EMR + with the AWC improves endoscopic resection speed compared to ESD: a porcine ex-vivo pilot study

Endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection with an external additional working channel (EMR+ and ESD+) are equivalent to using a double-channel endoscope: a systematic evaluation in a porcine ex vivo model

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

With an external additional working channel (AWC) endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) as well as endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) can be extended to techniques termed "EMR+" and "ESD+." These novel techniques are systematically compared to EMR and ESD under the use of a double-channel endoscope (DC).

METHODS

Our trial was conducted prospectively in a pre-clinical porcine animal model (EASIE-R simulator) with standardized gastric lesions measuring 3 or 4 cm.

RESULTS

EMR+ and EMR DC showed both good results for 3 cm lesions with no adverse events and an en bloc resection rate of 73.33% (EMR+) and 60.00% (EMR DC, p = 0.70). They came to their limits in 4 cm lesions with muscularis damages of 20.00% (EMR+), 13.33% (EMR DC, p ≥ 0.99) and decreasing en bloc resection rates of 60.00% (EMR+) and 46.67% (EMR DC, p = 0.72). ESD+ and ESD DC were both reliable concerning en bloc resection rates (100% in all groups) and adverse events (0.00% in 3 cm lesions, 12.50% muscularis damages in both ESD+ and ESD DC in 4 cm lesions). Resection time was slightly shorter in all groups with the AWC compared to DC although only reaching significance in 3 cm ESD lesions (p < 0.05*).

CONCLUSIONS

With the AWC, a standard endoscope can easily be transformed to double-channel functionality. We could show that EMR+ and ESD+ are non-inferior to EMR and ESD under the use of a double-channel endoscope. Consequently, the AWC presents an affordable alternative to a double-channel endoscope for both EMR and ESD.

Near-focus mode for accurate operation during endoscopic submucosal tunneling procedure

INTRODUCTION

When using the endoscopic submucosal tunnel technique (ESTT), the working space in the submucosal tunnel is limited, and the visual field is obscured during close inspection or hemostasis. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of near-focus mode technique for accurate operation during the submucosal tunneling endoscopic procedure.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective two-center study was designed. A total of 51 patients undergoing ESTT procedures with near-focus mode (n = 29) or traditional mode (n = 22) between February 2016 and May 2019 were included in this study.

RESULTS

When using the near-focus mode during the ESTT procedure, it is convenient to ensure a clear image and accurate operation. Adverse events occurred more frequently in the traditional group than in the near-focus group (45.5% vs 17.2%, p = .036). The near-focus group exhibited a lower rate of bleeding compared to the traditional group (0 vs 18.2%, p = .029). Furthermore, the mean hospital stay after the procedure was shorter in the near-focus group than in the traditional group (5.7 days vs 6.7 days, p = .013).

CONCLUSIONS

The visual field is more clearly exposed during submucosal tunneling when using the near-focus mode than when using traditional procedures. This technique appears to be more efficient and secure than the traditional ESTT procedure.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection with an additional working channel (ESD+): a novel technique to improve procedure time and safety of ESD

Background and aims

A new external additional working channel (AWC) was recently introduced by which endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) can be converted to a technique termed “ESD+ ”. We aim to systematically evaluate this novel technique in flat gastric lesions and compare it to classical ESD.

Methods

The study was prospectively conducted in a pre-clinical ex vivo animal model (EASIE-R simulator) with porcine stomachs. Prior to intervention, we set standardized lesions measuring 3 cm or 4 cm in antegrade as well as in retrograde positions.

Results

Overall, 64 procedures were performed by an experienced endoscopist. Both techniques were reliable and showed en bloc resection rates of 100%. Overall, ESD+ reduced time of procedure compared to ESD (24.5 vs. 32.5 min, p = 0.025*). Particularly, ESD+ was significantly faster in retrograde lesions with a median of 22.5 vs. 34.0 min in 3 cm retrograde lesions (p = 0.002*) and 34.5 vs. 41.0 min (p = 0.011*) in 4 cm retrograde lesions. There were 0 perforations with both techniques. In ESD+ , 1 muscularis damage occurred (3.13%) compared to 6 muscularis damages with ESD (18.75%, p = 0.045*).

Conclusions

By its grasp-and-mobilize technique, ESD+ allows potentially faster and safer resections of flat gastric lesions compared to conventional ESD in an ex vivo porcine model. The potential advantages of ESD+ in terms of procedure time may be particularly relevant for difficult lesions in retrograde positions.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00464-020-07808-w) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.