Modified endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection for large esophageal submucosal gland duct adenoma: A case report

BACKGROUND

With the recent improvement of endoscopic techniques, endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration and endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD) have been widely used for accurate diagnosis and dissection acceleration of esophageal tumors.

CASE SUMMARY

We used a modified submucosal tunnel technique during endoscopic en bloc resection in a 58-year-old man with large esophageal submucosal gland duct adenoma (ESGDA). During modified ESTD, the oral end of the involved mucosa was cut transversely, followed by a submucosal tunnel created from the proximal to the distal end, and the anal end of the involved mucosa blocked by the tumor was incised. As a result of retaining submucosal injection solutions using the submucosal tunnel technique, it was possible to reduce the amount of injection required and increase the efficiency and safety of dissection.

CONCLUSION

Modified ESTD is an effective treatment strategy for large ESGDAs. Single-tunnel ESTD appears to be a time-saving procedure compared with conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection.

Two traction methods that can facilitate esophageal endoscopic submucosal dissection

Different traction devices that can provide a visual field and attain appropriate tension at the dissection plane during endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) have been developed. Clip-with-line (CWL) is a classic traction device that can offer per-oral traction toward the direction where the line is drawn. A multicenter randomized controlled trial (CONNECT-E trial) comparing the conventional ESD and CWL-assisted ESD (CWL-ESD) for large esophageal tumors was conducted in Japan. This study showed that CWL-ESD was associated with a shorter procedure time (defined as the time from initiating submucosal injection to completing tumor removal) without increasing the risk of adverse events. Multivariate analysis revealed that whole-circumferential lesion and abdominal esophageal lesion were independent risk factors for technical difficulties, which were defined as a procedure time of > 120 min, perforation, piecemeal resection, inadvertent incision (any accidental incision caused by the electrosurgical knife within the marked area), or handover to another operator. Therefore, techniques other than CWL should be considered for these lesions. Several studies have shown the usefulness of endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD) for such lesions. A randomized controlled trial conducted at five Chinese institutions showed that compared with the conventional ESD, ESTD had a significantly reduced median procedure time for lesions covering ≥ 1/2 of the esophageal circumference. In addition, a propensity score matching analysis conducted at a single Chinese institution showed that compared with the conventional ESD, ESTD had a shorter mean resection time for lesions at the esophagogastric junction. With the appropriate use of CWL-ESD and ESTD, esophageal ESD can be performed more efficiently and safely. Moreover, the combination of these two methods may be effective.

Endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection vs conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection for large colorectal neoplasms: a single-centre retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is still not widely used due to its technical difficulty and the risk of complications. Several techniques, such as traction techniques, pocket techniques and others, have been proposed to facilitate it. One modified pocket technique especially suitable for large lesions is endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD). The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ESTD and compare ESTD to the conventional ESD (CESD) for treating large colorectal lesions.

METHODS

The charts of consecutive patients referred to the Arcispedale Santa Maria Nuova (Reggio Emilia, Italy) for colorectal ESD between January 2014 and February 2021 for colorectal neoplasms > 40 mm were retrospectively analysed. The primary outcome of the study was the en bloc resection rate. Secondary outcomes were complete and curative resection rates, procedure speed, the adverse events rate and the recurrence rate.

RESULTS

There were 59 patients (M:F ratio 29:30, median age 70 years [range 50-93 years]). Of 59 colorectal lesions > 40 mm, 25 were removed by ESTD and 34 by CESD. The en bloc resection rate was 100% in both groups and the complete resection rate was similar (ESTD 92% vs CESD 97.1%, p = 0.569), while the curative resection rate was higher in the CESD group, but not significantly (94.1% vs 76%, p = 0.061). Procedure speed was significantly faster with ESTD (22 vs 17 mm²/min, p = 0.045), and the overall incidence of adverse events was low (6.8%). Eight patients were referred to surgery due to non-curative resection. During follow-up, no recurrence was observed in either treatment group.

CONCLUSION

ESTD achieves a very high en bloc resection rate and is faster than CESD.

Endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection for early esophageal squamous cell carcinoma in patients with cirrhosis: A propensity score analysis

BACKGROUND

Although early esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (EESCC) with cirrhosis is a relatively rare clinical phenomenon, the management of EESCC in cirrhotic patients continues to be a challenge.

AIM

To evaluate the feasibility, safety, efficacy and long-term survival outcomes of endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD) for treating EESCC in patients with cirrhosis.

METHODS

This was a single-center retrospective cohort study. We examined 590 EESCC patients who underwent ESTD between July 14, 2014, and May 26, 2021, from a large-scale tertiary hospital. After excluding 25 patients with unclear lesion areas or pathological results, the remaining 565 patients were matched at a ratio of 1:3 by using propensity score matching. A total of 25 EESCC patients with comorbid liver cirrhosis and 75 matched EESCC patients were ultimately included in the analysis. Parametric and nonparametric statistical methods were used to compare the differences between the two groups. The Kaplan–Meier method was used to create survival curves, and differences in survival curves were compared by the log-rank test.

RESULTS

Among 25 patients with liver cirrhosis and 75 matched noncirrhotic patients, there were no significant differences in intraoperative bleeding (P = 0.234), 30-d post-ESTD bleeding (P = 0.099), disease-specific survival (P = 0.075), or recurrence-free survival (P = 0.8196). The mean hospitalization time and costs were significantly longer (P = 0.007) and higher (P = 0.023) in the cirrhosis group than in the noncirrhosis group. The overall survival rate was significantly lower in the cirrhosis group (P = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

ESTD is technically feasible, safe, and effective for patients with EESCC and liver cirrhosis. EESCC patients with Child-Pugh A disease seem to be good candidates for ESTD.

Comparison between endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection and endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial neoplasia at esophagogastric junction: a case-matched controlled study of a single center from China

BACKGROUND

So far, little evidence is available for the comprehensive comparison of endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD) with endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for the treatment of superficial neoplasia at esophagogastric junction (EGJ).

METHODS

EGJ superficial neoplasia patients with ESTD treatment between January, 2021 and August, 2020 were retrospectively reviewed and individually matched at 1:1 ratio with those with ESD treatment according to lesion size, specimen area and lesion location, forming ESTD and ESD group, respectively. A sample size of 17 patients was collected for each group. Treatment outcomes including resection time, specimen area, and resection speed as well as occurrence of complications were evaluated.

RESULTS

Compared with ESD group, ESTD group got shorter resection time (111.00 ± 11.70 min for ESD group vs. 71.59 ± 6.18 min for ESTD group, p = 0.008) and faster section speed (0.23 ± 0.03 cm2/min for ESD group vs. 0.37 ± 0.06 cm2/min for ESTD group, p = 0.012). No complication was found to occur in ESTD group, while 1 patient with MP damage and 1 with delayed bleeding was found in ESD group.

CONCLUSION

For the treatment of EGJ superficial neoplasia, ESTD is a safer and more effective and reliable endoscopic technique compared with ESD.

Autologous skin-grafting surgery to prevent esophageal stenosis after complete circular endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection: a case-matched controlled study

BACKGROUND

The incidence of postoperative stenosis after endoscopic resection of wholly circumferential superficial esophageal squamous cell neoplasms (SESCNs) is extremely high.

METHODS

Between January 2011 and April 2019, 19 patients who underwent autologous skin-grafting surgery (ASGS) after complete circular endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ccESTD) were enrolled to form the ASGS group. Cases in the ASGS group were individually matched at a 1:1 ratio to cases undergoing fully covered esophageal stent (FCES) placement alone (FCES group) based on pathological diagnosis, curative resection, longitudinal length of ulceration, lack of stent migration, time to stent removal, follow-up period and operators. Baseline characteristics and treatment outcomes were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were comparable between the ASGS group and the FCES group. The incidence of patients with esophageal stenosis after removal of the stent in the ASGS group was significantly reduced compared that in the FCES group (36.8% vs 78.9%, p = 0.020). Comparison of preventive methods (ASGS vs FCES alone) between the stenosis group and nonstenosis group revealed that ASGS accounted for a higher proportion than FCES alone in the nonstenosis group (p = 0.020).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with FCES placement alone, ASGS appeared to be more effective in preventing esophageal stenosis after ccESTD for SESCNs.

Efficacy and safety of endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection for rectal laterally spreading tumors

BACKGROUND

Evidence that comprehensively compares the efficacy and safety of endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD) with endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for rectal laterally spreading tumors (LSTs) is limited.

METHODS

Between January 2009 and June 2018, 143 rectal LSTs in 143 patients who had undergone either ESD (n = 84) or ESTD (n = 59) were included in the study. One-to-one propensity score matching (PSM) was performed, and 50 pairs were selected. The data on patient demographics, treatment information, pathology reports, adverse events and follow-up were collected.

RESULTS

Before PSM, the median specimen area was significantly larger in the ESTD group than in the ESD group (12.56 cm² vs. 6.32 cm², respectively; p < 0.001). The median dissection speed was significantly higher in the ESTD group than in the ESD group (24.53 mm²/min vs. 15.16 mm²/min, respectively; p < 0.001). After PSM, the median dissection speed was significantly higher in the ESTD group than in the ESD group (23.80 mm²/min vs. 17.12 mm²/min, respectively; p < 0.001). In multiple linear regression analysis, significant factors related to a higher dissection speed were the treatment method of ESTD (p < 0.001) and larger specimen area (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

ESTD appears to be a safe and effective method to treat rectal LSTs. Compared with ESD, ESTD appears to achieve a higher dissection speed for rectal LSTs.

Efficacy of endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection versus endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial esophageal neoplastic lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the effectiveness of endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in superficial esophageal neoplastic lesions (SENL).

METHODS

A comprehensive search for studies investigating the efficacy of ESTD and ESD for SENL was conducted to search for relevant studies through PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, SinoMed, CNKI, and Wanfang. Weighted pooled rates were calculated for en bloc resection rate, R0 resection rate, operation time, dissection area, dissection speed, and adverse events. The 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) for effect size were used to calculate the pooled value using the fixed- or random-effects model.

RESULTS

A total of seventeen studies with 1161 patients were identified and included in the meta-analysis. The pooled analysis showed that ESTD had significantly higher en bloc resection (OR 3.98; 95% CI 1.74 to 9.12; p = 0.001) and R0 resection rates (OR 2.29; 95% CI 1.54 to 3.46; p < 0.001) than ESD. The operation time in the ESTD group was shorter than that in the ESD group (SMD = - 0.57; 95% CI - 0.95 to - 0.19; p = 0.003). The dissection area of the ESTD group was larger than that in the ESD group (SMD = 0.49; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.83; p = 0.004), and the dissection speed is faster than that in the ESD group (SMD = 1.52; 95%CI 1.09 to 0.83; p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in esophageal stenosis (p = 0.94) between the two techniques. However, ESTD was superior to ESD in other adverse events (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

ESTD has a significant advantage over ESD in the treatment of SENL. ESTD has significantly higher en bloc and R0 resection rates and reduced adverse events.

Endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection versus conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancers: outcomes of 799 consecutive cases in a single institution

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a standard treatment for early gastric cancers (EGCs), but because of the obscured view and difficulty in submucosal lifting it is time consuming and poses high risk of perforation and bleeding in large lesions. In endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD) technique, good visualization of the submucosal layer can be achieved in the tunnel, it is, therefore, easy to discern the muscularis propria and visualize the vessels in the submucosal area. This study aims to evaluate the technical feasibility, efficacy, and safety of ESTD in comparison with conventional ESD (cESD) technique for treatment of EGCs.

METHODS

This is a single-center retrospective study of 799 consecutive patients with EGCs who underwent ESD. ESTD (n = 141) were performed between 2015 and 2018 and cESD (n = 658) were performed between 2003 and 2015. Using propensity scores to strictly balance the significant variables, we compared treatment outcomes.

RESULTS

After matching, we enrolled 444 patients (n = 111 in ESTD group, n = 333 in cESD group). The resection speeds for lesions of the ESTD were faster than those of cESD (19.3 mm²/min versus 17.7 mm²/min, P = 0.009). There was no need to use additional countertraction by clip-with-line technique or snare for the submucosal dissection in the ESTD procedure. The incidence of perforation was significantly higher in the cESD group (6.0%) than in the ESTD group (0.9%) (P = 0.035). Among 799 patients, four patients who received non-curative ESD had recurrence of gastric cancer.

CONCLUSION

ESTD technique is a safe and feasible treatment procedure for EGCs. It presents many theoretical advantages and may have definite benefits over cESD. ESTD may, therefore, be considered as the standard endoscopic treatment for EGCs.

Current status of endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection for treatment of superficial gastrointestinal neoplastic lesions

INTRODUCTION

With the widespread application of screening endoscopy and development of endoscopy-related instruments, more and more gastrointestinal cancers are detected in an early stage. Endoscopic resection is a preferred method for selected patients with superficial gastrointestinal neoplastic lesions, and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has become a standard method for its ability to perform en bloc resection regardless of the lesion size. ESD can be performed in a conventional or tunneling way, and the latter is termed endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD).

AREA COVERED

In the present review, we provided a comprehensive review on ESTD for treatment of superficial gastrointestinal neoplastic lesions. We mainly focus on technical details, safety and efficacy of ESTD for esophageal, gastric and colorectal lesions. The present review is expected to provide tips for operators who are going to perform ESTD.

EXPERT OPINION

The best indication of ESTD is large superficial esophageal neoplastic lesions (circumferential extent > 1/3 and longitudinal extent > 3 cm). Although ESTD has shown promising primary results for superficial gastric and colorectal neoplastic lesions, it is technically difficult and should be attempted only in experienced hands. Post-treatment stricture is a major concern, and preventive measures are recommended for patients with high risk of post-ESTD stricture.

Efficacy and safety of endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection for superficial esophageal neoplastic lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Presently, endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD) has been a novel therapy for superficial esophageal neoplastic lesions (SENL), especially for circumferential neoplastic lesions. A number of studies have reported the clinical application of ESTD with promising outcomes. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluated the efficacy and safety of ESTD for SENL .

Methods

From 2013 to November 2018, Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane databases were searched to determine studies reporting ESTD treatment of SENL. Weighted pooled rates (WPR) were calculated for en bloc resection, R0 resection and complication of ESTD. Risk ratios (RR) were calculated and pooled to compare the clinical outcomes of ESTD with ESD for SENL.

Results

A total of 9 studies involving 494 patients with 518 esophageal neoplastic lesions were included in our study. WPR for en bloc resection and R0 resection of ESTD was 97.0% (95% CI: 94.7–98.3%) and 84.1% (95% CI: 80.5–87.1%), respectively. WPR for complication was 40.0% (95% CI: 25.8–56.1%). Two studies with 265 patients compared the performance of ESTD with ESD. Pooled RR for en bloc resection and R0 resection was 1.04 (95% CI: 0.95–1.14, P = 0.42) and 1.01 (95% CI: 0.93–1.10, P = 0.73), respectively. Pooled RR for complication was 0.68 (95% CI: 0.46–1.01, P = 0.05).

Conclusion

Our study showed that ESTD is effective for treating SENL with high en bloc resection rate and R0 resection rate, but accompanying by a relatively high complications.

Esophageal bronchogenic cyst excised by endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection: A case report

BACKGROUND

Esophageal bronchogenic cyst (EBC) is a rare congenital disease that is difficult to diagnose preoperatively, and treatment remains controversial.

CASE SUMMARY

We report a 53-year-old Chinese woman hospitalized in our hospital following the discovery of a submucosal protruding mass of the esophagus by upper endoscopy. A preliminary diagnosis of EBC was made by endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), and treatment was accomplished by endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD). The pathological results verified the diagnosis. No scar changes or cystic lesion within the original lesion were found under EUS after a 3-mo follow-up.

CONCLUSION

EUS is valuable for the preliminary diagnosis of EBC and surveillance. ESTD is a safe and effective treatment for EBC. Further evaluation of complications and long-term follow-ups are required.

Endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection for superficial esophageal neoplastic lesions: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The emerging endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD) is becoming an alternative method for superficial esophageal neoplastic lesions. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and feasibility of ESTD for superficial esophageal neoplastic lesions.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature review was conducted to search relevant studies through PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science before 1 December 2018. Studies relating to ESTD for superficial esophageal neoplastic lesions were included. Rates of effectiveness (en bloc resection rate, R0 resection rate, and curative resection rate), rates of feasibility (muscular damage rate, perforation rate, postprocedural bleeding rate, and emphysema rate), and rates of follow-up (recurrence rate and stricture rate) were pooled and analyzed. Forest plots were constructed based on the random-effects model. Sensitivity analyses were also performed if significant heterogeneity existed.

RESULTS

Six studies including 414 patients and 436 superficial esophageal neoplastic lesions that underwent ESTD were available for analysis. The pooled estimates of en bloc resection rate, R0 resection rate, and curative resection rate were 98% (95% CI 95.8-99.0%), 87.0% (95% CI 78.2-92.5%), and 87.6% (95% CI 67.4-96.0%), respectively. The pooled outcomes of muscular damage rate, perforation rate, postprocedural bleeding rate and emphysema rate were 19.1% (95% CI 9.8-33.8%), 2.2% (95% CI 1.1-4.1%), 1.6% (95% CI 0.7-3.5%), and 12.2% (95% CI 4.3-29.9%), respectively. Finally, the pooled results of recurrence and stricture were 4.7% (0.9-20.5%) and 20.9% (11.3-35.2%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

ESTD appears to be an effective and feasible approach for treating superficial esophageal neoplastic lesions. However, future research is needed for new and comprehensive methods to decrease the stricture rate after ESTD.

Consensus on the digestive endoscopic tunnel technique

With the digestive endoscopic tunnel technique (DETT), many diseases that previously would have been treated by surgery are now endoscopically curable by establishing a submucosal tunnel between the mucosa and muscularis propria (MP). Through the tunnel, endoscopic diagnosis or treatment is performed for lesions in the mucosa, in the MP, and even outside the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. At present, the tunnel technique application range covers the following: (1) Treatment of lesions originating from the mucosal layer, e.g., endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection for oesophageal large or circular early-stage cancer or precancerosis; (2) treatment of lesions from the MP layer, per-oral endoscopic myotomy, submucosal tunnelling endoscopic resection, etc.; and (3) diagnosis and treatment of lesions outside the GI tract, such as resection of lymph nodes and benign tumour excision in the mediastinum or abdominal cavity. With the increasing number of DETTs performed worldwide, endoscopic tunnel therapeutics, which is based on DETT, has been gradually developed and optimized. However, there is not yet an expert consensus on DETT to regulate its indications, contraindications, surgical procedure, and postoperative treatment. The International DETT Alliance signed up this consensus to standardize the procedures of DETT. In this consensus, we describe the definition, mechanism, and significance of DETT, prevention of infection and concepts of DETT-associated complications, methods to establish a submucosal tunnel, and application of DETT for lesions in the mucosa, in the MP and outside the GI tract (indications and contraindications, procedures, pre- and postoperative treatments, effectiveness, complications and treatments, and a comparison between DETT and other operations).

A multicenter retrospective study of endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection for large lesser gastric curvature superficial neoplasms

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD) has been used for dissection of esophageal and gastric lesions. However, outcomes of ESTD for large lesions in the lesser gastric curvature had not been acknowledged because previous reports had the limitations of being single-center studies. We aimed to clarify the outcomes of ESTD for large lesser gastric curvature superficial neoplasms and provide our experience to accelerate its application.

METHODS

Between July 2014 and July 2016, 87 patients with early cancer in the lesser gastric curvature treated at six Chinese institutions were enrolled. Our primary outcome was dissection speed. Moreover, both efficacy and safety clinical data were collected and analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

All of the 87 patients were found to successfully undergo ESTD or ESD. Of these, 32 underwent ESTD and 55 underwent endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). The ESTD group had a higher dissection speed (18.0 mm²/min vs. 7.8 mm²/min, p < 0.01) and was associated with higher en bloc resection rate (100% vs. 87.3%, p = 0.035) and curative resection rate (100% vs. 85.5%, p = 0.024) compared with the ESD group. No perforation or muscular injury occurred in the ESTD group and its intraprocedural bleeding rate was lower (59.4% vs. 100%, p < 0.01) than that of the ESD group.

CONCLUSIONS

In this multicenter retrospective study, outcomes of ESTD were excellent with a higher dissection speed and radical curative rate compared with ESD.

Efficacy and safety of endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection for superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and precancerous lesions

AIM

To evaluate the clinical outcomes of patients who underwent endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD) for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) and precancerous lesions.

METHODS

ESTD was performed in 289 patients. The clinical outcomes of the patients and pathological features of the lesions were retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS

A total of 311 lesions were included in the analysis. The en bloc rate, complete resection rate, and curative resection rate were 99.04%, 81.28%, and 78.46%, respectively. The ESTD procedure time was 102.4 ± 35.1 min, the mean hospitalization time was 10.3 ± 2.8 d, and the average expenditure was 3766.5 ± 846.5 dollars. The intraoperative bleeding rate was 6.43%, the postoperative bleeding rate was 1.61%, the perforation rate was 1.93%, and the postoperative infection rate was 9.65%. Esophageal stricture and positive margin were severe adverse events, with an incidence rate of 14.79% and 15.76%, respectively. No tumor recurrence occurred during the follow-up period.

CONCLUSION

ESTD for ESCC and precancerous lesions is feasible and relatively safe, but for large mucosal lesions, the rate of esophageal stricture and positive margin is high.

Endoscopic Submucosal Tunnel Dissection for Upper Gastrointestinal Submucosal Tumors Originating from the Muscularis Propria Layer: A Single-Center Study

Background/Aims

In recent years, endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD) has gained popularity worldwide. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ESTD in treating upper gastrointestinal submucosal tumors (SMTs) in a large-volume endoscopic center.

Methods

Patients with SMTs were enrolled in this study between January 2012 and January 2015. Demographic data, clinical data, and treatment outcome were collected and analyzed.

Results

Seventy SMTs originating from the muscularis propria (MP) layer were identified in 69 patients. All patients successfully underwent the ESTD procedure. The mean procedure time was 49.0±29.5 minutes, and the mean tumor size was 18.7±7.2 mm. Among all lesions, the majority (70.0%) were located in the esophagus, 12.9% in the cardia, and 17.1% in the stomach. Complete resection was achieved in 67 lesions (95.7%). Perforation occurred in three patients (4.3%), who were treated by endoclips. Pneumothorax occurred in two patients (2.9%) and was successfully managed by thoracic drainage. During a median follow-up of 18.1 months, patients were free of local recurrence or distant metastasis.

Conclusions

Our results demonstrated the feasibility and safety of ESTD in treating upper gastrointestinal SMTs originating from the MP layer. Large-scale comparative studies with other treatment methods should be conducted in the future.

Introduction to Endoscopic Submucosal Surgery

The concept of using natural orifices to reduce the complications of surgery, Natural Orifices Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery, has also been applied to therapeutic endoscopy. Endoscopic submucosal surgery (ESS) provides more treatment options for various gastrointestinal diseases than traditional therapeutic endoscopy by using the submucosal layer as a working space. ESS has been performed in various fields ranging from transluminal peritoneoscopy to peroral endoscopic myotomy. With further advances in technology, ESS will be increasingly useful for diagnosis and treatment of gastrointestinal diseases.

Endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection of upper gastrointestinal submucosal tumors: A comparative study of hook knife vs hybrid knife

AIM

To compare the efficacy and safety of a hook knife (HO) with a hybrid knife (HK) during endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD) procedure.

METHODS

Between August 2012 and December 2015, the ESTD procedure was performed for 83 upper GI submucosal lesions, which originated from the muscularis propria layer identified by upper endoscopy and endoscopic ultrasonography. Of these, 34 lesions were treated by a HO, whereas 49 lesions were treated by a HK. Data regarding age, gender, presenting symptoms, tumor location and size, procedure time, complications, en bloc resection rate and others were analyzed and compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in the age, gender, presenting symptoms and tumor location between the two groups. ESTD was successfully completed in all the patients, and no case was converted to laparoscopy. The mean procedure time was significantly shorter in the HK group than in the HO group (41.3 ± 20.3 min vs 57.2 ± 28.0 min, P = 0.004). The mean frequency of device exchange was 1.4 ± 0.6 in the HK group and significantly less than 3.3 ± 0.6 in the HO group (P < 0.001). The differences in tumor size and histopathological diagnoses were not significant between the two groups (P = 0.813, P = 0.363, respectively). Both groups had an equal en bloc resection rate and complete resection rate. Additionally, the complication rate was similar between the two groups (P = 0.901). During the follow-up, no recurrence occurred in either group.

CONCLUSION

We demonstrate for the first time that HO and HK do not differ in efficacy or safety, but HK reduces the frequency of device exchange and procedure time.

Endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection for large superficial esophageal squamous cell neoplasms

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a well-established treatment for superficial esophageal squamous cell neoplasms (SESCNs) with no risk of lymphatic metastasis. However, for large SESCNs, especially when exceeding two-thirds of the esophageal circumference, conventional ESD is time-consuming and has an increased risk of adverse events. Based on the submucosal tunnel conception, endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD) was first introduced by us to remove large SESCNs, with excellent results. Studies from different centers also reported favorable results. Compared with conventional ESD, ESTD has a more rapid dissection speed and R0 resection rate. Currently in China, ESTD for large SESCNs is an important part of the digestive endoscopic tunnel technique, as is peroral endoscopic myotomy for achalasia and submucosal tunnel endoscopic resection for submucosal tumors of the muscularis propria. However, not all patients with SESCNs are candidates for ESTD, and postoperative esophageal strictures should also be taken into consideration, especially for lesions with a circumference greater than three-quarters. In this article, we describe our experience, review the literature of ESTD, and provide detailed information on indications, standard procedures, outcomes, and complications of ESTD.

Endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection salvage technique for ulcerative early gastric cancer

Endoscopic submucosal dissection is an effective treatment modality for early gastric cancer (EGC), though the submucosal fibrosis found in ulcerative EGC is an obstacle for successful treatment. This report presents two cases of ulcerative EGC in two males, 73- and 80-year-old, with severe fibrosis. As endoscopic ultrasonography suggested that the EGCs had invaded the submucosal layer, the endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection salvage technique was utilized for complete resection of the lesions. Although surgical gastrectomy was originally scheduled, the two patients had severe coronary heart disease, and surgeries were refused because of the risks associated with their heart conditions. The endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection salvage technique procedures described in these cases were performed under conscious sedation, and were completed within 30 min. The complete en bloc resection of EGC using endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection salvage technique was possible with a free resection margin, and no other complications were noted during the procedure. This is the first known report concerning the use of the endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection salvage technique salvage technique for treatment of ulcerative EGC. We demonstrate that endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection salvage technique it is a feasible method showing several advantages over endoscopic submucosal dissection for cases of EGC with fibrosis.