Multicenter prospective randomized controlled clinical trial comparing the pocket-creation method with and without single-clip traction of colonic endoscopic submucosal dissection.

BACKGROUND: The pocket-creation method (PCM) was developed to overcome the technical difficulties of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), although opening the pocket remains challenging. We developed a novel technique of PCM with single-clip traction (PCM-CT), which uses a reopenable clip as a traction device to maintain stability during the procedure. No prospective study has compared the efficacy of PCM-CT and PCM. This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of PCM-CT vs. PCM in a randomized controlled trial. METHODS: This randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted at four Japanese institutions. Patients with superficial colorectal neoplastic lesions were included following Japanese guidelines for colorectal cancer. Seven moderately experienced endoscopists performed the ESD procedures using either PCM-CT or PCM. RESULTS: 100 patients were enrolled in the study. Compared with PCM, PCM-CT achieved significantly faster mean (SD) dissection speed (21.4 [10.8] vs. 27.0 [14.5] mm2/min [95%CI 0.5 to 10.7], P = 0.03), and reduced the mean procedure time (81.8 [57.9] vs. 64.8 [47.6] minutes [95%CI -38.2 to 4.3], P = 0.12) and pocket-opening time (37.8 [33.0] vs. 30.0 [28.9] minutes [95%CI -20.2 to 4.6], P = 0.22). En bloc and R0 resection rates were not significantly different between the two groups (100% vs. 100%, P >0.99; 100% vs. 96%, P = 0.50, respectively). No significant differences were observed in adverse events between the two groups. CONCLUSION: ESD facilitated by the novel PCM-CT method appeared to be significantly faster than PCM. Both methods achieved high R0 resection rates.

Feasibility of progressive polyp contraction with underwater endoscopic mucosal resection in ≥ 20 mm superficial colorectal lesions.

Background and study aims Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) does not always result in en bloc resection of large colorectal lesions. The aim of this study was to demonstrate the feasibility of en bloc resection with progressive polyp contraction with underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (PP-CUE) of large, superficial colorectal lesions. The advantage of PP-CUE is to enable resection of a superficial non-polypoid lesion that is larger than the snare diameter. Patients and methods Eleven consecutive lesions in ten patients who underwent UEMR with PP-CUE of large superficial colorectal lesions (20 mm or greater) were included. Results The median lesion diameter was 24 mm (interquartile range [IQR], 20-24 mm). All lesions were larger than the 15-mm rotatable snare that was used. Median procedure time and PP-CUE time were 11 minutes (IQR, 8.5-12.3) and 2.3 minutes (IQR, 1.9-3.4), respectively. Pathological diagnoses of resected specimens included six adenomas, three sessile serrated lesions, and two slightly invasive submucosal carcinomas. En bloc and R0 resection rates were both 91 % (10/11). No adverse events occurred. Conclusions PP-CUE is useful to resect superficial non-polypoid colorectal lesions 20 to 25 mm in diameter in an en bloc fashion.

Underwater Endoscopic Mucosal Resection of Small Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumors.

Background and Study Aims: The resection strategy for rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NET) < 10 mm is not uniform. We compared the utility of underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) to endoscopic submucosal resection with a ligation device (ESMR-L) to resect rectal NETs. Patients and Methods: Patients with rectal NET < 10 mm treated with UEMR or ESMR-L were included. Their medical records were retrospectively reviewed. Results: Thirty-two patients were divided into a UEMR group (n = 7) and an ESMR-L group (n = 25). Histopathological diagnosis of NET by biopsy was known before resection in 43% (3/7) in the UEMR group and 68% (17/25) in the ESMR-L group, (p = 0.379). UEMR was performed on an outpatient basis for all patients, and 92% of ESMR-L (23/25) were performed as inpatient procedures (p < 0.001). The procedure time was significantly shorter in the UEMR group than in the ESMR-L group [median (IQR), min, 6 (5-8) vs. 12 (9-14), p = 0.002]. En bloc resection and R0 resection rates were 100% in both groups. Pathological evaluations were predominantly NET G1 in both groups (UEMR: 7/7, 100% and ESMR-L: 23/25, 92%). Two patients in the ESMR-L group developed delayed bleeding, controlled by endoscopic hemostasis. Device costs were significantly higher in the ESMR-L group than the UEMR group by approximately US$180 [median (IQR), $90.45 (83.64-108.41) vs. $274.73 (265.86-292.45), P < 0.001]. Conclusion: UEMR results in similar resection quality with shorter procedure time and lower costs compared to ESMR-L. We recommend UEMR for the resection of rectal NET < 10 mm.

Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection using the pocket-creation method with single clip traction: a feasibility study.

Background and study aims The pocket-creation method (PCM) facilitates dissection of the central part of a tumor. We previously developed the PCM with clip traction (PCM-CT) to facilitate opening the mucosal pocket, which otherwise could become cumbersome. In the present study, we aimed to examine the feasibility of PCM-CT for colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). Patients and methods PCM-CT was performed on 30 patients with early colorectal tumors from October 2019 to April 2020. PCM-CT allows efficient opening of the mucosal pocket by using the PCM to dissect the center of the lesion and then apply traction with a single clip after making a circumferential mucosal incision. Results The median specimen major axis length, ESD time, ESD speed, and en bloc resection rate were 48 mm, 84 minutes, 20 mm 2 /min, and 100 % (30/30), respectively. The success rates for the traction clip and median single-clip-traction time were 100 % (30/30) and 1.5 minutes, respectively. Conclusions Colorectal ESD using PCM-CT is a simple and promising method.

Underwater Endoscopic Mucosal Resection without Submucosal Injection Facilitates En bloc Resection of Colon Adenomas Extending into a Diverticulum.

Superficial colonic neoplasms sometimes extend into a diverticulum. Conventional endoscopic mucosal resection of these lesions is considered challenging because colonic diverticula do not have a muscularis propria and are deeply inverted. Even if the solution is carefully injected below the mucosa at the bottom of the diverticulum, the mucosa is rarely elevated from the diverticular orifice, and it is usually just narrowed. Although endoscopic submucosal dissection or full-thickness resection with an over-the-scope clip device enables the complete resection of these lesions, it is still challenging, time consuming and expensive. Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection without submucosal injection (UEMR) is an innovative technique enabling en bloc resection of superficial colon lesions. We report three patients with colon adenomas extending into a diverticulum treated with successful UEMR. UEMR enabled rapid and safe en bloc resection of colon lesions extending into a diverticulum.

A boy with duodenocolic fistula mimicking functional gastrointestinal disorder.

Duodenocolic fistula (DCF) is a rare disorder defined by the presence of an internal fistula between the duodenum and colon. Colon cancer, Crohn's disease, diverticulum and duodenal ulcer are common causes of DCF, and vomiting and diarrhea are its main symptoms. We report a 14-year-old boy with DCF who had been treated for a functional gastrointestinal disorder (FGID). The boy had often experienced episodes of vomiting and diarrhea since infancy, and had been diagnosed with FGID. He was referred to our hospital because of a 2-month exacerbation of persistent vomiting and diarrhea. Upper gastrointestinal contrast revealed no abnormalities. Eventually, esophagogastroduodenoscopy detected a duodenal fistula, and DCF was diagnosed by endoscopic fistulography. Colonoscopy showed a diverticulum in the ascending colon near the fistula. In addition, a C13 urea breath test for Helicobacter pylori infection was positive. One hypothetical pathogenesis of his DCF was perforated colonic diverticulitis. Adhesion between the fistula wall and colonic diverticulum near the fistula strongly suggested a relationship between the fistula and the diverticulum. However, he never presented with symptoms of colonic diverticulitis. Thus, a congenital origin was also suspected. After confirming temporary relief from the symptoms by endoscopic closure, surgical closure was performed.