. This study was aimed at evaluating the education and knowledge of gastroenterology fellows about EMR of colorectal adenomas. Methods  Participation in this survey was offered to 1730 gastroenterology fellows in the United States during the academic year 2019 to 2020. The survey assessed endoscopic mucosal resection training and knowledge and was approved and administered by the American College of Gastroenterology. Results  A total of 163 fellows (9.4 %) completed the survey. Only 85 fellows (52.1 %) reported receiving formal education in endoscopic mucosal resection. Fellow confidence was lowest regarding knowing electrosurgery unit settings. Fewer fellows correctly identified Paris 0-IIb (79, 48.5 %; P  < 0.0001) or NICE I (114, 69.9 %; P  < 0.01) lesions as compared to other Paris and NICE III lesions, respectively. Only 73 (44.8 %) and 93 fellows (57.1 %) arranged steps of EMR in the correct order and identified the correct type of current used for resection, respectively. Training year, male sex, and provision of advanced endoscopy rotations during fellowship were associated with a higher knowledge score for EMR. Conclusions  Nearly half of all fellows reported no formal education in EMR and incorrectly ordered its steps. Adenoma assessment by Paris and NICE classifications and electrosurgery unit settings were the most prominent knowledge deficiencies. Incorporation of standardized training about EMR with inclusion of advanced endoscopy rotations appears to be an important educational opportunity during gastroenterology fellowship.

A Novel One-Step Knife Approach Can Reduce the Submucosal Injection Time of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection: A Single-Blinded Randomized Multicenter Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND/AIMS

: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a curative treatment modality for early gastric neoplasms; however, ESD can be a time-consuming process. To overcome this pitfall, we developed the one-step knife (OSK) approach, which combines an endoscopic knife and injection needle on a single sheath. We aimed to evaluate whether this approach could reduce the ESD procedure time.

METHODS

This single-blinded randomized multicenter trial at four tertiary hospitals from June 2019 to June 2020 included patients aged 19 to 85 years undergoing ESD. Patients were randomly assigned to two groups (OSK or conventional knife [CK]). The injection time, total procedure time, resected specimen size, submucosal fluid amount, degree of device satisfaction, and adverse events were evaluated and compared between groups.

RESULTS

Fifty-one patients were analyzed (OSK: 25 patients and CK: 26 patients). No baseline differences were observed between groups, with the exception of a higher portion of males in the OSK group. The mean injection time was significantly reduced in the OSK group (39.0 seconds) compared to that in the CK group (87.5 seconds, p<0.001). A decrease of more than 10 minutes in the total procedure time (18.0 minutes vs 28.1 minutes, p=0.055) in the OSK group compared to the CK group was observed. Second-look esophagogastroduodenoscopy revealed two delayed bleeding cases in the OSK group that were easily controlled by endoscopic hemostasis.

CONCLUSIONS

OSK reduced the injection time and showed a decrease in total procedure time compared with the CK approach. OSK can be a feasible tool for ESD, especially in difficult cases.

Endoscopic techniques to reduce recurrence rates after colorectal EMR: systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Colorectal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is an effective, safe, and minimally invasive treatment for large lateral spreading and sessile polyps. The reported high recurrence rate of approximately 20% is however one of the major drawbacks. Several endoscopic interventions have been suggested to reduce recurrence rates. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of endoscopic interventions targeting the EMR margin to reduce recurrence rates.

Methods

We searched in PubMed and Ovid for studies comparing recurrence rates after interventions targeting the EMR margin with standard EMR. The primary outcome was the recurrence rate at the first surveillance colonoscopy (SC1) assessed histologically or macroscopically. For the meta-analysis, risk ratios (RRs) were calculated and pooled using a random effects model. The secondary outcome was post-procedural complication rates.

Results

Six studies with a total of 1335 lesions were included in the meta-analysis. The techniques performed in the intervention group targeting the resection margin were argon plasma coagulation, snare tip soft coagulation, extended EMR, and precutting EMR. The interventions reduced the adenoma recurrence rate with more than 50%, resulting in a pooled RR of 0.37 (95% CI 0.18, 0.76) comparing the intervention group with the control groups. Overall post-procedural complication rates did not increase significantly in the intervention arm (RR 1.30; 95% CI 0.65, 2.58).

Conclusion

Interventions targeting the EMR margin decrease recurrence rates and may not result in more complications.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00464-021-08574-z.

Risk factors associated with adenoma recurrence following cold snare endoscopic mucosal resection of polyps ≥ 20 mm: a retrospective chart review

Background and study aims  Cold snare endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is being increasingly utilized for non-pedunculated polyps ≥ 20 mm due to adverse events associated with use of cautery. Larger studies evaluating adenoma recurrence rate (ARR) and risk factors for recurrence following cold snare EMR of large polyps are lacking. The aim of this study was to define ARR for polyps ≥ 20 mm removed by cold snare EMR and to identify risk factors for recurrence. Patients and methods  A retrospective chart review of colon cold snare EMR procedures performed between January 2015 and July 2019 at a tertiary care medical center was performed. During this period, 310 non-pedunculated polyps ≥ 20 mm were excised using cold snare EMR with follow-up surveillance colonoscopy. Patient demographic data as well as polyp characteristics at the time of index and surveillance colonoscopy were collected and analyzed. Results  A total of 108 of 310 polyps (34.8 %) demonstrated adenoma recurrence at follow-up colonoscopy. Patients with a higher ARR were older ( P  = 0.008), had endoscopic clips placed at index procedure ( P  = 0.017), and were more likely to be Asian and African American ( P  = 0.02). ARR was higher in larger polyps ( P  < 0.001), tubulovillous adenomas ( P  < 0.001), and polyps with high-grade dysplasia ( P  = 0.003). Conclusions  Although cold snare EMR remains a feasible alternative to hot snare polypectomy for resection of non-pedunculated polyps ≥ 20 mm, endoscopists must also carefully consider factors associated with increased ARR when utilizing this technique.

The efficacy and safety of underwater endoscopic mucosal resection for ≥10-mm colorectal polyps: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) is a promising strategy for nonpedunculated colorectal polyp removal. However, the efficacy and safety of the technique for the treatment of ≥ 10-mm colorectal polyps remain unclear. We aimed to comprehensively assess the efficacy and safety of UEMR for polyps sized 10-19 mm and ≥ 20 mm.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched for relevant articles from January 2012 to November 2019. Primary outcomes were the rates of adverse events and residual polyps. Secondary outcomes were the complete resection, en bloc resection, and R0 resection rates.

RESULTS

18 articles including 1142 polyps from 1093 patients met our inclusion criteria. The overall adverse event and residual polyp rates were slightly lower for UEMR when removing colorectal polyps of 10-19 mm vs. ≥ 20 mm (3.5 % vs. 4.3 % and 1.2 % vs. 2.6 %, respectively). The UEMR-related complete resection rate was slightly higher for colorectal polyps of 10-19 mm vs. ≥ 20 mm (97.9 % vs. 92.0 %). However, the en bloc and R0 resection rates were dramatically higher for UEMR removal of polyps of 10-19 mm vs. ≥ 20 mm (83.4 % vs. 36.1 % and 73.0 % vs. 40.0 %, respectively). In addition, univariate meta-regression revealed that polyp size was an independent predictor for complete resection rate (P = 0.03) and en bloc resection (P = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

UEMR was an effective and safe technique for the removal of ≥ 10-mm nonpedunculated colorectal polyps. However, UEMR exhibited low en bloc and R0 resection rates for the treatment of ≥ 20-mm polyps.

Endoscopic polypectomy devices

Video 1Use of submucosal injection prior to en-bloc endoscopic mucosal resection.Video 2Use of a detachable loop ligating device prior to hot snare resection of a pedunculated polyp.

Prophylactic clips to reduce delayed polypectomy bleeding after resection of large colorectal polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Prophylactic clips to prevent delayed polypectomy bleeding (DPB) after endoscopic resection of large colorectal polyps remains controversial. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of prophylactic clips for preventing DPB by synthesizing the results of randomized trials.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE were searched to October 2019 to identify randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficacy of placing prophylactic clips to reduce DPB after resection of large (≥10 mm) colorectal polyps. The primary outcome was DPB defined by GI bleeding after the conclusion of the colonoscopy.

RESULTS

Eight studies (n = 3415) met the study criteria, all with a low risk of bias. The overall pooled incidence of DPB was 3.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.4%-5.4%) in patients receiving endoscopic resection of colorectal polyps ≥10 mm. Placing prophylactic clips reduced DPB in patients receiving prophylactic clips (relative risk [RR], 0.61; 95% CI, 0.43-0.85; I² = 37.8%) compared with no clips with a number needed to treat (NNT) of 52 (95% CI, 31-163). In stratified analyses, placing clips was associated with reduced risks of DPB in patients with polyps ≥20 mm (RR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.35-0.84; I² = 0.0%; NNT, 30), nonpedunculated morphology (RR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.36-0.81; I² = 0.0%; NNT, 39), and located proximal to the hepatic flexure (RR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.31-0.78; I² = 54.8%; NNT, 25) compared with no clips.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic clips after endoscopic resection of colorectal polyps ≥10 mm demonstrated a modest reduction in the risk of DPB. Larger reductions were observed in patients with polyps ≥20 mm, nonpedunculated morphology, or located proximal to the hepatic flexure.

Cold or Hot Snare with Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for 6-9 mm Colorectal Polyps: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

Objective: To investigate the efficacy and safety of cold snare endoscopic mucosal resection (CS-EMR) and hot snare endoscopic mucosal resection (HS-EMR) for colorectal polyps with diameters of 6-9 mm. Methods: Retrospective analysis was performed on the clinical data of 485 patients with colorectal polyps (6-9 mm in size) who were treated with CS-EMR or HS-EMR in the endoscopy center of Hangzhou Third People's Hospital from January 2017 to December 2019. Colorectal polyps were lifted by submucosal injection of normal saline. The CS-EMR group used a cold snare to remove the lifting polyps, while the HS-EMR group used a hot snare. Propensity score matching analysis with 1:1 matching and the nearest neighbor matching method were performed to ensure well-balanced characteristics of the CS-EMR and HS-EMR groups. Matching factors included age, gender, body mass index, blood routine, coagulation indicators, polyp site, size, number, and morphology. This resulted in a balanced cohort of 128 patients per group. Polyp recovery, complications, clipping for disclosure, and length of hospital stay were compared after matching. t-Tests, χ² tests, McNemar's tests, and Fisher's exact test were used for comparison between the two groups before and after matching. Results: There were no differences between the two groups of intraoperative and postoperative bleeding (P > .05), but the CS-EMR clipping rate was lower than the HS-EMR group (P < .01). There was a higher incidence of post-polypectomy syndrome (PPS) (P = .03) and longer hospital stays (P < .01) in the HS-EMR group than the CS-EMR group. Conclusions: Compared with HS-EMR, CS-EMR is more convenient to operate, with a low incidence of PPS, clipping rates, and short hospital stays. It is a safe and effective removal method for 6-9 mm colorectal polyps.

Histologic changes caused by injection of a novel submucosal lifting agent for endoscopic resection in GI lesions

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

ORISE Gel is a recently introduced, U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved submucosal lifting agent used in endoscopic resection of GI lesions. Histologically evident gel deposits in resected specimens may pose a potential diagnostic pitfall. To aid in recognition of this procedure-related artifact, we report the largest histologic series of ORISE Gel in endoscopic and surgical resection specimens to date.

METHODS

Fifty-eight EMR/endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) specimens with ORISE Gel injection and 5 interval surgical resection specimens with previous ORISE Gel injection were included. Patient demographics and endoscopy reports were obtained. Histologic slides from all cases were reviewed. Histochemical stains were performed on select cases.

RESULTS

Fifty-one EMR and 7 ESD specimens were identified. In 51 of 58 (88%) endoscopic resection specimens, amorphous, pale blue-gray, finely granular material was evident in the submucosa, as well as focally within the mucosa in 4 cases. Most cases showed homogeneous near-complete filling of the submucosa with this material, whereas a few demonstrated areas of condensation and retraction. Mucicarmine and periodic acid-Schiff stains were negative for mucin. Interval surgical resection specimens revealed extensive deposition of dense, eosinophilic material with associated multinucleated giant cells in the submucosa in all cases, with transmural extension in 3 cases.

CONCLUSION

ORISE Gel injection during endoscopic resection of GI lesions results in deposition of amorphous, blue-gray material seen in histologic sections, whereas interval surgical resection specimens demonstrate dense, eosinophilic material with an associated giant cell reaction. Awareness of these artifacts will help avoid misinterpretation of their presence as pathologic findings.

Efficacy of early clip-with-line method for colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection

BACKGROUND

Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) remains demanding due to technical difficulties and high risk of perforation. Most of the reported traction methods are initiated after creating a mucosal flap, which is time consuming. To obtain a good visualization at the mucosal incision stage, we developed the early clip-with-line (ECL) method. This method was started immediately after injection of sodium hyaluronate solution into the submucosal layer. In this study, we evaluated the efficacy and the safety of the ECL method for colorectal ESD.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed all cases of colorectal ESDs (41 cases in total) performed from January 2017 to February 2019 in our institution. From January 2017 to August 2018, 27 of these cases were performed using conventional (non-ECL) ESDs, while from September 2018 onwards, the remaining 14 cases were performed using the ECL method. Retrospective comparison between the ECL group and the non-ECL group was conducted in terms of clinical characteristics, treatment outcomes, and adverse events.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in clinical characteristics between two groups. Procedure time (median [range]) was significantly shorter in the ECL group than in the non-ECL group (66 [29-131] min vs 90 [30-410] min; P = 0.03). As for adverse events, no case of perforation occurred in the ECL group, whereas perforation was observed in 7.4% (2/27) cases in the non-ECL group (no significant difference).

CONCLUSION

Early clip-with-line method for colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection reduced procedure time.

Long-term clinical outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal neoplasia with or without the hybrid technique

AIM

The main aim of this study was to compare the long-term outcome of a conventional colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in which submucosal dissection was continued throughout until the completion of resection (ESD-T) to hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD-H) in the colorectum.

METHOD

Medical records of 836 colorectal neoplasia patients treated by ESD-T or ESD-H were reviewed. ESD-H was defined as colorectal ESD with additional snaring in the final stage of the procedure. Primary outcomes were the overall and metastatic recurrence rates. Secondary outcomes were short-term outcomes such as the en bloc resection rate, procedure time and adverse events.

RESULTS

The overall recurrence rate was higher in the ESD-H than in the ESD-T group (5.7% vs 0.7%, P = 0.001). The metastatic recurrence rate showed no significant difference between these groups (1.4% vs 1.4%, P = 1.000). Multivariate analysis revealed that a failed en bloc resection (hazard ratio 24.097; 95% CI 5.446-106.237; P < 0.001) and larger tumour size (hazard ratio 1.042; 95% CI 1.014-1.070; P = 0.003) were independently associated with overall recurrence. The ESD-H group showed a lower en bloc resection rate (56.8% vs 96.5%, P < 0.001), shorter procedure time (45.6 vs 54.3 min, P < 0.001) and higher perforation rate (10.3% vs 6.0%, P = 0.029).

CONCLUSION

Although long-term outcomes in terms of overall recurrence are inferior following ESD-H, a failed en bloc resection and large tumour size are the only independent risk factors for recurrence. Further investigations are warranted to improve the long-term outcomes of ESD-H.

Endoscopic management versus transanal surgery for early primary or early locally recurrent rectal neoplasms-a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Both endoscopic techniques and transanal surgery are viable options that allow organ preservation for early rectal neoplasms. Whilst endoscopic approaches are less invasive and carry less morbidity, it is unclear whether they are as oncologically effective.

AIM

To compare endoscopic techniques with transanal surgery in the management of early rectal neoplasms.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed for randomised and observational studies comparing these techniques. The pre-specified main outcomes measured were en bloc and R0 resection rates and recurrence. Pair-wise meta-analysis was performed.

RESULTS

This review included 1044 patients. Transanal surgery had increased R0 resection rates (odds ratio (OR) 2.66; 95% CI 1.64; 4.31; p < 0.001) versus endoscopic management. The latter was associated with higher rates of incomplete resection (OR 2.25; 95% CI 1.14, 4.46; p = 0.02) and further intervention (OR 1.78; 95% CI 1.09, 2.88; p = 0.02). There was no difference in the rates of late recurrence (OR 1.01; 95% CI 0.53, 1.91; p = 0.99) or further major surgery (OR 0.87; 95% CI 0.39, 1.94; p = 0.73) between the groups. Endoscopic treatment was associated with a shorter operating time (weighted mean difference (WMD) - 12.08; 95% CI - 18.97, - 5.19; p < 0.001) and LOS (WMD - 1.94; 95% CI - 2.43, - 1.44; p < 0.001), as well as lower rates of urinary retention post-operatively (OR 0.12; 95% CI 0.02, 0.63; p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic techniques should be favoured in the setting of benign early rectal neoplasms given their decreased morbidity and increased cost-effectiveness. However, where malignancy is suspected transanal surgery should be the preferred option given the superior R0 resection rate.

Effect on Bleeding Prevention of an Intravenous Proton Pump Inhibitor During the Fasting Period After Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection: a Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

No consensus has been achieved on optimal perioperative strategies for patients undergoing endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of an intravenous (IV) proton pump inhibitor (PPI) given during the fasting period after ESD on delayed bleeding following ESD.

METHODS

This study was designed as a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in a single center. A total of 235 patients who underwent ESD for adenoma and early gastric cancer between March 2016 and September 2018 were randomized into a PPI group and placebo group. Patients were administrated intravenous pantoprazole 40 mg daily (PPI group) or placebo (placebo group) during the fasting period 48 h after ESD (from the day of ESD to the following day, 48 h). After oral feeding (48 h after ESD), oral PPI was given to both groups for 8 weeks.

RESULTS

Among 235 patients in the intention-to-treat (ITT) and 195 in the per-protocol (PP) analysis, there was no significant difference between the PPI and control groups in major bleeding (PPI vs. placebo; 3.3% vs. 1.7%, p = 0.27) or minor bleeding (PPI vs. placebo; 7.6% vs. 4.3%, p = 0.41) after ESD. There was no significant difference in age (p = 0.28), histology (p = 0.75), tumor size (p = 0.48), or procedure time (p = 0.49) between the two groups. The only independent risk factor for major delayed bleeding was the combined use of aspirin and antiplatelet agent (OR; 12.25, 95% CI; 1.06-141.19, p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Administration of routine IV PPI during the fasting period 48 h after ESD does not reduce delayed post-ESD bleeding.

Endoscopic Mucosal Resection and Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection

Therapeutic endoscopy is an emerging field within general surgery. This article explores the evidence for and usage of endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection throughout the gastrointestinal tract. We aim to educate surgeons and provide an understanding of these techniques. With education and appropriate training, the surgeon will gain confidence and hopefully adopt these tools into their daily practice.

A History of Flexible Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

Surgeons have been involved, since the beginning, in the development and evolution of endoscopy. They have been instrumental in developing new methods and have been actively involved in most of the therapeutic applications. The continued evolution of endoscopic technique is inevitable and will involve the integration of new technology with innovative thinking.