Safety and efficacy of multiband mucosectomy in 1060 resections in Barrett's esophagus

Endoscopic submucosal dissection versus endoscopic mucosal resection for early esophageal adenocarcinoma

OBJECTIVES

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) allow endoscopic resection of early esophageal adenocarcinoma. The choice between the two techniques takes into account the morphology of the lesion, and the experience of the endoscopist. The aim of this study was to compare EMR to ESD for the treatment of early esophageal adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

Patients who underwent an endoscopic resection for esophageal adenocarcinomas between March 2015 and December 2019 were included. ESD was compared to EMR in terms of clinical, procedural, histologic, and oncologic outcomes.

RESULTS

85 patients were included: 57 ESD and 28 EMR. The median (IQR) diameter of the lesion was 20(15-25) mm in the ESD group, and 15(8-16) mm in the EMR group, p<0.01. ESD allowed en bloc resection in 100% of cases, and EMR in 39% of cases, p<0.001. The R0 and curative resection rate in the ESD group versus the EMR group were 88% and 67%, respectively, versus 21% and 11%, p<0.001. We recorded one severe adverse event, in the EMR group. After a median (IQR) follow-up of 27.5 (14.5-38.7) months, the local recurrence rate was 23% vs. 18% (p=0.63), and the overall survival 89% vs. 86% (p=0.72), in the ESD and EMR groups, respectively.

CONCLUSION

ESD was as safe as EMR and allowed higher en bloc, R0 and curative resection rates. Although these results did not translate into long-term outcomes, these data prompt for a broader adoption of ESD for the resection of esophageal lesions suspected of harboring early esophageal adenocarcinoma.

Nonthermal resection device for ablation of Barrett's esophagus: a feasibility and safety study

BACKGROUND

Several techniques exist for the eradication of Barrett's esophagus (BE); however, all have limitations regarding successful conversion to squamous epithelium and a complication profile. We aimed to assess the feasibility and safety of a new nonthermal device, the EndoRotor, for the eradication of BE as a first-line ablation technique.

METHODS

Patients with BE were prospectively included at two tertiary referral centers in The Netherlands.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

BE length 2-5 cm, with low grade dysplasia, high grade dysplasia, or residual BE after endoscopic resection (ER) of a lesion containing early neoplasia.

EXCLUSION CRITERIA

previous ER > 50 % circumference, or previous ablation therapy. Follow-up endoscopy was performed 3 months after ablation therapy. Outcomes were the percentage of endoscopically visible BE surface regression and complications.

RESULTS

30 patients were included (age 66 years, interquartile range [IQR] 59-73, median BE C0M3, 25 male). Overall, 18 patients underwent ER prior to ablation. Median percentage BE ablated was 100 % (IQR 94 %-100 %). Median visual BE surface regression at 3-month follow-up was 80 % (IQR 68 %-95 %). Multiple residual Barrett's islands were commonly seen. Six patients (20 %) had a treatment-related complication requiring intervention, including one perforation (3 %), one postprocedural hemorrhage (3 %), and four strictures (13 %). Post-procedural pain was reported in 18 patients (60 %).

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic ablation of BE using this novel nonthermal device was found to be technically demanding, with a longer procedure time compared with established ablation techniques and a high complication rate. Based on these results, we do not recommend its use as a first-line ablation technique for the eradication of BE.

Individual risk calculator to predict lymph node metastases in patients with submucosal (T1b) esophageal adenocarcinoma: a multicenter cohort study

BACKGROUND

Lymph node metastasis (LNM) is possible after endoscopic resection of early esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). This study aimed to develop and internally validate a prediction model that estimates the individual risk of metastases in patients with pT1b EAC.

METHODS

A nationwide, retrospective, multicenter cohort study was conducted in patients with pT1b EAC treated with endoscopic resection and/or surgery between 1989 and 2016. The primary end point was presence of LNM in surgical resection specimens or detection of metastases during follow-up. All resection specimens were histologically reassessed by specialist gastrointestinal pathologists. Subdistribution hazard regression analysis was used to develop the prediction model. The discriminative ability of this model was assessed using the c-statistic.

RESULTS

248 patients with pT1b EAC were included. Metastases were seen in 78 patients, and the 5-year cumulative incidence was 30.9 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 25.1 %-36.8 %). The risk of metastases increased with submucosal invasion depth (subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR] 1.08, 95 %CI 1.02-1.14, for every increase of 500 μm), lymphovascular invasion (SHR 2.95, 95 %CI 1.95-4.45), and for larger tumors (SHR 1.23, 95 %CI 1.10-1.37, for every increase of 10 mm). The model demonstrated good discriminative ability (c-statistic 0.81, 95 %CI 0.75-0.86).

CONCLUSIONS

A third of patients with pT1b EAC experienced metastases within 5 years. The probability of developing post-resection metastases was estimated with a personalized predicted risk score incorporating tumor invasion depth, tumor size, and lymphovascular invasion. This model requires external validation before implementation into clinical practice.

Recent Advances of Biomedical Materials for Prevention of Post-ESD Esophageal Stricture

Esophageal stricture commonly occurs in patients that have suffered from endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), and it makes swallowing difficult for patients, significantly reducing their life qualities. So far, the prevention strategies applied in clinical practice for post-ESD esophageal stricture usually bring various inevitable complications, which drastically counteract their effectiveness. Nowadays, with the widespread investigation and application of biomedical materials, lots of novel approaches have been devised in terms of the prevention of esophageal stricture. Biomedical polymers and biomedical-derived materials are the most used biomedical materials to prevent esophageal stricture after ESD. Both of biomedical polymers and biomedical-derived materials possess great physicochemical properties such as biocompatibility and biodegradability. Moreover, some biomedical polymers can be used as scaffolds to promote cell growth, and biomedical-derived materials have biological functions similar to natural organisms, so they are important in tissue engineering. In this review, we have summarized the current approaches for preventing esophageal stricture and put emphasis on the discussion of the roles biomedical polymers and biomedical-derived materials acted in esophageal stricture prevention. Meanwhile, we proposed several potential methods that may be highly rational and feasible in esophageal stricture prevention based on other researches associated with biomedical materials. This review is expected to offer a significant inspiration from biomedical materials to explore more effective, safer, and more economical strategies to manage post-ESD esophageal stricture.

Recent advances in early esophageal cancer: diagnosis and treatment based on endoscopy

Esophageal cancer (EC) often cannot be discovered in time because of its asymptomatic or symptom-atypical characteristics in early stage. The risk and probability of lymph node metastasis and distant metastasis increase correspondingly as the cancer aggressively invades deeper layers. Treatment regimens may be shifted to surgery and chemoradiotherapy (CRT) from endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) with poor quality of life and prognosis. It is imperative to identify dysplasia and EC early and enable early curative endoscopic treatments. Newer methods have been attempted in the clinical setting to achieve early detection at a more microscopic and precise level. Newer imaging techniques and artificial intelligence (AI) technology have been involved in targeted biopsies and will gradually unveil the visualization of pathology in the future. Early detection and diagnosis are the prerequisite to choose personal and precise treatment regimens. EET has also been undergoing development and improvement to benefit more patients as the first option or the firstly chosen alternative therapy, when compared with esophagectomy. More clinical studies are needed to provide more possibilities for EET.

Snare-tip soft coagulation is effective and efficient as a first-line modality for treating intraprocedural bleeding during Barrett's mucosectomy

BACKGROUND : Intraprocedural bleeding (IPB) during multiband mucosectomy (MBM) for Barrett's neoplasia can obscure the endoscopic field. Current hemostatic devices may affect procedure continuity and technical success. Snare-tip soft coagulation (STSC) as a first-line therapy for primary hemostasis has not previously been studied in this setting.

METHODS

Between January 2014 and November 2019, 191 consecutive patients underwent 292 MBM procedures for Barrett's neoplasia within a prospective observational cohort in two tertiary care centers. A standard MBM technique was performed. IPB was defined as bleeding obscuring the endoscopic field that required intervention. The primary outcome was the technical success and efficacy of STSC.

RESULTS

IPB occurred in 63 MBM procedures (21.6 %; 95 % confidence interval 17.3 % - 26.7 %). STSC was attempted as first-line therapy in 51 IPBs, with the remainder requiring alternate therapies because of pooling of blood. STSC achieved hemostasis in 48 cases (94.1 % by per-protocol analysis; 76.2 % by intention-to-treat analysis). No apparatus disassembly was required to perform STSC.

CONCLUSIONS

STSC is a safe, effective, and efficient first-line hemostatic modality for IPB during MBM for Barrett's neoplasia.

Safety and efficacy of multiband mucosectomy for Barrett's esophagus: a systematic review with pooled analysis

Background

According to guidelines, all visible lesions in Barrett’s esophagus (BE) should be endoscopically resected. Available methods of endoscopic resection include the cap-assisted technique and, more recently, multiband mucosectomy (MBM). Data on the efficacy and safety of MBM have yet to be systematically reviewed. We performed the first systematic review with pooled analysis to evaluate the outcomes of MBM in patients with BE.

Methods

Electronic databases (Medline, Scopus, EMBASE) were searched up to August 2019. Studies including patients with BE who underwent MBM were eligible. The primary outcome was the adverse events rate. Secondary outcomes were the proportions of complete resections and R0 resections. Outcomes were assessed by pooling data using a random or fixed-effect model, according to the degree of heterogeneity, to obtain a proportion with a 95% confidence interval.

Results

Fourteen studies were eligible (1334 procedures, 986 patients). The adverse event rate was 5.3%. Immediate and post-procedural bleeding, perforations and strictures occurred in 0.2%, 0.7%, 0.3% and 3.9% of procedures, respectively. Focal lesions were resected at a complete rate of 97.6% with an R0 resection rate of 94.1%.

Conclusion

MBM is a safe and effective technique for treating visible lesions in BE.

Management of esophageal strictures after endoscopic resection for early neoplasia

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic resection of extensive esophageal neoplastic lesions is associated with a high rate of esophageal stricture. Most studies have focused on the risk factors for post-endoscopic esophageal stricture, but data on the therapeutic management of these strictures are scarce. Our aim is to describe the management of esophageal strictures following endoscopic resection for early esophageal neoplasia.

METHODS

We included all patients with an endoscopic resection for early esophageal neoplasia followed by endoscopic dilatation at a tertiary referral center. We recorded the demographic, endoscopic, and histological characteristics, and the outcomes of the treatment of the strictures.

RESULTS

Between January 2010 and December 2019, we performed 166 endoscopic mucosal resections and 261 endoscopic submucosal dissections for early esophageal neoplasia, and 34 (8.0%) patients developed an esophageal stricture requiring endoscopic treatment. The indication for endoscopic resection was Barrett's neoplasia in 15/34 (44.1%) cases and squamous cell neoplasia (SCN) in 19/34 (55.9%) cases. The median [(interquartile range) (IQR)] number of endoscopic dilatations was 2.5 (2.0-4.0). Nine of 34 (26.5%) patients required only one dilatation, and 22/34 (65%) had complete dysphagia relief following three endoscopic treatment sessions. The median number of dilatations was significantly higher for SCN [3.0 (2-7); range 1-17; p = 0.02], and in the case of circumferential resection [4.0 (3.0-7.0); p = 0.03]. Endoscopic dilatation allowed a sustained dysphagia relief in 33/34 (97.0%) patients after a mean follow-up of 25.3 ± 22 months.

CONCLUSION

Refractory post-endoscopic esophageal stricture is a rare event. After a median of 2.5 endoscopic dilatations, 97.0% of patients were permanently relieved of dysphagia. Circumferential endoscopic esophageal resections should be considered when indicated.

Role of Endoscopic Mucosal Resection and Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection in the Management of Barrett's Related Neoplasia

Endoscopic resection has been proven to be safe and highly effective for removing early neoplastic lesions in Barrett esophagus. It enables accurate histopathological assessment and is therefore considered as the cornerstone in the endoscopic work-up for patients with Barrett neoplasia. Various techniques are available to perform endoscopic resection. Multiband mucosectomy is the most commonly used resection technique. However, endoscopic submucosal dissection is gaining ground in the Western world. Endoscopic resection for low-risk submucosal lesions already is fully justified. Future studies have to point out whether endoscopic resection and subsequent follow-up are also justified in selected patients with high-risk submucosal tumors.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection in the treatment of patients with early colorectal carcinoma and precancerous lesions

BACKGROUND

Our study aims to explore the indications and clinical efficacy of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) on the early colorectal carcinoma and precancerous lesions.

METHODS

The clinical data of 29 patients with early colorectal carcinoma and precancerous lesions who were treated with ESD at Nantong First People's Hospital between January 2018 and December 2019 were collected. Then the endoscopic morphology, postoperative pathological classification, tumor resection rate, postoperative complications, and follow-up outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Colorectal carcinoma lesions were distributed in the left colon, accounting for 89.6%. There were 14 cases (48.3%) with protuberant endoscopic tumors, accounting for the highest proportion, while 2 cases (6.9%) of the flat tumors, accounting for the lowest proportion. The average operation time for ESD was 123 minutes, and en-bloc resection was 100% while the curative resection rate was 89.6%. There were 3 cases (10.3%) with delayed hemorrhage after ESD, and 1 case with persistent hemorrhage during the operation was transferred to surgical treatment. No cases with infection or perforation after ESD. For postoperative pathological classification, villous-tubular adenoma with low-grade epithelioma accounted for 31%; tubular adenoma with high-grade epithelioma only accounted for 3.4%. There was no recurrence in the follow-up for 1-20 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Control of surgical indications strictly, improvement of operation skills, attention to postoperative pathological feedback, and close follow-up are necessary guarantees to improve the clinical effectiveness of ESD.

Application of a novel self-assembling peptide to prevent hemorrhage after EMR, a feasibility and safety study

Background

A novel self-assembling peptide (SAP) can be applied to the post-endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) defect to treat oozing bleedings. It has been suggested to stimulate early healing of damaged vessels. We hypothesized that SAP application could prevent delayed bleeding (DB) after EMR and performed a prospective cohort study to determine feasibility and safety.

Methods

A total of 48 consecutive patients who underwent EMR between June 2018 and August 2019 for large lesions in the esophagus, duodenum (> 1 cm) or colorectum (> 2 cm) were treated with adjuvant SAP application. Duration and ease of SAP application were measured, as well as DB outcome.

Results

The EMR defects of 48 patients were treated with SAP; 17 in the esophagus, 13 in the duodenum and 18 in the colorectum. SAP was easy to apply on the EMR defect with a median duration of 2.0 min. A dose of 3 cc was generally enough to cover a defect between 10 and 50 mm. An exploratory analysis of the prophylactic ability of SAP showed that 15.9% of patients (7/44) treated with SAP still had a DB, mostly in the duodenum (4/11). No adverse events related to gel exposure were reported.

Conclusions

SAP application after EMR was found to be feasible and safe, and did not delay the procedure; however, DB was still relatively common. Future comparative studies are needed to evaluate whether SAP is able to reduce DB after EMR, particularly for lesions with an increased bleeding risk, such as in the duodenum.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00464-020-07819-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Risk factors for serious adverse events associated with multiband mucosectomy in Barrett's esophagus: an international multicenter analysis of 3827 endoscopic resection procedures

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Multiband mucosectomy (MBM) is a widely used technique for the treatment of Barrett's esophagus (BE). However, large multicenter studies enabling a generalizable estimation of the risk of serious adverse events, such as perforation and postprocedural bleeding, are lacking. The aim of this study was to estimate the rate of, and risk factors for, serious adverse events associated with MBM.

METHODS

In this retrospective analysis, consecutive patients who underwent MBM for treatment of BE in 14 tertiary referral centers in Europe, the United States, Canada, and Australia were included. Primary outcomes were perforation and postprocedural bleeding rate. Potential risk factors were identified by logistic regression.

RESULTS

Between 2001 and 2016, a total of 3827 MBM procedures were performed in 2447 patients (84% male, mean age 66 years, median BE length C2M4). Perforation occurred in 17 procedures (0.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.3-0.7), of which 15 could be treated endoscopically or conservatively. Female gender was an independent risk factor for perforation (odds ratio [OR], 2.77; 95% CI, 1.02-7.57; P = .05). Postprocedural bleeding occurred after 35 procedures (0.9%; 95% CI, 0.6-1.3). The number of resections (OR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.06-1.25; P < .001) was significantly associated with postprocedural bleeding.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study show that MBM for BE is safe with a low risk of serious adverse events. In addition, most of the adverse events could be managed endoscopically or conservatively. The number of resections was an independent risk factor for postprocedural bleeding.

Risk factors for complications after endoscopic treatment in Chinese patients with early esophageal cancer and precancerous lesions

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to analyze the risk factors for complications after endoscopic treatment of early esophageal cancer and precancerous lesions and provides evidence for developing preventive measures against these complications.

METHODS

The clinical data of patients with early esophageal cancer and precancerous lesions treated in the Department of Endoscopy, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, and Peking Union Medical College from January 2009 to December 2015 were analyzed. The risk factors related to delayed bleeding, perforation, and stenosis were assessed.

RESULTS

Of 459 patients, 15 (3.3%) had delayed bleeding, 16 (3.5%) had perforation, and 82 (17.9%) had stenosis. Conservative treatment was performed for patients with bleeding and perforation, and endoscopic dilation was performed to relieve stenosis. The independent risk factors for delayed bleeding were lesion size (OR = 1.51, P = 0.020), circumferential diameter [odds ratio (OR) = 1.24, P = 0.037]. The kind of operation method [endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD)/cap-based endoscopic resection (EMR-Cap): OR = 15.38, P = 0.013) was the independent risk factor for perforation. The independent predictors of stenosis were circumferential diameter (OR = 1.58, P < 0.001), lesion in the neck (OR = 0.12, P = 0.003), and surgical time (OR = 1.02, P = 0.007).

CONCLUSION

Few complications occur after the endoscopic treatment of early esophageal cancer and precancerous lesions which can be treated by endoscopic and conservative medical therapies. Strict operational training is required for ESD treatment.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection/endoscopic mucosal resection guidelines for esophageal cancer

The Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society has developed endoscopic submucosal dissection/endoscopic mucosal resection guidelines. These guidelines present recommendations in response to 18 clinical questions concerning the preoperative diagnosis, indications, resection methods, curability assessment, and surveillance of patients undergoing endoscopic resection for esophageal cancers based on a systematic review of the scientific literature.

Recent advances in understanding and preventing oesophageal cancer

Oesophageal cancer is a common cancer that continues to have a poor survival. This is largely in part due to its late diagnosis and early metastatic spread. Currently, screening is limited to patients with multiple risk factors via a relatively invasive technique. However, there is a large proportion of patients diagnosed with oesophageal cancer who have not been screened. This has warranted the development of new screening techniques that could be implemented more widely and lead to earlier identification and subsequently improvements in survival rates. This article also explores progress in the surveillance of Barrett’s oesophagus, a pre-malignant condition for the development of oesophageal adenocarcinoma. In recent years, advances in early endoscopic intervention have meant that more patients are considered at an earlier stage for potentially curative treatment.

Volumetric laser endomicroscopy in Barrett's esophagus: ready for primetime

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is the condition where intestinal metaplastic changes are found in the normal stratified squamous epithelium of the esophagus predisposing an individual to dysplasia and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). It tends to affect males and is often the result of chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The current standard of therapy for diagnosing Barrett's is white light endoscopy (WLE) with biopsies obtained using the Seattle protocol. Multiple newer advanced modalities have been developed to improve diagnostic abilities, including volumetric laser endomicroscopy (VLE). This technique utilizes second generation optical coherence tomography (OCT) to provide an enhanced circumferential image to a depth of 3 mm with the potential for improved diagnostic yield for dysplasia, particularly submucosal lesions or lesions not seen by WLE. It has also been evaluated in guiding mapping of endotherapy as well as post therapy surveillance for recurrence. Although the results have been promising when used with current diagnostic standards, overall data are limited to support the routine use of VLE.

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.

Efficacy and Safety of Multiband Mucosectomy Versus Cap-assisted Endoscopic Resection For Early Esophageal Cancer and Precancerous Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of multiband mucosectomy (MBM) for early esophageal cancer and precancerous lesions is still in uncertainty. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of this procedure and to compare it with cap-assisted endoscopic resection (EMR-cap).

METHODS

A systematic search of both English and Chinese databases was performed from inception to April 30, 2019. Complete resection rate, local recurrence rate, and procedure time were considered the primary outcome measures. Prevalence of complications was considered the secondary outcome measure. All data analyses were performed using Review Manager Software.

RESULTS

Two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 3 non-RCTs were included in the final meta-analysis. When compared with the EMR-cap technique, MBM had a similar complete resection rate [odds ratio (OR)=2.09, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.78-5.60, P=0.14], a similar local recurrence rate (OR=0.50, 95% CI: 0.09-2.67, P=0.42), a shorter resection time (mean difference: -9.08, 95% CI: -13.86 to -4.30, P=0.0002), a shorter procedure time (mean difference: -13.36, 95% CI: -17.85 to -8.86, P<0.00001), a lower bleeding rate (OR=0.45, 95% CI: 0.24-0.83, P=0.01), a similar perforation rate (OR=0.55, 95% CI: 0.15-2.06, P=0.37), and a similar stricture rate (OR=0.77, 95% CI: 0.10-5.84, P=0.80). The results of non-RCTs were consistent with those of RCTs.

CONCLUSIONS

MBM is similar to EMR-cap in terms of efficacy and safety for endoscopic resection of early cancer and precancerous lesions of the esophagus. However, MBM is less time-consuming.

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.).

Quality in upper gastrointestinal endoscopic submucosal dissection

Progress in the endoscopy technology field led to an increase in the diagnosis of early gastrointestinal (GI) superficial lesions and to an improvement of their treatment. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been developed in Japan with the aim of removing such lesions in one piece, in order to obtain a curative resection and to minimize the risk of local recurrence, and to preserve the native organ. ESD is widely used in Asia for the treatment of early upper and lower GI lesions and is currently gaining attention in Western countries too. However, ESD can be safely performed only by expert endoscopists and in specific clinical settings. Therefore, prior to decide whether ESD is feasible or not, the target lesion must be carefully assessed, in order to understand whether or not it is eligible for submucosal dissection. The aim of this paper is to review indications, limitations and technical aspects of upper GI ESD.

Controversies in Endoscopic Eradication Therapy for Barrett's Esophagus

Advances in endoscopic eradication therapy for Barrett's Esophagus-associated neoplasia have resulted in a significant paradigm shift in the diagnosis and management of this complex disease. A robust body of literature critically evaluating outcomes of resection and ablative strategies has allowed gastroenterologists to make quality, evidence-based decisions for their patients. Despite this progress, there are still many unanswered questions and challenges that remain. Ultimately, identification of a cost-effective screening modality, biomarkers for risk stratification, and strides to eliminate post surveillance endoscopy after endoscopic eradication therapy are essential to reach our long-term goal for eradication of esophageal adenocarcinoma.

Diagnosis and treatment of superficial esophageal cancer

Endoscopy allows for the screening, early diagnosis, treatment and follow up of superficial esophageal cancer. Endoscopic submucosal dissection has become the gold standard for the resection of superficial squamous cell neoplasia. Combinations of endoscopic mucosal resection and radiofrequency ablation are the mainstay of the management of Barrett’s associated neoplasia. However, protruded, non-lifting or large lesions may be better managed by endoscopic submucosal dissection. Novel ablation tools, such as argon plasma coagulation with submucosal lifting and cryoablation balloons, are being developed for the treatment of residual Barrett’s esophagus, since iatrogenic strictures still hamper the development of extensive circumferential resections in the esophagus. Optimal surveillance modalities after endoscopic resection are still to be determined. The assessment of the risk of lymph-node metastases, as well as of the need for additional treatments based on qualitative and quantitative histological criteria, balanced to the patient’s condition, requires a dedicated multidisciplinary team decision process. The need for trained endoscopists, expert pathologists and surgeons, and specialized multidisciplinary meetings underlines the role of expert centers in the management of superficial esophageal cancer.

Approaches for stricture prevention after esophageal endoscopic resection

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic resection of extensive esophageal lesions has become more common as endoscopic resection techniques and equipment have developed. However, extensive esophageal endoscopic resections can cause postoperative esophageal strictures, which have a negative impact on the quality of life of patients. We aimed to review current treatments and innovative approaches to prevent esophageal strictures after widespread endoscopic resection of esophageal lesions.

METHODS

We performed a comprehensive literature search from 2000 to 2016 using predetermined search terms to identify relevant articles and summarized their results as a narrative review.

RESULTS

A total of 21 original articles and case series were identified. A circumferential mucosal defect involving more than three fourths of the esophageal luminal circumference was the primary risk factor for developing an esophageal stricture after endoscopic resection. Oral and injectable steroid therapy demonstrated promise in preventing post-endoscopic submucosal dissection esophageal strictures, with both strategies significantly reducing the number of required endoscopic balloon dilations. More data are needed on prophylactic self-expandable metal stents, local botulinum toxin injection, and oral tranilast as a strategy to prevent post-endoscopic submucosal dissection esophageal strictures. Although preliminary studies of tissue-shielding resection sites with polyglycolic acid sheets and fibrin glue and autologous cell sheet transplantation have demonstrated promising results, additional larger validation studies are needed.

CONCLUSIONS

Oral and locally injected/administered steroids are first-line options for the prevention of esophageal strictures, but additional innovative solutions are being developed.

Complex early Barrett's neoplasia at 3 Western centers: European Barrett's Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection Trial (E-BEST)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is an effective technique to resect early Barrett's neoplasia and has advantages over conventional EMR in that it enables en-bloc resection and accurate histopathologic analysis of cancer resection margins. However, its long learning curve and higher adverse event rate have tempered its uptake in the West. We aimed to analyze the safety and efficacy of ESD when used to resect complex Barrett's neoplasia. The primary endpoint was the en-bloc and R0 resection rate.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of 143 ESDs for Barrett's neoplasia performed in 3 tertiary referral centers from 2008 to 2016.

RESULTS

The mean lesion size was 31.1 mm (range, 5-90) and median follow-up time 21.6 months (interquartile range, 11.0-32.6). In total, 24.5% of lesions (35/143) were scarred after previous endoscopic resection, surgery, or radiotherapy. The en-bloc resection rate was 90.8% and R0 resection rate 79% in this series. The overall adverse event rate was 3.5% (1.4% bleeding, 0% perforation, and 2.1% stricture formation). The expanded curative resection rate was 65.8%, reflecting the R0 resection rate and proportion of cases with more advanced disease. Submucosal cancer was identified as a significant factor affecting the R0 resection rate.

CONCLUSION

We demonstrated the feasibility and safety of ESD in the West for resection of complex Barrett's neoplasia including large, nodular, or scarred lesions. This is a safe and effective technique with a low adverse event rate when performed by an experienced operator. The en-bloc resection rate reached a plateau once 30 procedures had been performed.

Management of Nodular Neoplasia in Barrett's Esophagus: Endoscopic Mucosal Resection and Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection

Endoscopic resection has proven highly effective and safe in the removal of focal early neoplastic lesions in Barrett's esophagus and is considered the cornerstone of endoscopic treatment. Several techniques are available for endoscopic resection in Barrett's esophagus. The most widely used technique for piecemeal resection of early Barrett's neoplasia is the ligate-and-cut technique. Newer techniques such as endoscopic submucosal dissection may also play a role in the treatment of neoplastic Barrett's esophagus. Treatment of early Barrett's neoplasia should be centralized and limited to expert centers with a high-volume load and sufficient expertise in the detection and treatment of esophageal neoplasia.

A randomised trial of endoscopic submucosal dissection versus endoscopic mucosal resection for early Barrett's neoplasia

BACKGROUND

For endoscopic resection of early GI neoplasia, endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) achieves higher rates of complete resection (R0) than endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). However, ESD is technically more difficult and evidence from randomised trial is missing.

OBJECTIVE

We compared the efficacy and safety of ESD and EMR in patients with neoplastic Barrett's oesophagus (BO).

DESIGN

BO patients with a focal lesion of high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia (HGIN) or early adenocarcinoma (EAC) ≤3 cm were randomised to either ESD or EMR. Primary outcome was R0 resection; secondary outcomes were complete remission from neoplasia, recurrences and adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in patient and lesion characteristics between the groups randomised to ESD (n=20) or EMR (n=20). Histology of the resected specimen showed HGIN or EAC in all but six cases. Although R0 resection defined as margins free of HGIN/EAC was achieved more frequently with ESD (10/17 vs 2/17, p=0.01), there was no difference in complete remission from neoplasia at 3 months (ESD 15/16 vs EMR 16/17, p=1.0). During a mean follow-up period of 23.1±6.4 months, recurrent EAC was observed in one case in the ESD group. Elective surgery was performed in four and three cases after ESD and EMR, respectively (p=1.0). Two severe AEs were recorded for ESD and none for EMR (p=0.49).

CONCLUSIONS

In terms of need for surgery, neoplasia remission and recurrence, ESD and EMR are both highly effective for endoscopic resection of early BO neoplasia. ESD achieves a higher R0 resection rate, but for most BO patients this bears little clinical relevance. ESD is, however, more time consuming and may cause severe AE.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT1871636.

Current Endoscopic Approaches for the Treatment of Barrett Esophagus

Barrett esophagus (BE) is the only identifiable premalignant condition for esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), a cancer associated with a poor 5-year survival rate. The stepwise pathologic progression of BE to invasive cancer provides an opportunity to halt progression and potentially decrease incidence and ultimately the morbidity and mortality related to this lethal cancer. Endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) in patients at increased risk of progression to invasive EAC (intramucosal EAC, high-grade dysplasia, and low-grade dysplasia) is a practice that is endorsed by multiple societies and has replaced esophagectomy as the standard of care for these patients. Although the effectiveness, safety, and durability of EET have been demonstrated in several studies, this review addresses the several challenges with EET that need to be considered to optimize patient outcomes. Finally, the critical role of training, competence, and quality indicators in EET are emphasized in this era of value-based health care practice.

Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for Barrett's Esophagus

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is an increasingly popular minimally invasive technique that is used for the management of superficial lesions in the upper and lower gastrointestinal tract. The goal of this article is to describe the indications and technique of EMR, with a focus on the endoscopic management of Barrett's esophagus (BE). The two major EMR techniques-cap EMR and band EMR-will be presented, along with a discussion of their efficacy as well as their integration into the broader treatment paradigm of endoscopic eradication therapy for BE.

Non-radical, stepwise complete endoscopic resection of Barrett's epithelium in short segment Barrett's esophagus has a low stricture rate

Background and aims: Radical endoscopic excision of Barrett's epithelium performing 4 - 6 endoscopic resections during the same endoscopic session results in complete Barrett's eradication but has a high stricture rate (40 - 80 %). Therefore radiofrequency ablation is preferred after endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of visible nodules. We investigated the clinical outcome of non-radical, stepwise endoscopic mucosal resection with a maximum of two endoscopic resections per endoscopic session. Methods: We analysed our prospectively maintained database of patients undergoing esophageal EMR for early neoplasia in Barrett's esophagus from 2009 to 2014. EMR was performed using a maximum of two band ligation mucosectomies per endoscopic session; thereafter, follow-up was 3-monthly and EMR was repeated as required for Barrett's eradication. Results: In total, 118 patients underwent staging EMR for early Barrett's neoplasia. Subsequently, 27 patients underwent surgery/chemotherapy due to deep submucosal or more advanced tumor stages or were managed conservatively. The remaining 91 patients with high grade dysplasia (48), intramucosal (38) or submucosal cancer (5) in the resected nodule underwent further endoscopic therapy with a mean follow-up of 24 months. Remission of dysplasia/neoplasia was achieved in 95.6 % after 12 months treatment. Stepwise endoscopic Barrett's resection resulted in complete Barrett's eradication in 36/91 patients (39.6 %) in a mean of four sessions; 40/91 patients (44.0 %) had a short circumferential Barrett's segment (< 3 cm). In this group, repeated EMR achieved complete Barrett's excision in 85.0 %. One patient developed a stricture (1.1 %), one a delayed bleeding, and there were no perforations. Conclusion: In patients with a short Barrett's segment, non-radical endoscopic Barrett's resection at the time of scheduled endoscopy follow-up allows complete Barrett's eradication with very low stricture rate.

Thoracolaparoscopic dissection of esophageal lymph nodes without esophagectomy is feasible in human cadavers and safe in a porcine survival study

High-risk early esophageal adenocarcinoma (i.e. submucosal invasion >500 nm, poor differentiation, and/or presence of lymphovascular invasion) is currently treated with esophagectomy with lymph node (LN) dissection given the high rates of LN metastases. However, esophagectomy is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. Endoscopic radical resection followed by thoracolaparoscopic LN dissection without concomitant esophagectomy could be an alternative. The study aim was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of thoracolaparoscopic dissection of esophageal LNs in a preclinical setting. (i) In human cadavers, thoracolaparoscopic dissection of LNs involved in drainage of the esophagus was performed. Subsequently, esophagectomy was performed to be able to detect retained LNs. Outcome parameters included the number of dissected LNs, the number of retained LNs in the esophagectomy specimen (ES), and technical success. (ii) In swine, thoracolaparoscopic LN dissection was also performed. After the procedure, the swine survived for 28 days. Thereafter, the swine were sacrificed and esophagectomy was performed. Outcome parameters included the presence of ischemia and/or stenosis in the ES and other complications. (i) In five human cadavers, a median of 26 LNs (interquartile range 22-46) were dissected. In two ES, one retained LN was found: one high paraesophageal, one low paraesophageal. Technical success rate was 100%. (ii) None of the seven porcine ES showed signs of ischemia or stenosis. One swine died because of ventricular fibrillation during surgery; during follow up no complications were observed. Thoracolaparoscopic dissection of LNs involved in the drainage of the esophagus is feasible in human cadavers and swine. The porcine survival study suggests that the esophageal vascularity is not severely compromised by the procedure. As anatomy differs between swine and humans, safety of the procedure will have to be investigated thoroughly before applying this new technique as the treatment of choice.

Single-session endoscopic resection and focal radiofrequency ablation for short-segment Barrett's esophagus with early neoplasia

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The management of early neoplasia in Barrett's esophagus (BE) requires endoscopic resection of visible lesions, followed by radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of the remaining BE. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of combining endoscopic resection and focal RFA in a single endoscopic session in patients with early BE neoplasia.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of patients with early BE neoplasia and a visible lesion undergoing combined endoscopic resection and focal RFA in a single session. Consecutive ablation procedures were performed every 8 to 12 weeks until complete endoscopic and histologic eradication of dysplasia and intestinal metaplasia were reached.

RESULTS

Forty patients were enrolled, with a median C1M2 BE segment, a visible lesion with a median diameter of 15 mm, and invasive carcinoma in 68% of cases. Endoscopic resection was performed by using the multiband mucosectomy technique in 80% of cases, and the Barrx(90) catheter (Barrx Medical, Sunnyvale, Calif) was used for focal ablation. When an intention-to-treat analysis was used, both complete remission of all neoplasia and intestinal metaplasia were 95% after a median follow-up of 19 months. Stenoses occurred in 33% of cases and were successfully managed with a median number of 2 dilations. In 43% of patients, 1 single-session treatment resulted in complete histologic remission of intestinal metaplasia.

CONCLUSIONS

Combining endoscopic resection and focal RFA in a single session appears to be effective. Less-aggressive RFA regimens could limit the adverse event rates.

Endoscopic Resection and Radiofrequency Ablation for Early Esophageal Neoplasia

In the last few decades, endoscopic treatment of early neoplastic lesions in the esophagus has established itself as a valid and less invasive alternative to surgical resection. Endoscopic resection (ER) is the cornerstone of endoscopic therapy. Next to the curative potential of ER, by removing neoplastic lesions, ER may also serve as a diagnostic tool. The relatively large tissue specimens obtained with ER enable accurate histological staging of a lesion, allowing for optimal decision-making for further patient management. ER was pioneered in Japan, mainly for the resection of gastric lesions and squamous esophageal neoplasia, and also Western countries have been increasingly implementing ER in the treatment of early gastroesophageal neoplasia, mostly associated with Barrett's esophagus (BE). In BE, however, there is still a risk of metachronous lesions in the remainder of the Barrett's after focal ER. Additional treatment of all Barrett's mucosa is therefore advised. Currently, the most effective method for this is by using radiofrequency ablation (RFA). This review will provide an overview of indications for ER and RFA. Key Messages and Conclusions: Endoscopic management of early esophageal neoplasia is a safe and valid alternative to surgery and is nowadays the treatment of choice. ER is the mainstay of endoscopic management of early esophageal neoplasia since it allows for removal of neoplastic lesions and provides a large tissue specimen for histological evaluation. In case of early neoplasia in BE, focal ER should be complemented by eradication of the remaining Barrett's mucosa. RFA has proven to be a safe and effective modality to achieve complete eradication of Barrett's mucosa.

A randomized trial comparing multiband mucosectomy and cap-assisted endoscopic resection for endoscopic piecemeal resection of early squamous neoplasia of the esophagus

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Piecemeal endoscopic resection for esophageal high grade intraepithelial neoplasia (HGIN) or early squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is usually performed by cap-assisted endoscopic resection. This requires submucosal lifting and multiple snares. Multiband mucosectomy (MBM) uses a modified variceal band ligator without submucosal lifting. In high-risk areas where ESCC is common and endoscopic expertise is limited, MBM may be a better technique. We aimed to compare MBM to the cap-assisted technique for piecemeal endoscopic resection of esophageal ESCCs.

METHODS

Patients with mucosal HGIN/ESCC (2 - 6 cm, maximum two-thirds of esophageal circumference) were included. Lesions, delineated by 1.25 % Lugol staining, were randomized to MBM or cap-assisted piecemeal resection. Endpoints were procedure time and costs, complete endoscopic resection, adverse events, and absence of HGIN/ESCC at 3-month and 12-month follow-up. 

RESULTS

Endoscopic resection was performed in 84 patients (59 men, mean age 60) using MBM (n = 42) or the endoscopic resection cap (n = 42). There were no differences in baseline characteristics. Endoscopic complete resection was achieved in all lesions. Procedure time was significantly shorter with MBM (11 vs. 22 minutes, P < 0.0001). One perforation, seen after using the endoscopic resection cap, was treated conservatively. Total costs of disposables were lower for MBM (€200 vs. €251, P = 0.04). At 3-month and 12-month follow-ups none of the patients had HGIN/ESCC at the resection site.

CONCLUSION

Piecemeal endoscopic resection of esophageal ESCC with MBM is faster and cheaper than with the endoscopic resection cap. Both techniques are highly effective and safe. MBM may have significant advantages over the endoscopic resection cap technique, especially in countries where ESCC is extremely common but limited endoscopic expertise and resources exist. (Netherlands trial register: NTR 3246.).

Endoscopic treatments for dysplastic Barrett's esophagus: resection, ablation, what else?

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic eradication therapy for dysplastic Barrett's esophagus (BE) comprises resection and mucosal ablation techniques. Over the years, these techniques have been tried with success, not only for dysplastic Barrett's epithelium but also for non-dysplastic Barrett's epithelium and early adenocarcinoma. Endoscopic resection is usually carried out for visible lesions, either as endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), which is practiced widely in Western countries, or as endoscopic submucosal dissection, which is more popular in Japan and throughout Asia. Among ablative techniques are photodynamic therapy, cryotherapy, and radiofrequency ablation (RFA).

METHODS

We reviewed the published evidence pertaining to endoscopic treatments of dysplastic BE, with emphasis on the various resection and ablative techniques, their safety, efficacy, durability of effect, and tolerability.

RESULTS

Both resection and ablation procedures performed endoscopically have been proved effective, and safe for treating dysplastic BE and early adenocarcinoma. Among the ablative techniques, RFA has shown to be more effective and safe, and is preferred for most cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic therapies have revolutionized the treatment of BE and have minimized the need for surgical intervention in many patients. Concomitant treatment of acid reflux with proton pump inhibitors and continuous surveillance are essential. Combination techniques such as EMR followed by RFA may be also considered in some cases.

Endoscopic mucosal resection of early oesophageal neoplasia in patients requiring anticoagulation: is it safe?

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) has become the standard treatment for early oesophageal neoplasia. The mucosal defect caused by EMR usually takes several weeks to heal. Despite guidelines on high-risk endoscopic procedures in patients on anticoagulation, evidence is lacking whether EMR is safe in such patients. We investigated the immediate and delayed bleeding risk in patients undergoing diagnostic or therapeutic oesophageal EMR comparing patients requiring warfarin anticoagulation with a control group.

METHODS

Warfarin was stopped 5 days before the planned EMR and restarted on the evening following the procedure. Patients with high-risk conditions, such as recent pulmonary thromboemboli, received bridging with low molecular weight heparin. All EMRs were performed when the INR was <1.5. Bleeding events on the day of the EMR and within 3 months post-procedure were documented.

RESULTS

One hundred and seventeen consecutive patients with early oesophageal neoplasia were included. Sixty-eight EMRs were performed in 15 patients requiring anticoagulation. One patient on warfarin was readmitted 10 days after EMR with haematemesis and melaena. Out of 400 EMRs in 102 controls, 26 immediate bleeding events occurred requiring endoscopic intervention. One delayed bleeding event (melaena) occurred in the control group. The number of bleeding events did not differ between groups [p = 0.99; odds ratio 1.01 (0.30-3.44)], neither for acute (p = 0.76) nor delayed bleeding (p = 0.24).

CONCLUSION

EMR of early oesophageal neoplasia can be safely performed in patients requiring anticoagulation when warfarin is discontinued 5 days before the endoscopic intervention and reinstituted on the evening of the procedure day.

Endoscopic approaches for early-stage esophageal cancer: current options

Early esophageal cancer is confined to the mucosa or submucosa of the esophagus. While most esophageal cancer is detected at an advanced stage (requiring surgical resection, chemotherapy, and radiation), early-stage mucosal lesions may be detected through Barrett's surveillance programs or incidentally on diagnostic upper endoscopies performed for other reasons. These early-stage cancers are often amenable to endoscopic therapies, including mucosal resection, ablation, and cryotherapy. Studies suggest equivalent survival rates and reduced morbidity but higher recurrence rates with endoscopic removal of early-stage cancers compared to surgical resection. There is emerging data regarding the efficacy and long-term outcomes of endoscopic therapy for early esophageal cancer that is promising, and further research is needed to better define the role of endoscopic therapy in the management of early esophageal cancer.

Challenges with Endoscopic Therapy for Barrett's Esophagus

Barrett's esophagus is the only identifiable premalignant condition for esophageal adenocarcinoma. Endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) has revolutionized the management of Barrett's-related dysplasia and intramucosal cancer. The primary goal of EET is to prevent progression to invasive esophageal adenocarcinoma and ultimately improve survival rates. There are several challenges with EET that can be encountered before, during, or after the procedure that are important to understand to optimize the effectiveness and safety of EET and ultimately improve patient outcomes. This article focuses on the challenges with EET and discusses them under the categories of preprocedural, intraprocedural, and postprocedural challenges.

Endoscopic Mucosal Resection and Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Endoscopic Therapy of Barrett's Esophagus-related Neoplasia

A major paradigm shift has occurred in the management of dysplastic Barrett's esophagus (BE) and early esophageal carcinoma. Endoscopic therapy has now emerged as the standard of care for this disease entity. Endoscopic resection techniques like endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection combined with ablation techniques help achieve long-term curative success comparable with surgical outcomes, in this subgroup of patients. This article is an in-depth review of these endoscopic resection techniques, highlighting their role and value in the overall management of BE-related dysplasia and neoplasia.

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

Background and study aims

Multiband mucosectomy (MBM) is widely used for the endoscopic resection of early neoplasia in the upper gastrointestinal tract. A new MBM-device may have advantages over the current MBM-device with improved visualization, easier passage of accessories, and higher suction power due to different trip wire and cap.

Methods

Rubber bands were released one by one for both MBM-devices while endoscopic images were collected. First, free endoscopic view was assessed by computer-assisted measurements (quantitative) and by ranking the images by a panel of 11 endoscopists (qualitative). Second, using a visual analog scale, three ‘blinded’ endoscopists assessed introduction and advancement of three types of endoscopic devices through the working channel of a diagnostic endoscope with the MBM-devices assembled. Third, suction power was evaluated by a manometer attached to the cap of the assembled MBM-devices in four endoscopes. Negative pressures were measured after 5 and 10 s of suction and repeated five times. The passage and suction experiments were performed with dry trip wires and repeated after soaking with bloody, mucous fluids.

Results

With all bands present, endoscopic views were 90 and 40 % in the new and current MBM-device, respectively. With the release of more bands, differences slowly disappeared. The panel scored a better endoscopic view in the new MBM-device (p = 0.03). Passage of all accessories was considered significantly easier in the new MBM-device. With the associated snare in the working channel, suction power was significantly better with the new MBM-device.

Conclusion

Compared to the currently available MBM-device, the new MBM-device provides improved endoscopic visibility, smoother passage of accessories, and higher suction power.

Advanced endoscopic therapeutics in Barrett's neoplasia: where are we now and where are we heading?

Over the last 10 years, there have been considerable changes in how we manage Barrett's neoplasia, with the shift away from conventional surgery and moving toward endotherapy for treating dysplasia and early cancer. In this editorial, we will review these changes and look forward to the possible developments which may occur over the next decade.

Multiband mucosectomy for advanced dysplastic lesions in the upper digestive tract

Endoscopic resection (ER) is at present an accepted treatment for superficial gastrointestinal neoplasia. ER provides similar efficacy to surgery; however, it is minimally invasive and less expensive. Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is superior to biopsy for diagnosing advanced dysplasia and can change the diagnostic grade and the management. Several EMR techniques have been described that are alternatively used dependent upon the endoscopist personal experience, the anatomic conditions and the endoscopic appearance of the lesion to be resected. The literature suggests that EMR offers comparable outcomes to surgery for selected indications. EMR techniques using a cap fitted endoscope and EMR using a ligation device [multiband mucosectomy (MBM)] are the most frequently use. MBM technique does not require submucosal injection as with the endoscopic resection-cap technique, multiple resections can be performed with the same snare, pre-looping the endoscopic resection-snare in the ridge of the cap is not necessary, MBM does not require withdrawal of the endoscope between resections and up to six consecutive resections can be performed. This reduces the time and cost required for the procedure, while also reducing patient discomfort. Despite the increasing popularity of MBM, data on the safety and efficacy of this technique in upper gastrointestinal lesions with advanced dysplasia, defined as those lesions that have high-grade dysplasia or early cancer, is limited.

Comparison of the clinical value of multi-band mucosectomy versus endoscopic mucosal resection for the treatment of patients with early-stage esophageal cancer

The present study aimed to compare the clinical value of multi-band mucosectomy (MBM) versus endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for the treatment of patients with early-stage esophageal cancer. Between January 2011 and December 2012, 68 patients with early-stage esophageal cancer who underwent MBM and EMR were enrolled into the present study. The curative resection rate, duration of surgery, complications and follow-up records were retrospectively analyzed. Of the 68 patients included, 33 were treated with MBM and 35 with EMR. There was no significant difference in the rate of complete resection between the MBM and EMR groups (P>0.05). The mean duration of surgery in the MBM group was statistically lower than that in the EMR group (P<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the intraoperative and post-operative complications between the MBM and EMR groups (P>0.05). Esophageal cancer reoccurred in 2 patients treated with MBM and 1 patient treated with EMR during the follow-up period (range, 3-24 months). Overall, MBM can be considered a better surgical option for the management of patients with early-stage esophageal cancer, as it offers higher histological curative resection rates and improved safety. However, further studies and a larger follow-up period are required to confirm the long-term curative effect.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Mucosal Biopsy versus Endoscopic Mucosal Resection in Barrett's Esophagus and Related Superficial Lesions

Background. Endoscopic surveillance for early detection of dysplastic or neoplastic changes in patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE) depends usually on biopsy. The diagnostic and therapeutic role of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) in BE is rapidly growing. Objective. The aim of this study was to check the accuracy of biopsy for precise histopathologic diagnosis of dysplasia and neoplasia, compared to EMR in patients having BE and related superficial esophageal lesions. Methods. A total of 48 patients with previously diagnosed BE (36 men, 12 women, mean age 49.75 ± 13.3 years) underwent routine surveillance endoscopic examination. Biopsies were taken from superficial lesions, if present, and otherwise from BE segments. Then, EMR was performed within three weeks. Results. Biopsy based histopathologic diagnoses were nondysplastic BE (NDBE), 22 cases; low-grade dysplasia (LGD), 14 cases; high-grade dysplasia (HGD), 8 cases; intramucosal carcinoma (IMC), two cases; and invasive adenocarcinoma (IAC), two cases. EMR based diagnosis differed from biopsy based diagnosis (either upgrading or downgrading) in 20 cases (41.67%), (Kappa = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.170–0.69). Conclusions. Biopsy is not a satisfactory method for accurate diagnosis of dysplastic or neoplastic changes in BE patients with or without suspicious superficial lesions. EMR should therefore be the preferred diagnostic method in such patients.

Simultaneous use of endoscopic resection and radiofrequency ablation is not safe in an esophageal porcine model

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is safe and effective for eradication of Barrett’s esophagus after endoscopic resection (ER) of neoplasia. Widespread ER, however, is likely to induce stenosis, hampering subsequent circumferential RFA. A ‘single step’ procedure with ER and circumferential RFA in the same session may avoid this problem. Two variants are possible: circumferential RFA of Barrett’s esophagus including the lesion followed by ER of the ablated lesion (‘RFA→ER’), or ER of the lesion directly followed by circumferential RFA of remaining Barrett’s esophagus including the resection wound (‘ER→RFA’). First aim was to evaluate perforation risk of ‘ER→RFA’ using increasing RFA energies. Second aim was to compare stenosis rate after ‘ER→RFA’ versus ‘RFA→ER’. In Experiment 1, 24 areas in six pigs underwent widespread ER directly followed by circumferential RFA with increasing energies (2 x 10, 2 x 12-6 x 12 J/cm(2)) in the esophagus. In Experiment 2, eight pigs each had four treatment areas randomized: ‘ER→RFA’, RFA alone, ER alone, and ‘RFA→ER’. No acute perforations occurred when ablating ER wounds. Two delayed perforations occurred: one in experiment 1, another in experiment n2 at the ‘ER→RFA’ area. The remaining seven pigs in experiment 2 showed stenosis in all ‘ER→RFA’ and ‘RFA→ER’ areas versus 5/7 RFA alone areas, and 0/7 ER alone areas. In conclusion, the ‘single step’ variant ‘ER→RFA’ is not safe in this porcine model and seems therefore not ethical to evaluate in humans at this stage. Given the high rate of stenosis after ‘RFA→ER’ and RFA alone, one might question the validity of the porcine model for this type of experiments.