The utility of a novel colonoscope with retroflexion for colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection

Diagnostic and therapeutic strategies for colorectal tumor with positive muscle-retracting sign

Objectives

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for colorectal tumors with positive muscle-retracting (MR) sign often results in incomplete resection or discontinuation owing to the difficulty of submucosal dissection. The present study aimed to evaluate the usefulness of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) in diagnosing the MR sign and performing ESD using the pocket-creation method (PCM).

Methods

Thirty-six cases of colorectal tumors with positive MR sign during ESD between January 2015 and December 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Cases were divided into two groups: 1) the conventional method (CM) group, comprising 29 cases, and 2) the PCM group with seven cases, in which preoperative EUS and ESD using PCM were performed. Treatment outcomes were compared between the groups. The diagnostic yield of EUS for the MR sign was evaluated among large sessile tumors >20 mm in which preoperative EUS was performed.

Results

Histologic diagnosis was adenoma or Tis carcinoma in 12 cases (33%), T1 carcinoma in 18 cases (50%), T2 carcinoma in four cases (11%), and unevaluable in two cases (6%). The sensitivity and specificity of the EUS-MR sign for large sessile tumors were 87.5% and 83.3%, respectively. ESD was achieved in all cases in the PCM group, although it was discontinued in eight cases (28%) in the CM group. There were significant differences between the PCM and CM groups in en bloc resection (100% vs. 48%, p = 0.013) and R0 resection rates (71% vs. 31%, p = 0.049).

Conclusion

The MR sign can be predicted by preoperative EUS, and ESD using PCM allows en bloc resection.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Efficacy of single-balloon overtube for endoscopic submucosal dissection in the proximal colon: A propensity score-matched analysis

OBJECTIVES

A single-balloon overtube (SBO) can improve poor scope operability during colonic endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). We aimed to evaluate the clinical usefulness of SBO for ESD in the proximal colon and the predictive factors for cases in which SBO is useful.

METHODS

A total of 88 tumors located in the proximal colon resected by balloon-assisted ESD (BA-ESD) using SBO and 461 tumors resected by conventional ESD (C-ESD) between June 2015 and November 2020 were considered. Seventy-eight tumors each in the BA-ESD and C-ESD groups were matched by propensity score matching. ESD outcomes were compared between the groups, and a decision tree analysis was performed to explore the predictive factors for cases in which SBO is useful.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between the groups in the major outcomes such as en bloc resection rate (95% vs. 99%, p = 0.17), R0 resection rate (92% vs. 96%, p = 0.30), mean dissection speed (16 mm²/min vs. 16 mm²/min, p = 0.53), and intraoperative perforation rate (5% vs. 6%, p = 0.73). Even when considering cases with poor preoperative scope operability, there were no significant differences between the groups. Comparison of tumors ≥40 mm in diameter between the groups confirmed that the intraoperative perforation rate was significantly lower in the BA-ESD group than in the C-ESD group (0% vs. 24%, p = 0.0188).

CONCLUSION

SBO is useful for ESD of tumors ≥40 mm in diameter in the proximal colon to prevent intraoperative perforation, which usually has a long procedure time.

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.

Review on colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection focusing on the technical aspect

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) enables removal of broad-based colorectal polyps or lateral spreading tumors with a higher rate of en bloc resection and a lower risk of local recurrence. However, it is technically demanding. Over the past 20 years, various equipment and innovative techniques have been developed to reduce the difficulty of ESD. The information in the literature is scattered. Our aim is to provide a comprehensive review on the setup and technical aspects of colorectal ESD.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed database and systemically reviewed all original and review articles related to colorectal ESD. Further manual search according to reference lists of identified articles were done. The selected articles were categorized and reviewed. Original figures were created to help readers understand some of the ESD techniques.

RESULTS

A total of 216 articles were identified, in which 25 of them were review articles and 191 of them were original articles. They were categorized and reviewed. An in-depth appraisal of the setting, equipment, and technical aspects of colorectal ESD was performed.

CONCLUSIONS

Although ESD is a technically demanding procedure that requires expert endoscopic skills, it can be mastered. With good peri-procedural preparation, sufficient knowledge of the equipment, and thorough understanding of the useful endoscopic tricks and maneuvers, colorectal ESD can be performed smoothly and safely.