Endoscopic submucosal dissection techniques and technology: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Technical Review

ESGE suggests conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD; marking and mucosal incision followed by circumferential incision and stepwise submucosal dissection) for most esophageal and gastric lesions. ESGE suggests tunneling ESD for esophageal lesions involving more than two-thirds of the esophageal circumference. ESGE recommends the pocket-creation method for colorectal ESD, at least if traction devices are not used. The use of dedicated ESD knives with size adequate to the location/thickness of the gastrointestinal wall is recommended. It is suggested that isotonic saline or viscous solutions can be used for submucosal injection. ESGE recommends traction methods in esophageal and colorectal ESD and in selected gastric lesions. After gastric ESD, coagulation of visible vessels is recommended, and post-procedural high dose proton pump inhibitor (PPI) (or vonoprazan). ESGE recommends against routine closure of the ESD defect, except in duodenal ESD. ESGE recommends corticosteroids after resection of  > 50 % of the esophageal circumference. The use of carbon dioxide when performing ESD is recommended. ESGE recommends against the performance of second-look endoscopy after ESD. ESGE recommends endoscopy/colonoscopy in the case of significant bleeding (hemodynamic instability, drop in hemoglobin > 2 g/dL, severe ongoing bleeding) to perform endoscopic hemostasis with thermal methods or clipping; hemostatic powders represent rescue therapies. ESGE recommends closure of immediate perforations with clips (through-the-scope or cap-mounted, depending on the size and shape of the perforation), as soon as possible but ideally after securing a good plane for further dissection.

Quality of Colonoscopy Is Associated With Adenoma Detection and Postcolonoscopy Colorectal Cancer Prevention in Lynch Syndrome

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Colonoscopy reduces colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality in Lynch syndrome (LS) carriers. However, a high incidence of postcolonoscopy CRC (PCCRC) has been reported. Colonoscopy is highly dependent on endoscopist skill and is subject to quality variability. We aimed to evaluate the impact of key colonoscopy quality indicators on adenoma detection and prevention of PCCRC in LS.

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter study focused on LS carriers without previous CRC undergoing colonoscopy surveillance (n = 893). Incident colorectal neoplasia during surveillance and quality indicators of all colonoscopies were analyzed. We performed an emulated target trial comparing the results from the first and second surveillance colonoscopies to assess the effect of colonoscopy quality indicators on adenoma detection and PCCRC incidence. Risk analyses were conducted using a multivariable logistic regression model.

RESULTS

The 10-year cumulative incidence of adenoma and PCCRC was 60.6% (95% CI, 55.5%-65.2%) and 7.9% (95% CI, 5.2%-10.6%), respectively. Adequate bowel preparation (odds ratio [OR], 2.07; 95% CI, 1.06-4.3), complete colonoscopies (20% vs 0%; P = .01), and pan-chromoendoscopy use (OR, 2.14; 95% CI, 1.15-3.95) were associated with significant improvement in adenoma detection. PCCRC risk was significantly lower when colonoscopies were performed during a time interval of less than every 3 years (OR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.14-0.97). We observed a consistent but not significant reduction in PCCRC risk for a previous complete examination (OR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.03-1.28), adequate bowel preparation (OR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.17-3.24), or previous use of high-definition colonoscopy (OR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.02-2.33).

CONCLUSIONS

Complete colonoscopies with adequate bowel preparation and chromoendoscopy use are associated with improved adenoma detection, while surveillance intervals of less than 3 years are associated with a reduction of PCCRC incidence. In LS, high-quality colonoscopy surveillance is of utmost importance for CRC prevention.

Personalised surveillance for serrated polyposis syndrome: results from a prospective 5-year international cohort study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Serrated polyposis syndrome (SPS) is associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). International guidelines recommend surveillance intervals of 1-2 years. However, yearly surveillance likely leads to overtreatment for many. We prospectively assessed a surveillance protocol aiming to safely reduce the burden of colonoscopies.

METHODS

Between 2013 and 2018, we enrolled SPS patients from nine Dutch and Spanish hospitals. Patients were surveilled using a protocol appointing either a 1-year or 2-year interval after each surveillance colonoscopy, based on polyp burden. Primary endpoint was the 5-year cumulative incidence of CRC and advanced neoplasia (AN) during surveillance.

RESULTS

We followed 271 SPS patients for a median of 3.6 years. During surveillance, two patients developed CRC (cumulative 5-year incidence 1.3%[95% CI 0% to 3.2%]). The 5-year AN incidence was 44% (95% CI 37% to 52%), and was lower for patients with SPS type III (26%) than for patients diagnosed with type I (53%) or type I and III (59%, p<0.001). Most patients were recommended a 2-year interval, and those recommended a 2-year interval were not at increased risk of AN: AN incidence after a 2-year recommendation was 15.6% compared with 24.4% after a 1-year recommendation (OR 0.57, p=0.08).

CONCLUSION

Risk stratification substantially reduced colonoscopy burden while achieving CRC incidence similar to previous studies. AN incidence is considerable in SPS patients, but extension of surveillance intervals was not associated with increased AN in those identified as low-risk by the protocol. We identified SPS type III patients as low-risk group that might benefit from even less frequent surveillance.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

The study was registered on http://www.trialregister.nl; trial-ID NTR4609.

A case series of intestinal adenomatous polyposis of unidentified etiology; a late effect of irradiation?

Background

In a large number of patients with multiple gastrointestinal adenomatous polyps, no causal germline mutation can be found. Non-genetic factors may contribute to the development of adenomatous polyps in these unexplained polyposis patients.

In the development of gastrointestinal cancer, prior exposure to abdominal radiotherapy has been identified as such a factor, as it increases the gastrointestinal cancer risk in cancer survivors. A relationship of radiotherapy with intestinal polyposis, however, has not yet been described. Despite the increased cancer risk, these cancer survivors do not receive gastrointestinal screening recommendations. This case series describes three patients with adenomatous polyposis after abdominal radiotherapy.

Case presentation

Patient 1 was diagnosed with testicular cancer at the age of 31 and was treated with hemicastration, radiotherapy and chemotherapy. Thirty-nine years later, he was diagnosed with more than 30 colonic adenomas. Additionally, gastroduodenoscopy revealed a well-differentiated adenocarcinoma in the antrum of the stomach.

Patient 2 was diagnosed with a nephroblastoma at the age of 10, which was resected and treated with radiotherapy and chemotherapy. At age 36, a rectal adenocarcinoma was diagnosed and treated by radiotherapy and a total mesorectal excision. During 11 years of surveillance endoscopies, 21 colonic adenomas and three duodenal adenomas were detected.

Patient 3 was diagnosed with Hodgkin lymphoma at the age of 20 and treated with radiotherapy, followed by chemotherapy for a recurrence 3 years later. At age 62, a subtotal colectomy was performed because of colonic polyposis: 36 adenomas were detected. During screening gastro-duodenoscopy, three duodenal adenomas were detected.

In all three patients, germline analysis did not reveal a mutation in the APC and MYH genes. The gastric and rectal cancer were both microsatellite stable.

Conclusion

This report describes three patients with adenomatous polyposis, of which two developed a gastrointestinal cancer. The polyposis was not explained by a germline mutation in APC or MYH and all patients received abdominal radiotherapy. Although an etiologic role has not been established, an association between radiotherapy and intestinal adenomatous polyposis and the subsequent development of cancer seems very likely in our patients.

Incidence of colonic neoplasia in patients with serrated polyposis syndrome who undergo annual endoscopic surveillance

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Patients with serrated polyposis syndrome (SPS) are advised to undergo endoscopic surveillance for early detection of polyps and prevention of colorectal cancer (CRC). The optimal surveillance and treatment regimen is unknown. We performed a prospective study to evaluate a standardized endoscopic treatment protocol in a large cohort of patients with SPS.

METHODS

We followed a cohort of patients with SPS who received annual endoscopic surveillance at the Academic Medical Centre in Amsterdam, The Netherlands from January 2007 through December 2012. All patients underwent clearing colonoscopy with removal of all polyps ≥3 mm. After clearance, subsequent follow-up colonoscopies were scheduled annually. The primary outcomes measure was the incidence of CRC and polyps. Secondary outcomes were the incidence of complications and the rate of preventive surgery.

RESULTS

Successful endoscopic clearance of all polyps ≥3 mm was achieved in 41 of 50 (82%) patients. During subsequent annual surveillance, with a median follow-up time of 3.1 years (interquartile range, 1.5-4.3 years), CRC was not detected. The cumulative risks of detecting CRC, advanced adenomas, or large (≥10 mm) serrated polyps after 3 surveillance colonoscopies were 0%, 9%, 34%, respectively. Twelve patients (24%) were referred for preventive surgery; 9 at initial colonoscopy and 3 during surveillance. Perforations or severe bleeding did not occur.

CONCLUSIONS

Annual surveillance with complete removal of all polyps ≥3 mm with timely referral of selected high-risk patients for prophylactic surgery prevents development of CRC in SPS patients without significant morbidity. Considering the substantial risk of polyp recurrence, close endoscopic surveillance in SPS seems warranted. www.trialregister.nl ID NTR2757.