Successful endoscopic en bloc full-thickness and complete resection for two adjacent rectal neuroendocrine tumors

Endoscopic mucosal resection with an over-the-scope clip for colorectal tumors (with video)

Background

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection may result in complications or may be unsuitable for tumors that are difficult to treat endoscopically. We investigated the usefulness of a newly developed endoscopic resection technique-EMR with an over-the-scope clip (EMR-O)-for difficult-to-treat lesions.

Method

We retrospectively examined patients who underwent EMR-O for colorectal tumors between September 2017 and January 2024. Patient and lesion characteristics, technical success rates, en bloc resection rates, R0 resection rates, procedure time, histopathology, and the clinical course were evaluated.

Results

EMR-O was performed for 18 patients. Indications for EMR-O included residual or recurrent lesions (seven patients; 38.9%), diverticulum lesions (five patients; 27.8%), appendiceal orifice lesions (three patients; 16.7%), T1 cancers (two patients; 11.1%), and subepithelial tumors (one patient; 5.5%). The median lesion size was 11 mm. The rates of technical success, en bloc resection, and R0 resection were 100%, 86.7%, and 86.7%. The median procedure time was 10 min. The only adverse event was diverticulitis (one patient; 5.5%). Intraoperative and delayed perforation and bleeding were not observed. The pathological resection depths were full-thickness for three patients (16.7%), muscularis resection for four patients (22.2%), and deep submucosal resection for 11 patients (61.1%).

Conclusion

Although EMR-O is limited by the target lesion size, it shortens the procedure time, prevents perforation, and avoids the need for surgery. EMR-O may be a minimally invasive treatment option for small lesions that are difficult to treat endoscopically.

Endoscopic Full Thickness Resection: A Systematic Review

Background Endoscopic full thickness resection (EFTR) is an emerging therapeutic option for resecting subepithelial lesions (SELs) and epithelial neoplasms. We aimed to systematically review the techniques, applications, outcomes, and complications of EFTR.

Methods A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed. All relevant original research articles involving EFTR were included for the review along with case report/series describing novel/rare techniques from 2001 to February 2022.

Results After screening 7,739 citations, finally 141 references were included. Non-exposed EFTR has lower probability of peritoneal contamination or tumor seeding compared with exposed EFTR. Among exposed EFTR, tunneled variety is associated with lower risk of peritoneal seeding or contamination compared with non-tunneled approach. Closure techniques involve though the scope (TTS) clips, loop and clips, over the scope clips (OTSC), full thickness resection device (FTRD), and endoscopic suturing/plicating/stapling devices. The indications of EFTR range from esophagus to rectum and include SELs arising from muscularis propria (MP), non-lifting adenoma, recurrent adenoma, and even early gastric cancer (EGC) or superficial colorectal carcinoma. Other indications include difficult locations (involving appendicular orifice or diverticulum) and full thickness biopsy for motility disorders. The main limitation of FTRD is feasibility in smaller lesions (<20–25 mm), which can be circumvented by hybrid EFTR techniques. Oncologic resection with lymphadencetomy for superficial GI malignancy can be accomplished by hybrid natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) combining EFTR and NOTES. Bleeding, perforation, appendicitis, enterocolonic fistula, FTRD malfunction, peritoneal tumor seeding, and contamination are among various adverse events. Post OTSC artifacts need to be differentiated from recurrent/residual lesions to avoid re-FTRD/surgery.

Conclusion EFTR is safe and effective therapeutic option for SELs, recurrent and non-lifting adenomas, tumors in difficult locations and selected cases of superficial GI carcinoma.

Endoscopic resection using an over-the-scope clip for duodenal neuroendocrine tumors

Background and study aims  Endoscopic resection of duodenal neuroendocrine tumors (DNETs) remains controversial, and its indications are still unclear. This study aimed to evaluate short-term outcomes of a newly developed endoscopic muscularis resection (EMR) method that utilizes an over-the-scope clip (OTSC), termed EMRO, for treating DNETs. Patients and methods  In total, 13 consecutive patients with 14 small (≤ 10 mm) DNETs who underwent EMRO from September 2017 to March 2020 were retrospectively enrolled. EMRO was performed by a single experienced endoscopist. Patients' characteristics and treatment outcomes were assessed. Results  The En bloc and R0 resection rates were 100 % (14/14) and 92.9 % (13/14), respectively. The median pathological resected specimen size was 10 mm, with a median pathological resected tumor size of 6 mm. During the EMRO procedure, there was no occurrence of misplacement of the OTSC to the target lesion. With respect to the pathological resection depth, nine cases (64.3 %) and five cases (35.7 %) were categorized as deep submucosal resection and muscularis resection, respectively, whereas no case was categorized as full-thickness resection. There were no intraoperative or delayed perforations. However, delayed bleeding occurred in two cases. At a median follow-up of 12 months (range 7-36) after EMRO, there was no incidence of local recurrence. At the first follow-up endoscopy performed at 6 months after EMRO, the OTSC was retained in place in two of 14 DNETs (14.3 %). Conclusions  EMRO can be performed safely, by an experienced endoscopist, for small (≤ 10 mm) DNETs.

Comparison of Endoscopic Techniques in the Management of Type I Gastric Neuroendocrine Neoplasia: A Systematic Review

Background. Endoscopic resection is considered the treatment of choice for type I gastric neuroendocrine neoplasia (gNEN) given its indolent behaviour; however, the favoured endoscopic technique to remove these tumours is not well established. Aims. This systematic review is aimed at investigating the best endoscopic management for type I gNEN. Methods. PubMed Central/Medline and Scopus were systematically searched for records up to August 31, 2020. Results. After screening the 675 retrieved records, 6 studies were selected for the final analysis. The main endoscopic resection techniques described were endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). Overall, 112 gNENs were removed by EMR and 77 by ESD. Both techniques showed similar results for complete and en bloc resection (97.4% and 98.7%; 92.3% and 96.3% with ESD and EMR, respectively). ESD was associated with a higher rate of complications than EMR (11.7% vs. 5.4%), but this difference was not statistically significant ( $p=0.17$ ). The rates of recurrence during follow-up were 18.2% and 11.5% for EMR and ESD, respectively. Conclusions. To date, there are no sufficient data showing superiority of a given endoscopic technique over others. Both ESD and EMR seem to be effective in the management of type I gNEN, with a relatively low rate of recurrence.