Feasibility of a novel unassisted single-channel transcolonic endoscopic appendectomy for the treatment of appendiceal lesions (with video).

BACKGROUND: Transcolonic endoscopic appendectomy (TEA) is rapidly evolving and has been reported as a minimally invasive alternative to appendectomy. We aimed to characterize the feasibility and safety of a novel unassisted single-channel TEA. METHOD: We retrospectively investigated 23 patients with appendicitis or appendiceal lesions who underwent TEA from February 2016 to December 2022. We collected clinicopathological characteristics, procedure­related parameters, and follow­up data and analyzed the impact of previous abdominal surgery and traction technique. RESULTS: The mean age was 56.0 years. Of the 23 patients with appendiceal lesions, fourteen patients underwent TEA and nine underwent traction-assisted TEA (T-TEA). Eight patients (34.8%) had previous abdominal surgery. The En bloc resection rate was 95.7%. The mean procedure duration was 91.1 ± 45.5 min, and the mean wound closure time was 29.4 ± 18.6 min. The wounds after endoscopic appendectomy were closed with clips (21.7%) or a combination of clip closure and endoloop reinforcement (78.3%), and the median number of clips was 7 (range, 3-15). Three patients (13.0%) experienced major adverse events, including two delayed perforations (laparoscopic surgery) and one infection (salvage endoscopic suture). During a median follow-up of 23 months, no residual or recurrent lesions were observed, and no recurrence of abdominal pain occurred. There were no significant differences between TEA and T-TEA groups and between patients with and without abdominal surgery groups in each factor. CONCLUSION: Unassisted single-channel TEA for patients with appendiceal lesions has favorable short- and long-term outcomes. TEA can safely and effectively treat appendiceal disease in appropriately selected cases.

Endoscopic resection of giant esophageal subepithelial lesions: experience from a large tertiary center.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Increased reports on endoscopic resection (ER) of esophageal giant subepithelial lesions (g-SELs) have emerged in recent years. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy, technical difficulty, and safety through our single-center experience. METHODS: Seventy-five patients with g-SELs undergoing endoscopic resection were included in the training set. Clinicopathologic features, procedure-related characteristics, postprocedural outcomes, and follow-up data were analyzed. A predictive nomogram model for procedural difficulty was proposed based on the multivariable logistic regression analysis. Internal and external validations were conducted to verify the model performance. RESULTS: The overall en bloc resection rate was 93.3%. Intraoperative and postoperative adverse events occurred in 7 (9.3%) and 13 (17.3%) patients, respectively. No recurrence or metastasis was observed. Thirty-two (42.7%) patients underwent a difficult procedure. Age (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], .915; P = .004), maximal tumor diameter ≥8 cm (aOR, 9.896; P = .009), irregular shape (aOR, 4.081; P = .053), extraluminal growth pattern (aOR, 5.419; P = .011), and submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection (aOR, .109; P = .042) were found to be statistically or clinically significant factors for predicting endoscopic resection difficulty, based on which a nomogram model was developed. Internal and external validations of the nomogram via receiver-operating characteristic curves and calibration curves achieved favorable results. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic resection serves as a promising therapeutic option for esophageal g-SELs. A younger patient age, large tumor size, irregular shape, and extraluminal growth may indicate increased endoscopic resection difficulty, whereas a submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection procedure tends to be of lower difficulty. Our nomogram model performs well for predicting endoscopic resection difficulty for esophageal g-SELs.

Muscular injury as an independent risk factor for esophageal stenosis after endoscopic submucosal dissection of esophageal squamous cell cancer.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Stenosis after esophageal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has a high incidence, and muscular injury is an important risk factor for esophageal stenosis. Hence, this study aimed to classify muscular injury degrees and investigate their association with postoperative stenosis. METHODS: This retrospective study included 1033 patients with esophageal mucosal lesions treated with ESD between August 2015 and March 2021. Demographic and clinical parameters were analyzed, and stenosis risk factors were identified using multivariate logistic regression. A novel muscular injury classification system was proposed and used to investigate the association between different muscular injury degrees and postoperative stenosis. Finally, a scoring system was established to predict muscular injury. RESULTS: Of 1033 patients, 118 (11.4%) had esophageal stenosis. The multivariate analysis demonstrated that the history of endoscopic esophageal treatment, circumferential range, and muscular injury were significant risk factors for esophageal stenosis. Patients with type II muscular injuries tended to develop complex stenosis (n = 13 [36.1%], P < .05), and type II muscular injuries were more likely to predispose patients to severe stenosis than type I (73.3% and 92.3%, respectively). The scoring system showed that patients with high scores (3-6) were more likely to have muscular injury. The score model presented good discriminatory power in the internal validation (area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve, .706; 95% confidence interval, .645-.767) and goodness-of-fit in the Hosmer-Lemeshow test (P = .865). CONCLUSIONS: Muscular injury was an independent risk factor for esophageal stenosis. The scoring system demonstrated good performance in predicting muscular injury during ESD.