Successful complete cure en-bloc resection of large nonpedunculated colonic polyps by endoscopic submucosal dissection: a meta-analysis and systematic review

Colorectal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection: Performance of a Novel Hybrid-Technology Knife in an Animal Trial

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) was developed for the removal of benign and early malignant lesions in the gastrointestinal tract. We aimed to evaluate the performance and safety of a novel high-pressure waterjet-assisted ESD knife in colorectal applications. Six female German Landrace pigs with an average weight of 62 kg (range 60-65 kg) were used in this prospective, randomized, and controlled study. Twenty-four ESDs were performed by three endoscopists: Twelve each with the new Erbe HYBRIDknife® flex T-Type (HK-T) and the Olympus DualKnife® J (DK-J), including six rectal and six colonic ESDs per instrument. The order of performance was randomized regarding anatomic position and instrument. As the primary endpoint, ESD knife performance characteristics were combined and rated on a 5-point Likert scale, with 5 Likert points (LP) representing the best response (5 = very good). The HK-T was rated significantly better than the DK-J (4.7 LP versus 4.4 LP, p = 0.0295), mainly because of HK-T injection ability (5 LP versus 3 LP, p < 0.0001) and hemostasis (5 LP versus 4 LP, p = 0.0452). There was no difference in procedure time (HK-T: 35 min versus DK-J: 34 min, p = 0.8005), resection diameter (3.1 cm versus 2.8 cm, p = 0.3492), injection volume (41 mL versus 46 mL, p = 0.5633), and complication rates. HK-T is as effective as DK-J in colorectal ESD in terms of dissection quality but has better injection and hemostatic properties. The impact of these technical advantages on the ESD treatment of patients with large superficial colorectal lesions remains to be clinically verified.

Outcomes for Underwater Endoscopic Mucosal Resection and Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection of 21-30-mm Colorectal Polyps: A Feasible Study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

This randomized controlled trial (RCT) was designed to evaluate the short-term outcomes of underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) of 21-30 mm colonic polyps.

METHOD

We conducted a single-center RCT. Patients diagnosed with suspected colorectal intramucosal carcinoma (21-30 mm and adaptable for both UEMR and ESD) were randomly assigned to the UEMR and ESD groups at a 1:1 ratio. The primary endpoint was the R0 resection rate. We independently performed one-sample tests against the set threshold for each treatment. The significance level was set at p = 0.224.

RESULT

Eleven polyps each in the UEMR and ESD groups, respectively, were analyzed. The R0 resection rate (%) was 36 (95% confidence interval 11-69) and 100 (72-100) for UEMR and ESD, respectively, with a significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.002). The p-value against the set threshold for UEMR was 0.743, whereas that for ESD was < 0.001 (one-sample binomial test). The en bloc resection rates (%) were 82 (48-97) and 100 (72-100) for UEMR and ESD, respectively; however, no significant difference was observed (p = 0.167). The mean treatment time (min) was significantly shorter in the UEMR group (8 ± 6) than in the ESD group (48 ± 29) (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

ESD could achieve a high R0 resection rate, while the en bloc resection rate was comparable between the two treatment techniques with less burden on patients undergoing UEMR for 21-30-mm colorectal polyps.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was registered at the Japan Registry of Clinical Trial as jRCT1030210015 and jRCT1030210177.

Injury to the muscle layer, increasing the risk of post-colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection electrocoagulation syndrome

BACKGROUND AND AIM

In colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), post-ESD electrocoagulation syndrome (PECS) has been recognized as one of the major complications. There are no reports on the relationships between ESD findings and PECS. This study aims to evaluate the risk factors for PECS, including ESD findings such as muscularis propria exposure.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent colorectal ESD between January 2017 and December 2021 in Japan. The grade of injury to the muscle layer caused by ESD was categorized as follows: Grade 0, no exposure of muscularis propria; Grade 1, muscularis propria exposure; Grade 2, torn muscularis propria; and Grade 3, colon perforation. The risk factors for PECS, including injury to the muscle layer, were analyzed by univariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

Out of 314 patients who underwent colorectal ESD, PECS occurred in 28 patients (8.9%). The multivariate analysis showed that female sex (odds ratio [OR] 3.233; 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 1.264-8.265, P = 0.014), large specimen size (≥ 40 mm) (OR 6.138; 95% CI: 1.317-28.596, P = 0.021), long procedure time (≥ 90 min) (OR 2.664; 95% CI: 1.053-6.742, P = 0.039), and Grade 1 or 2 injury to the muscle layer (OR 3.850; 95% CI: 1.090-13.61, P = 0.036) were independent risk factors for PECS.

CONCLUSIONS

Injury to the muscle layer, such as exposure or tear, was identified as a novel independent risk factor for PECS. We should perform colorectal ESD carefully to avoid injuring the muscle layers.

Endoscopic Management of Complex Colorectal Polyps: Current Insights and Future Trends

Most colorectal cancers arise from adenomatous polyps and sessile serrated lesions. Screening colonoscopy and therapeutic polypectomy can potentially reduce colorectal cancer burden by early detection and removal of these polyps, thus decreasing colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. Most endoscopists are skilled in detecting and removing the vast majority of polyps endoscopically during a routine colonoscopy. Polyps can be considered “complex” based on size, location, morphology, underlying scar tissue, which are not amenable to removal by conventional endoscopic polypectomy techniques. They are technically more challenging to resect and carry an increased risk of complications. Most of these polyps were used to be managed by surgical intervention in the past. Rapid advancement in endoscopic resection techniques has led to a decreasing role of surgery in managing these complex polyps. These endoscopic resection techniques do require an expert in the field and advanced equipment to perform the procedure. In this review, we discuss various advanced endoscopic techniques for the management of complex polyps.

High total Joule heat increases the risk of post-endoscopic submucosal dissection electrocoagulation syndrome after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection

BACKGROUND

We hypothesized that thermal damage accumulation during endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) causes the pathogenesis of post-ESD electrocoagulation syndrome (PECS).

AIM

To determine the association between Joule heat and the onset of PECS.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study in patients who underwent colorectal ESD from May 2013 to March 2021 in Japan. We developed a novel device that measures swift coagulation time with a sensor adjacent to the electrosurgical coagulation unit foot switch, which enabled us to calculate total Joule heat. PECS was defined as localized abdominal pain (visual analogue scale ≥ 30 mm during hospitalization or increased by ≥ 20 mm from the baseline) and fever (temperature ≥ 37.5 degrees or white blood cell count ≥ 10000 µ/L). Patients exposed to more or less than the median Joule heat value were assigned to the high and low Joule heat groups, respectively. Statistical analyses included Mann-Whitney U and chi-square tests and logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) analyses.

RESULTS

We evaluated 151 patients. The PECS incidence was 10.6% (16/151 cases), and all patients were followed conservatively and discharged without severe complications. In multivariate analysis, high Joule heat was an independent PECS risk factor. The area under the ROC curve showing the correlation between PECS and total Joule heat was high [0.788 (95% confidence interval: 0.666-0.909)].

CONCLUSION

Joule heat accumulation in the gastrointestinal wall is involved in the onset of PECS. ESD-related thermal damage to the peeled mucosal surface is probably a major component of the mechanism underlying PECS.

Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for management of colorectal polyps

BACKGROUND

The Japanese Society of Gastroenterology (JSGE) published ''Daicho Polyp Shinryo Guideline 2014'' in Japanese and a part of this guideline was published in English as "Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for management of colorectal polyps" in the Journal of Gastroenterology in 2015. A revised version of the Japanese-language guideline was published in 2020, and here we introduce a part of the contents of revised version.

METHODS

The guideline committee discussed and drew up a series of clinical questions (CQs). Recommendation statements for the CQs were limited to items with multiple therapeutic options. Items with established conclusions that had 100% agreement with previous guidelines (background questions) and items with no (or old) evidence that are topics for future research (future research questions: FRQs) were given descriptions only. To address the CQs and FRQs, PubMed, ICHUSHI, and other sources were searched for relevant articles published in English from 1983 to October 2018 and articles published in Japanese from 1983 to November 2018. The Japan Medical Library Association was also commissioned to search for relevant materials. Manual searches were performed for questions with insufficient online references.

RESULTS

The professional committee created 18 CQs and statements concerning the current concept and diagnosis/treatment of various colorectal polyps, including their epidemiology, screening, pathophysiology, definition and classification, diagnosis, management, practical treatment, complications, and surveillance after treatment, and other colorectal lesions (submucosal tumors, nonneoplastic polyps, polyposis, hereditary tumors, ulcerative colitis-associated tumors/carcinomas).

CONCLUSIONS

After evaluation by the moderators, evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for management of colorectal polyps were proposed for 2020. This report addresses the therapeutic related CQs introduced when formulating these guidelines.

Cost of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection Versus Endoscopic Piecemeal Mucosal Resection in the Colorectum

BACKGROUND

Few studies have compared the costs of colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and endoscopic piecemeal mucosal resection (EPMR).

AIMS

Here, we aimed to investigate the cost-effectiveness of these approaches by analyzing clinical outcomes and costs.

METHODS

Data from patients undergoing colorectal ESD and EPMR were retrospectively reviewed. Clinical outcomes (procedure time, complete resection, and recurrence) were compared, and total direct costs (procedural and follow-up) were assessed.

RESULTS

Data from 429 ESD and 115 EPMR patients were included in the analysis. The complete resection rate was significantly higher (83.9% vs. 32.2%, p < 0.001), recurrence rate was lower (0.5% vs. 7.1%, p < 0.001), procedure time was longer (55.4 ± 47.0 vs. 25.6 ± 32.7 min, p < 0.001), and total direct procedural costs at the initial resection were higher (1480.0 ± 728.0 vs. 729.8 ± 299.7 USD, p < 0.001) in the ESD group than in the EPMR group. The total number of surveillance endoscopies was higher in the EPMR group (1.7 ± 1.5 vs. 1.3 ± 1.1, p = 0.003). The cumulative total costs of ESD and EPMR were comparable at 3 and 2 years' follow-up in the adenoma and mucosal/superficial submucosal cancer subgroups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Colorectal ESD was associated with higher complete resection and lower recurrence rates. EPMR showed shorter procedure times and similar cumulative total direct costs. ESD or EPMR should be chosen based on both clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness.

Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society guidelines for colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection/endoscopic mucosal resection

Suitable lesions for endoscopic treatment include not only early colorectal carcinomas but also several types of precarcinomatous adenomas. It is important to establish practical guidelines wherein preoperative diagnosis of colorectal neoplasia and selection of endoscopic treatment procedures are appropriately outlined and to ensure that actual endoscopic treatment is useful and safe in general hospitals when carried out in accordance with guidelines. In cooperation with the Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum, the Japanese Society of Coloproctology, and the Japanese Society of Gastroenterology, the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society compiled colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection/endoscopic mucosal resection guidelines by using evidence-based methods in 2014. The first edition of these guidelines was published 5 years ago. Accordingly, we have published the second edition of these guidelines based on recent new knowledge and evidence.

Management of colorectal laterally spreading tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective and study aims  To evaluate the efficacy and safety of different endoscopic resection techniques for laterally spreading colorectal tumors (LST). Methods  Relevant studies were identified in three electronic databases (PubMed, ISI and Cochrane Central Register). We considered all clinical studies in which colorectal LST were treated with endoscopic resection (endoscopic mucosal resection [EMR] and/or endoscopic submucosal dissection [ESD]) and/or transanal minimally invasive surgery (TEMS). Rates of en-bloc/piecemeal resection, complete endoscopic resection, R0 resection, curative resection, adverse events (AEs) or recurrence, were extracted. Study quality was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and a meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model. Results  Forty-nine studies were included. Complete resection was similar between techniques (EMR 99.5 % [95 % CI 98.6 %-100 %] vs. ESD 97.9 % [95 % CI 96.1 - 99.2 %]), being curative in 1685/1895 (13 studies, pooled curative resection 90 %, 95 % CI 86.6 - 92.9 %, I ²  = 79 %) with non-significantly higher curative resection rates with ESD (93.6 %, 95 % CI 91.3 - 95.5 %, vs. 84 % 95 % CI 78.1 - 89.3 % with EMR). ESD was also associated with a significantly higher perforation risk (pooled incidence 5.9 %, 95 % CI 4.3 - 7.9 %, vs. EMR 1.2 %, 95 % CI 0.5 - 2.3 %) while bleeding was significantly more frequent with EMR (9.6 %, 95 % CI 6.5 - 13.2 %; vs. ESD 2.8 %, 95 % CI 1.9 - 4.0 %). Procedure-related mortality was 0.1 %. Recurrence occurred in 5.5 %, more often with EMR (12.6 %, 95 % CI 9.1 - 16.6 % vs. ESD 1.1 %, 95 % CI 0.3 - 2.5 %), with most amenable to successful endoscopic treatment (87.7 %, 95 % CI 81.1 - 93.1 %). Surgery was limited to 2.7 % of the lesions, 0.5 % due to AEs. No data of TEMS were available for LST. Conclusions  EMR and ESD are both effective and safe and are associated with a very low risk of procedure related mortality.

Clinical guidelines for endoscopic mucosal resection of non-pedunculated colorectal lesions

This document summarizes the contents of the Clinical Guidelines for the Endoscopic Mucosal Resection of Non-Pedunculated Colorectal Lesions that was developed by the working group of the Spanish Society of Digestive Endoscopy (GSEED of Endoscopic Resection). This document presents recommendations for the endoscopic management of superficial colorectal neoplastic lesions.

Current practices in endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal neoplasms: a survey of indications among Korean endoscopists

Background/Aims

The indications for colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) vary in clinical practice. To establish colorectal ESD as a standard treatment, standard indications are essential. For establishing standard indications for colorectal ESD, we surveyed the preferences and criteria of endoscopists for colorectal ESD in their practices.

Methods

A multiple-choice questionnaire was sent to 27 members of the Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy/ESD group. The indications of endoscopists for selecting ESD as a treatment for colorectal tumors ≥2 cm in diameter were surveyed.

Results

On the basis of the preprocedural assessment of histology, adenoma with high-grade dysplasia, mucosal cancer, and shallow submucosa invasive cancer were included in the indication for ESD. Based on gross morphology, laterally spreading tumor (LST) granular nodular mixed type, LST-nongranular (LST-NG) flat elevated type, and LST-NG pseudodepressed type were included. On the basis of the pit pattern by Kudo classification, types III, IV, and V-I were included. Based on the narrow band imaging pattern by Sano classification, types II and III-a were included. Other lesions, such as sporadic localized tumors in chronic inflammation and local residual early carcinoma after endoscopic resection, were also included in the indication for ESD.

Conclusions

The indications of Korean endoscopists for colorectal ESD are broader than those in recent guidelines, and tend to include more benign-looking tumors. To find the appropriate indications for colorectal ESD, systematic data collection and analysis are required to reach a consensus in a timely manner.

Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and study aims: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is an advanced endoscopic technique that allows en-bloc resection of gastrointestinal tumor. We systematically review the medical literature in order to evaluate the safety and efficacy of colorectal ESD. Patients and methods: We performed a comprehensive literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Ovid, CINAHL, and Cochrane for studies reporting on the clinical efficacy and safety profile of colorectal ESD. Results: Included in this study were 13833 tumors in 13603 patients (42 % female) who underwent colorectal ESD between 1998 and 2014. The R0 resection rate was 83 % (95 % CI, 80 - 86 %) with significant between-study heterogeneity (P < 0.001) which was partly explained by difference in continent (P = 0.004), study design (P = 0.04), duration of the procedure (P = 0.009), and, marginally, by average tumor size (P = 0.09). Endoscopic en bloc and curative resection rates were 92 % (95 % CI, 90 - 94 %) and 86 % (95 % CI, 80 - 90 %), respectively. The rates of immediate and delayed perforation were 4.2 % (95 % CI, 3.5 - 5.0 %) and 0.22 % (95 % CI, 0.11 - 0.46 %), respectively, while rates of immediate and delayed major bleeding were 0.75 % (95 % CI, 0.31 - 1.8 %) and 2.1 % (95 % CI, 1.6 - 2.6 %). After an average postoperative follow up of 19 months, the rate of tumor recurrence was 0.04 % (95 % CI, 0.01 - 0.31) among those with R0 resection and 3.6 % (95 % CI, 1.4 - 8.8 %) among those without R0 resection. Overall, irrespective of the resection status, recurrence rate was 1.0 % (95 % CI, 0.42 - 2.1 %). Conclusions: Our meta-analysis, the largest and most comprehensive assessment of colorectal ESD to date, showed that colorectal ESD is safe and effective for colorectal tumors and warrants consideration as first-line therapy when an expert operator is available.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection of gastric tumors: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM: To systematically review the medical literature in order to evaluate the safety and efficacy of gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD).

METHODS: We performed a comprehensive literature search of MEDLINE, Ovid, CINAHL, and Cochrane for studies reporting on the clinical efficacy and safety profile of gastric ESD.

RESULTS: Twenty-nine thousand five hundred and six tumors in 27155 patients (31% female) who underwent gastric ESD between 1999 and 2014 were included in this study. R0 resection rate was 90% (95%CI: 87%-92%) with significant between-study heterogeneity (P < 0.001) which was partly explained by difference in region (P = 0.02) and sample size (P = 0.04). Endoscopic en bloc and curative resection rates were 94% (95%CI: 93%-96%) and 86% (95%CI: 83%-89%) respectively. The rate of immediate and delayed perforation rates were 2.7% (95%CI: 2.1%-3.3%) and 0.39% (95%CI: 0.06%-2.4%) respectively while rates of immediate and delayed major bleeding were 2.9% (95%CI: 1.3-6.6) and 3.6% (95%CI: 3.1%-4.3%). After an average follow-up of about 30 mo post-operative, the rate of tumor recurrence was 0.02% (95%CI: 0.001-1.4) among those with R0 resection and 7.7% (95%CI: 3.6%-16%) among those without R0 resection. Overall, irrespective of the resection status, recurrence rate was 0.75% (95%CI: 0.42%-1.3%).

CONCLUSION: Our meta-analysis, the largest and most comprehensive assessment of gastric ESD till date, showed that gastric ESD is safe and effective for gastric tumors and warrants consideration as first line therapy when an expert operator is available.

Endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal lesions: A systematic review

AIM

To assess the efficacy and safety of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for the treatment of colorectal lesions.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted from January 2000 to May 2015. The main outcomes were: recurrence after "en bloc" and "piecemeal" resection; procedure related adverse events; the EMR endoscopic success rate and the completely eradicated resection rate (R0) after ESD.

RESULTS

A total of 66 studies were included in the analysis. The total number of lesions was 17950 (EMR: 11.873; ESD: 6077). Recurrence rate was higher in the EMR than ESD group (765/7303l vs. 50/3910 OR 8.19, 95% CI 6.2-10.9 p<0.0001). EMR-en bloc resection was achieved in 6793/10803 lesions (62.8%) while ESD-en bloc resection was obtained in 5500/6077 lesions (90.5%) (OR 0.18, p<0.0001, 95% CI 0.16-0.2). Perforation occurred more frequently in ESD than in EMR group (p<0.0001, OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.15-0.24).

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic resection of large colorectal lesions is safe and effective. Compared with EMR, ESD results in higher "en bloc" resection rate and lower local recurrence rate, however ESD has high procedure-related complication rates.

Early Outcomes of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Colorectal Neoplasms According to Clinical Indications

BACKGROUND

Although endoscopic submucosal dissection has been shown to be safe and effective for colorectal tumors, its clinical outcomes vary.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to assess the outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection according to clinical indications.

DESIGN

This is a prospective, multicenter, single-arm study.

SETTING

The study was conducted at special hospitals for colorectal diseases and cancers.

PATIENTS

The study population included consecutive patients aged 20 to 80 years who underwent colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection for 1) early colorectal cancer, 2) laterally spreading tumors ≥2 cm in diameter, and 3) submucosal tumors.

INTERVENTIONS

Procedures were performed by experienced colonoscopists.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary end points were en bloc and curative resection rates. En bloc resection was defined as endoscopic one-piece resection without tumor fragmentation. Curative resection was defined as en bloc resection and no pathologic requirement for additional surgery. Secondary end points included procedure time, complications, and hospital stay.

RESULTS

Of 321 patients, 317 (98.8%) underwent en bloc resection and 231 (72.0%) underwent curative resection. The mean procedure time was 46.2 minutes. Mean hospital stay after the procedure was 3.1 days. Perforation occurred in 2 patients (0.6%), and bleeding occurred in 10 (3.1%) patients. All patients with complications were treated by endoscopic clipping or nonoperative management. Fifteen patients (4.7%) underwent additional radical surgery owing to the risks of lymph node metastasis. Although tumor size was smaller and procedure time shorter in the submucosal tumor group than in the laterally spreading tumor or early colorectal cancer group, there were no differences in clinical outcomes including en bloc and curative resection rates. Submucosal fibrosis was the only factor affecting endoscopic submucosal dissection procedure-related complications.

LIMITATIONS

Early outcomes in a limited population and the potential for selection bias were limitations of this study.

CONCLUSIONS

Outcomes of colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection were acceptable in selected patients, with no difference in outcomes according to clinical indications. Because submucosal fibrosis can increase complications, it should be minimized before endoscopic submucosal dissection.

Overview of robotic colorectal surgery: Current and future practical developments

Minimal access surgery has revolutionised colorectal surgery by offering reduced morbidity and mortality over open surgery, while maintaining oncological and functional outcomes with the disadvantage of additional practical challenges. Robotic surgery aids the surgeon in overcoming these challenges. Uptake of robotic assistance has been relatively slow, mainly because of the high initial and ongoing costs of equipment but also because of limited evidence of improved patient outcomes. Advances in robotic colorectal surgery will aim to widen the scope of minimal access surgery to allow larger and more complex surgery through smaller access and natural orifices and also to make the technology more economical, allowing wider dispersal and uptake of robotic technology. Advances in robotic endoscopy will yield self-advancing endoscopes and a widening role for capsule endoscopy including the development of motile and steerable capsules able to deliver localised drug therapy and insufflation as well as being recharged from an extracorporeal power source to allow great longevity. Ultimately robotic technology may advance to the point where many conventional surgical interventions are no longer required. With respect to nanotechnology, surgery may eventually become obsolete.

Practice parameters for early colon cancer management: Italian Society of Colorectal Surgery (Società Italiana di Chirurgia Colo-Rettale; SICCR) guidelines

Early colon cancer (ECC) has been defined as a carcinoma with invasion limited to the submucosa regardless of lymph node status and according to the Royal College of Pathologists as TNM stage T1 NX M0. As the potential risk of lymph node metastasis ranges from 6 to 17% and the preoperative assessment of lymph node metastasis is not reliable, the management of ECC is still controversial, varying from endoscopic to radical resection. A meeting on recent advances on the management of colorectal polyps endorsed by the Italian Society of Colorectal Surgery (SICCR) took place in April 2014, in Genoa (Italy). Based on this material the SICCR decided to issue guidelines updating the evidence and to write a position statement paper in order to define the diagnostic and therapeutic strategy for ECC treatment in context of the Italian healthcare system.

JGES guidelines for colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection/endoscopic mucosal resection

Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has become common in recent years. Suitable lesions for endoscopic treatment include not only early colorectal carcinomas but also many types of precarcinomatous adenomas. It is important to establish practical guidelines in which the preoperative diagnosis of colorectal neoplasia and the selection of endoscopic treatment procedures are properly outlined, and to ensure that the actual endoscopic treatment is useful and safe in general hospitals when carried out in accordance with the guidelines. In cooperation with the Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum, the Japanese Society of Coloproctology, and the Japanese Society of Gastroenterology, the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society has recently compiled a set of colorectal ESD/endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) guidelines using evidence-based methods. The guidelines focus on the diagnostic and therapeutic strategies and caveat before, during, and after ESD/EMR and, in this regard, exclude the specific procedures, types and proper use of instruments, devices, and drugs. Although eight areas, ranging from indication to pathology, were originally planned for inclusion in these guidelines, evidence was scarce in each area. Therefore, grades of recommendation were determined largely through expert consensus in these areas.

Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for management of colorectal polyps

BACKGROUND

Recently in Japan, the morbidity of colorectal polyp has been increasing. As a result, a large number of cases of colorectal polyps that are diagnosed and treated using colonoscopy has now increased, and clinical guidelines are needed for endoscopic management and surveillance after treatment.

METHODS

Three committees [the professional committee for making clinical questions (CQs) and statements by Japanese specialists, the expert panelist committee for rating statements by the modified Delphi method, and the evaluating committee by moderators] were organized. Ten specialists for colorectal polyp management extracted the specific clinical statements from articles published between 1983 and September 2011 obtained from PubMed and a secondary database, and developed the CQs and statements. Basically, statements were made according to the GRADE system. The expert panel individually rated the clinical statements using a modified Delphi approach, in which a clinical statement receiving a median score greater than seven on a nine-point scale from the panel was regarded as valid.

RESULTS

The professional committee created 91CQs and statements for the current concept and diagnosis/treatment of various colorectal polyps including epidemiology, screening, pathophysiology, definition and classification, diagnosis, treatment/management, practical treatment, complications and surveillance after treatment, and other colorectal lesions (submucosal tumors, nonneoplastic polyps, polyposis, hereditary tumors, ulcerative colitis-associated tumor/carcinoma).

CONCLUSIONS

After evaluation by the moderators, evidence-based clinical guidelines for management of colorectal polyps have been proposed for 2014.

Efficacy and adverse events of EMR and endoscopic submucosal dissection for the treatment of colon neoplasms: a meta-analysis of studies comparing EMR and endoscopic submucosal dissection

BACKGROUND

EMR and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) are used frequently to remove colon neoplasms. However, the predominance of these procedures has not yet been thoroughly explored.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy and adverse events related to EMR with those related to ESD for colon neoplasms.

DESIGN

A meta-analysis of 8 studies published between 2005 and 2013.

SETTING

Multicenter review.

PATIENTS

Patients from 8 studies yielding 2299 lesions.

INTERVENTIONS

EMR or ESD.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

En bloc resection, curative resection, recurrence, and adverse events.

RESULTS

The pooled odds ratios (OR) (OR [95% confidence interval]) for the tumor size, length of the procedure, en bloc resection, curative resection, recurrence, additional surgery, delayed bleeding, and perforation by ESD versus EMR were 7.38 (6.42-8.34), 58.07 (36.27-79.88), 6.84 (3.30-14.18), 4.26 (3.77-6.57), 0.08 (0.04-0.17), 2.16 (1.16-4.03), 0.85 (0.45-1.60), and 4.96 (2.79-8.85), respectively.

LIMITATIONS

This analysis included only nonrandomized studies.

CONCLUSION

The size of the tumor and rate of en bloc resection and curative resection were higher, and the rate of recurrence was lower in the ESD group versus the EMR group. However, in the ESD group, the procedure was longer, and the rate of additional surgery and perforation was higher, suggesting that the indications for ESD should therefore be rigorously determined in order to avoid such problems.

Training in endoscopic submucosal dissection

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) represents an important advancement in the therapy of early neoplastic gastrointestinal lesions by providing higher en-bloc curative resection rate with lower recurrence compared to endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and by sparing the involved organ and protecting patient’s quality of life. Despite these advantages ESD is associated with long procedure times and a higher rate of complications, making ESD a challenging procedure which requires advanced endoscopic skills. Thus, there has been a recognized need for structured training system for ESD to enhance trainee experience and, to reduce the risks of complications and inadequate treatment. ESD has a very flat learning curve. However, we do not have uniformly accepted benchmarks for competency. Nevertheless, it appears that, in Japan, more than 30 supervised gastric ESD procedures are required to achieve technical proficiency and minimize complications. A number of training algorithms have been proposed in Japan with the aim to standardize ESD training. These algorithms cannot be directly applied in the West due to substantial differences including the availability of highly qualified mentors, the type of pathology seen, choice of devices, and trainee’s background. We propose a training algorithm for Western physicians which integrates both hands-on training courses, animal model work as well as visits to expert centers. No specific preceptor training programs have been yet developed but there is a consensus that these programs are important for permeation of ESD worldwide.

Training in endoscopic submucosal dissection

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) represents an important advancement in the therapy of early neoplastic gastrointestinal lesions by providing higher en-bloc curative resection rate with lower recurrence compared to endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and by sparing the involved organ and protecting patient's quality of life. Despite these advantages ESD is associated with long procedure times and a higher rate of complications, making ESD a challenging procedure which requires advanced endoscopic skills. Thus, there has been a recognized need for structured training system for ESD to enhance trainee experience and, to reduce the risks of complications and inadequate treatment. ESD has a very flat learning curve. However, we do not have uniformly accepted benchmarks for competency. Nevertheless, it appears that, in Japan, more than 30 supervised gastric ESD procedures are required to achieve technical proficiency and minimize complications. A number of training algorithms have been proposed in Japan with the aim to standardize ESD training. These algorithms cannot be directly applied in the West due to substantial differences including the availability of highly qualified mentors, the type of pathology seen, choice of devices, and trainee's background. We propose a training algorithm for Western physicians which integrates both hands-on training courses, animal model work as well as visits to expert centers. No specific preceptor training programs have been yet developed but there is a consensus that these programs are important for permeation of ESD worldwide.

Comparison of clinical outcomes among different endoscopic resection methods for treating colorectal neoplasia

BACKGROUND/AIM

Endoscopic treatments of colorectal neoplasms have yet to be standardized. This study aimed to compare efficacy and tolerability of different endoscopic resection methods for colorectal epithelial tumors.

METHODS

Patients with non-pedunculated colorectal tumors undergoing endoscopic treatments were consecutively enrolled, and their medical records were reviewed retrospectively. The resection methods were classified into three groups: endoscopic mucosal resection with circumferential precutting (EMR-P), endoscopic submucosal dissection with snaring (ESD-S), and endoscopic submucosal dissection alone (ESD). We compared en bloc resection, pathological complete resection, and complications associated with these methods.

RESULTS

Overall, 206 lesions from 203 patients were included in the study (mean size 25.2 ± 10.1 mm). The number of lesions treated with EMR-P, ESD-S, and ESD was 91 (44.2 %), 57 (27.7 %), and 58 (28.2 %), respectively. There was a significant difference in both the en bloc resection rates (EMR-P, 61.5 %; ESD-S, 64.9 %; ESD, 96.6 %; p = 0.001) and complete resection rates (EMR-P, 51.6 %; ESD-S, 54.4 %; ESD, 75.9 %; p = 0.009). Bleeding and perforation were less frequently observed in the EMR-P group. In the subgroup-analysis of lesions less than 20 mm, however, these differences were not observed.

CONCLUSIONS

All endoscopic resection methods, including EMR-P, ESD-S, and ESD, were effective and safe for the treatment of colorectal neoplasms. Technically demanding ESD with high en bloc and complete resection rate should be reserved for the suspicious cancer lesion, which requires the precise histological evaluation. EMR-P with good feasibility can be considered an alternative to ESD for the lesions less than 20 mm.

[Endoscopic submucosal dissection: only for expert endoscopists?]

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) can be applied to early gastrointestinal cancers. This technique was developed to achieve radical curative resection and to reduce unnecessary surgical interventions. ESD was designed in eastern countries and is not widely used in the West. Although ESD represents a major therapeutic advance in endoscopy and is performed with curative intent, the complication rate (hemorrhage, perforation) is higher than reported in other techniques, requiring from endoscopists the acquirement of technical skill and experience through a structured and progressive training program to reduce the morbidity associated with this technique and increase its potential benefits. Although there is substantial published evidence on the applications and results of ESD, there are few publications on training in this technique and a standardized training program is lacking. The current article aims to describe the various proposals for training, as well as the basic principles of the technique, its indications, and the results obtained, since theoretical knowledge that would guide endoscopists during the clinical application of ESD is advisable before training begins. Training in an endoscopic technique has a little value without knowledge of the technique's aims, the situations in which it should be applied, and the results that can be expected.

Value and interpretation of resection margin after a colonoscopic polypectomy for malignant polyps

Purpose

This study was designed to compare the clinicopathologic findings of an endoscopic polypectomy for malignant polyps with subsequent surgery and to evaluate the appropriateness of the pathologic finding criterion of the resection margin as an indicator for surgery in cases of malignant colorectal polyps.

Methods

We examined the clinicopathologic characteristics, complications and prognoses among the patients who underwent a colonoscopic polypectomy in both our hospitals and at other hospitals from April 2003 and April 2010. These patients were divided into two groups, the group (non-operation group) that only underwent a polypectomy (n = 37) and the group (operation group) that underwent a polypectomy with subsequent surgery (n = 33).

Results

There were no differences between two groups in the ratios of the number of men to the number of women, the ages or the comorbidities. In terms of endoscopic findings, we found no differences between the two groups in the locations of the polyps, the sizes of the polyps, or the presence of stalks. However, ulceration of polyps was higher in the non-operation group (51.5% vs. 21.6%; P = 0.009), as was the case with submucosal invasion (75.8% vs. 16.2%; P < 0.005). When an endoscopic polypectomy was performed, incomplete resection margins and specimens with margins involved occurred more frequently in the operation group (93.9% vs. 51.4%; P < 0.005), but no residual tumor was detected in 31 of 33 (93.9%) patients in that group. One pathologist reviewed the specimens of 54 patients (operation group, 19; non-operation group, 36). Six of the 19 polyps (31.6%) in the operation group and fifteen of the 36 polyps (41.7%) in the non-operation group had a margin without cancer cells.

Conclusion

We may accept the criterion of a safe margin, including a coagulation zone. A multidisciplinary approach has to be developed by surgeons, endoscopists and pathologists based on a discussion of the risk factors for the patient before making a decision on the treatment treatment.

Linear array ultrasonography to stage rectal neoplasias suitable for local treatment

BACKGROUND

Because of the many therapeutic options available, a reliable staging is crucial for rectal neoplasia management. Adenomas and cancers limited to the submucosa without lymph node involvement may be treated locally.

AIMS

The aim of this study is to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of endorectal ultrasonography in the staging of neoplasias suitable for local treatment.

METHODS

We considered all patients who underwent endorectal ultrasonography between 2001 and 2010. The study population consisted of 92 patients with 92 neoplasias (68 adenocarcinomas and 24 adenomas). A 5 and 7.5MHz linear array echoendoscope was used. The postoperative histopathologic result was compared with the preoperative staging defined by endorectal ultrasonography. Adenomas and cancers limited to the submucosa were considered together (pT0-1).

RESULTS

The sensitivity, specificity, overall accuracy rate, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of endorectal ultrasonography for pT0-1 were 86%, 95.6%, 91.3%, 94.9% and 88.7%. Those for nodal involvement were 45.4%, 95.5%, 83%, 76.9% and 84%, with 3 false positive results and 12 false negative. For combined pT0-1 and pN0, endorectal ultrasonography showed an 87.5% sensitivity, 95.9% specificity, 92% overall accuracy rate, 94.9% positive predictive value and 90.2% negative predictive value.

CONCLUSION

Endorectal linear array ultrasonography is a reliable tool to detect rectal neoplasias suitable for local treatment.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection for colonic lesions: why and how should we do it?

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a safe and effective alternative to surgery for large non-polypoid colonic lesions and early colorectal carcinoma. In this article, we discuss the development, efficacy and safety of ESD. As the incidence of colorectal cancer is rapidly increasing in Asia, we advocate standardization of ESD program, including patient selection, hardware prerequisites, and training of operators.

Endoscopic colorectal imaging and therapy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Colorectal cancer screening and prevention is a pivotal element in every gastroenterologist practice. Recent advances in imaging technology and treatment opened the field for endoscopic management of large flat colorectal polyps and early cancer.

RECENT FINDINGS

High-definition white light colonoscopy allowed for better characterization of colon polyps, particularly flat lesions. Chromoendoscopy facilitated the identification of colon polyps as well as better endoscopic polyp characterization, with strong correlation with final pathological diagnosis, opening the field of 'virtual' biopsy. One particular technology, confocal endomicroscopy can magnify an image approximately 1000 times resembling optical microscopy with very good correlation with histology. Endoscopic mucosal resection has gained great acceptance to manage flat colorectal polyps with the two major complications being bleeding and perforation, both now under 5% in experienced hands. Endoscopic submucosal resection was developed to increase en-bloc resection (less residual disease) of a flat colorectal lesion but one has to accept a higher perforation rate around 10%.

SUMMARY

Current technology allows for better polyp identification and characterization, which can be managed endoscopically.

Malignant colorectal polyps

Nowadays, the number of cases in which malignant colorectal polyps are removed is increasing due to colorectal cancer screening programmes. Cancerous polyps are classified into non-invasive high grade neoplasia (NHGN), when the cancer has not reached the muscularis mucosa, and malignant polyps, classed as T1, when they have invaded the submucosa. NHGN is considered cured with polypectomy, while the prognosis for malignant polyps depends on various morphological and histological factors. The prognostic factors include, sessile or pedunculated morphology of the polyp, whether partial or en bloc resection is carried out, the degree of differentiation of the carcinoma, vascular or lymphatic involvement, and whether the polypectomy resection margin is tumor free. A malignant polyp at T1 is considered cured with polypectomy if it is a pedunculated polyp (Ip of the Paris classification), it has been completely resected, it is not poorly differentiated, the resection edge is not affected by the tumor and there is no vascular or lymphatic involvement. The sessile malignant polyp (Is of the Paris classification) at T1 is considered not cured with polypectomy. Only in some cases (e.g. older people with high surgical risk) local excision (polypectomy or endoscopic submucosal dissection or conventional endoscopic mucosal resection) is considered the definitive treatment.