Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection is here to stay.

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) or mucosectomy and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) are both techniques that have modified the therapeutic outlook of superficial gastrointestinal tract lesions and neoplasms. EMR is used for the en-bloc excision of lesions smaller than 2-3 cm or the piecemeal resection of larger ones. In theory, ESD achieves higher rates of en-bloc resections as compared to EMR with a lower rate of recurrence; however, it shows a higher percentage of complications, particularly in inexperienced centers or in centers at the start of their learning curve.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection of colonic anisakiasis.

A 61-year-old male with no relevant past medical history underwent a colonoscopy for routine screening of colorectal cancer. Colonoscopy revealed a pearly and hard submucosal lesion of less than 10 mm in diameter in the ascending colon, with normal mucosa. An abdominopelvic computed tomography (CT) scan was performed, which was normal. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) was performed and the lesion appeared to originate from the muscularis propia. Thus, the muscularis propia and part of the serosa of the colonic wall were cut and the perforation was finally closed with hemoclips.

Short and long-term outcomes of underwater EMR compared to the traditional procedure in the real clinical practice.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (U-EMR) has been recently described as an alternative to endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for flat colorectal polyps. However, the real applications remain unclear due to the lack of comparative studies. METHODS: a multi-centric prospective study was performed from November 2016 to December 2017. All lesions larger than 15 mm that were resected with both techniques were included in the study. The samples were matched using the size, morphology, site and access (SMSA) score as a reference. The efficacy, efficiency and adverse events rates were compared. RESULTS: a total of 162 resections were collected (112 EMR and 50 U-EMR) with an average size of 25 mm. U-EMR achieved better results for the en bloc resection rate (49 vs 62%; p = 0.08) and there were no cases of an incomplete resection (10.7 vs 0%; p = 0.01). U-EMR was faster than EMR and there were no differences in the adverse events rate. Furthermore, U-EMR tended to achieve better results in terms of recurrence. Performing the resection in emersion appeared to prevent the cautery artefact, especially in sessile serrated adenomas. CONCLUSION: in the real clinical practice, U-EMR and EMR are equivalent in terms of efficacy and safety. Furthermore, U-EMR may be a feasible approach to prevent cautery artefact, allowing an accurate pathologic assessment.

Endoscopic mucosal resection for proximal superficial lesions: efficacy and safety study in 59 consecutive resections.

INTRODUCTION: endoscopic mucosal resection is an accepted technique for the treatment of proximal gastrointestinal tract superficial lesions. OBJECTIVES: to evaluate the efficacy and safety of this procedure in the proximal gastrointestinal tract. MATERIAL AND METHODS: forty one consecutive patients (23 males and 18 females, mean age of 61 ± 11.5 years) were included in our study. Fifty nine resections were performed in these patients in 69 sessions. Lesions treated consisted of elevated lesions with high grade dysplasia in the context of Barrett's esophagus (group A), high grade dysplasia appearing in random biopsies taken during the follow-up of Barrett's esophagus (group B) and superficial gastroduodenal lesions (group C). Snare resection after submucosal injection, band ligator-assisted or cap-assisted mucosal resection were the chosen techniques. RESULTS: we resected 7 elevated lesions with high grade dysplasia in the context of Barrett's esophagus, 6 complete Barrett's esophagus with high grade dysplasia in 16 sequential sessions and 46 gastroduodenal superficial lesions (10 adenomas, 9 gastric superficial carcinomas, 18 carcinoid tumours and 9 lesions of different histological nature). Resections in the two first groups were complete in 100% of the cases, and in 97.9% of the cases in group C. Complications included 2 cases of limited deferred bleeding (groups A and B) and another two cases of stenosis with little clinical relevance in Group B. CONCLUSIONS: a) endoscopic mucosal resection is an efficient technique for the treatment of proximal gastrointestinal tract superficial lesions; b) it is a safe procedure with a low percentage of complications, which can generally be managed endoscopically; and c) in contrast with other ablative techniques, endoscopic mucosal resection offers the possibility of a pathologic analysis of the samples.

Serum lipopolysaccharide-binding protein in endotoxemic patients with inflammatory bowel disease.

BACKGROUND: In inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), enhanced inflammatory activity in the gut is thought to increase the risk of bacterial translocation and endotoxemia. By searching for signs of endotoxin-signaling cascade activation, including augmented levels of endotoxin, lipopolysaccharide-binding protein (LBP), and soluble CD14 receptor (sCD14), this prospective study sought to establish whether endotoxemia could contribute to greater clinical activity of disease. METHODS: Concentrations of plasma endotoxin, LBP, sCD14, several cytokines, acute phase proteins and clinical activity indices were determined in 104 patients with Crohn's disease (CD) and 52 patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). RESULTS: Endotoxemia was present in 48% of the patients with CD and in 28% of the patients with UC. The mean LBP was higher in patients with active CD (23.1 +/- 13.7 microg/mL) and UC (21.4 +/- 10.9 microg/mL) than in healthy controls (7.2 +/- 1.8 microg/mL; P < 0.01). Elevated serum concentrations of endotoxin and LBP were even detected in patients with inactive CD. Among the patients with active IBD, those with higher endotoxin levels had the worst clinical activity scores and the highest LBP levels. Treatment normalized LBP concentrations, from 29.1 +/- 13.0 to 15.2 +/- 7.3 microg/mL; (P < 0.05) in active CD and from 21.7 +/- 9.8 to 13.6 +/- 5.7 microg/mL; (P < 0.01) in active UC, along with normalizing endotoxin and sCD14 plasma concentrations. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with IBD show increased serum levels of endotoxin, LBP and sCD14. This alteration correlates with disease activity, with normal levels recovered after treatment, although less completely in Crohn's disease, and parallels a rise in proinflammatory cytokines, suggesting a contribution of bacterial products to the inflammatory cascade in these patients.

La disección submucosa endoscópica colorrectal ha venido para quedarse / No disponible

No disponible

Endoscopic submucosal dissection of colonic anisakiasis

No disponible

Colangitis aguda asociada a hemobilia en un paciente con cirrosis hepática y cavernomatosis portal / Acute cholangitis and hemobilia in a patient with liver cirrhosis and portal vein cavernomatous transformation

No disponible

Short and long-term outcomes of underwater EMR compared to the traditional procedure in the real clinical practice

Background and aims: underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (U-EMR) has been recently described as an alternative to endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for flat colorectal polyps. However, the real applications remain unclear due to the lack of comparative studies. Methods: a multi-centric prospective study was performed from November 2016 to December 2017. All lesions larger than 15 mm that were resected with both techniques were included in the study. The samples were matched using the size, morphology, site and access (SMSA) score as a reference. The efficacy, efficiency and adverse events rates were compared. Results: a total of 162 resections were collected (112 EMR and 50 U-EMR) with an average size of 25 mm. U-EMR achieved better results for the en bloc resection rate (49 vs 62%; p = 0.08) and there were no cases of an incomplete resection (10.7 vs 0%; p = 0.01). U-EMR was faster than EMR and there were no differences in the adverse events rate. Furthermore, U-EMR tended to achieve better results in terms of recurrence. Performing the resection in emersion appeared to prevent the cautery artefact, especially in sessile serrated adenomas. Conclusion: in the real clinical practice, U-EMR and EMR are equivalent in terms of efficacy and safety. Furthermore, U-EMR may be a feasible approach to prevent cautery artefact, allowing an accurate pathologic assessment

No disponible

Resección endoscópica mucosa de lesiones superficiales altas: estudio de su eficacia y seguridad en 59 resecciones consecutivas / Endoscopic mucosal resection for proximal superficial lesions: efficacy and safety study in 59 consecutive resections

Introducción: la resección endoscópica mucosa es una técnica aceptada en el tratamiento de lesiones superficiales del tracto digestivo. Objetivos: evaluar la eficacia y seguridad de dicho procedimiento en el tracto digestivo superior. Material y métodos: se incluyeron en nuestro estudio 41 pacientes consecutivos (23 hombres y 18 mujeres, edad media de 60,6 años) a los que se les realizaron 59 resecciones en 69 sesiones. Se trataron las siguientes patologías: lesiones sobreelevadas con displasia de alto grado sobre esófago de Barrett (grupo A), displasia de alto grado en biopsias aleatorias del seguimiento de esófago de Barrett (grupo B) y lesiones superficiales gastroduodenales (grupo C). Las técnicas utilizadas fueron la resección con asa tras inyección submucosa, la asistida por bandas o por capuchón. Resultados: se resecaron 7 lesiones sobreelevadas con displasia de alto grado sobre esófago de Barrett, 6 esófagos de Barrett con displasia de alto grado de forma completa en 16 sesiones secuenciales de resección mucosa y 46 lesiones superficiales gastroduodenales (10 adenomas, 9 carcinomas gástricos superficiales, 18 carcinoides y 9 lesiones de diferente estirpe). Las resecciones se realizaron con éxito en el 100% de los dos primeros grupos y en el 97,9% del grupo C. Como complicaciones tuvimos 2 sangrados diferidos autolimitados (grupos A y B) y dos casos de estenosis con escasa relevancia clínica en el grupo B. Conclusiones: a) la resección endoscópica mucosa es una técnica eficaz en el tratamiento de lesiones superficiales del tracto digestivo superior; b) se trata de un procedimiento seguro, con un porcentaje de complicaciones muy bajo y que generalmente pueden ser manejadas de forma endoscópica; y c) al contrario que otras técnicas ablativas, permite el estudio anatomopatológico de las muestras(AU)

Introduction: endoscopic mucosal resection is an accepted technique for the treatment of proximal gastrointestinal tract superficial lesions. Objectives: to evaluate the efficacy and safety of this procedure in the proximal gastrointestinal tract. Material and methods: forty one consecutive patients (23 males and 18 females, mean age of 61 ± 11.5 years) were included in our study. Fifty nine resections were performed in these patients in 69 sessions. Lesions treated consisted of elevated lesions with high grade dysplasia in the context of Barrett’s esophagus (group A), high grade dysplasia appearing in random biopsies taken during the follow-up of Barrett’s esophagus (group B) and superficial gastroduodenal lesions (group C). Snare resection after submucosal injection, band ligator-assisted or cap-assisted mucosal resection were the chosen techniques. Results: we resected 7 elevated lesions with high grade dysplasia in the context of Barrett’s esophagus, 6 complete Barrett’s esophagus with high grade dysplasia in 16 sequential sessions and 46 gastroduodenal superficial lesions (10 adenomas, 9 gastric superficial carcinomas, 18 carcinoid tumours and 9 lesions of different histological nature). Resections in the two first groups were complete in 100% of the cases, and in 97.9% of the cases in group C. Complications included 2 cases of limited deferred bleeding (groups A and B) and another two cases of stenosis with little clinical relevance in Group B. Conclusions: a) endoscopic mucosal resection is an efficient technique for the treatment of proximal gastrointestinal tract superficial lesions; b) it is a safe procedure with a low percentage of complications, which can generally be managed endoscopically; and c) in contrast with other ablative techniques, endoscopic mucosal resection offers the possibility of a pathologic analysis of the samples(AU)