Endoscopic submucosal dissection of T1 cancer with colonic diverticulum by pocket-creation method

Feasibility and safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection for lesions in proximity to a colonic diverticulum

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for diverticulum-associated colorectal lesions is generally contraindicated because of the high risk of perforation. Several studies on patients with such lesions treated with ESD have been reported recently. However, the feasibility and safety of ESD for lesions in proximity to a colonic diverticulum (D-ESD) have not been fully clarified. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of D-ESD.

METHODS

D-ESD was defined as ESD for lesions within approximately 3 mm of a diverticulum. Twenty-six consecutive patients who underwent D-ESD were included. Two strategic approaches were used depending on whether submucosal dissection of the diverticulum-related part was required (strategy B) or not (strategy A). Treatment outcomes and adverse events associated with each strategy were analyzed.

RESULTS

The en bloc resection rate was 96.2%. The rates of R0 and curative resection in strategies A and B were 80.8%, 73.1%, 84.6%, and 70.6%, respectively. Two cases of intraoperative perforation and one case of delayed perforation occurred. The delayed perforation case required emergency surgery, but the other cases were managed conservatively.

CONCLUSION

D-ESD may be a feasible treatment option. However, it should be performed in a high-volume center by expert hands because it requires highly skilled endoscopic techniques.

Pocket-creation method improves efficacy of colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: a system review and meta-analysis

The pocket-creation method (PCM) is a new strategy for endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). The aim of this system review is to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of PCM-ESD compared to conventional ESD (C-ESD) for colorectal neoplasm lesions. We performed literature search using MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL database from inception to 15 February 2020. Studies provided comparison between PCM-ESD and C-ESD for colorectal neoplasm lesions were included. En bloc resection rate, R0 resection rate, occurrence rate of adverse events and operation speed/time were extracted from included studies. Pooled risk difference with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was calculated in meta-analysis. Three cohort studies and one randomized control trial (RCT) were included, which contained 432 colorectal lesions removed by PCM-ESD and 959 lesions resected by C-ESD. PCM-ESD achieved significantly higher en bloc/R0 resection rate than C-ESD in cohort studies with pooled risk differences of 0.05 (CI, 0.03-0.07, I2 = 34%) and 0.14 (CI, 0.04-0.24, I2 = 83%). However, comparison of en bloc/R0 resection rate between two surgery strategies could not be estimated in RCT. Pooled results in cohort studies and data from RCT revealed comparable occurrence rate of adverse events between PCM-ESD and C-ESD. Measurements and outcomes of operation time/speed varied between the included studies and no consistent conclusion could be achieved in this aspect. The results indicate that PCM-ESD is an effective and well-tolerated treatment for colorectal neoplasm lesions and may be a superior treatment to C-ESD in en bloc/R0 resection rate.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection in management of colorectal tumors near or involving a diverticulum: a retrospective case series

Background and study aims  Surgery is the standard treatment for colon tumors associated with diverticulum. U se of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) to treat such tumors is controversial. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and feasibility of ESD in treating superficial colorectal tumors situated near or involving diverticulum. Patients and methods  Consecutive patients from two referral centers who had colorectal tumors near or involving diverticulum treated by ESD were retrospectively studied. Clinicopathological characteristics and clinical outcomes were analyzed. Results  Of the 12 patients studied, six had tumors near diverticulum and six had tumors involving diverticulum. The overall en-bloc R0 resection rate, median tumor size and procedure time were 67 %, 26.5 mm (range, 15 - 80 mm) and 110 minutes (range, 50 - 220 minutes), respectively. For tumors near diverticulum group, the en-bloc R0 resection rate was 100 % and no adverse events (AEs) or residual/recurrent tumors were observed. In contrast, for intradiverticular tumors group, the en-bloc R0 resection rate was low at 33 %, and one AE (perforation) was observed. The diverticula were ≥ 6 mm in diameter in the patients with incomplete resection. However, all but one diverticulum was unrecognized before ESD. Two residual tumors were detected at the 12-month surveillance and one required surgery. Conclusions  This case series indicates that ESD is safe and feasible for treating colorectal tumors near a diverticulum and might be feasible for tumors involving a diverticulum smaller than 6 mm. Selection for smaller diverticulum size may contribute to higher en-bloc R0 resection rates.