Clinical efficacy analysis of endoscopic band electrocision ligation surgical method in the treatment of small submucosal tumors of the gastric fundus.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare and analyze the clinical effects of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and endoscopic band electrocision ligation (EEL) in the removal of gastric submucosal tumors (SMTs). METHOD: We analyzed the clinical data of 130 patients with gastrointestinal SMTs (diameter ≤10 mm) who underwent endoscopic resection, including 62 cases in the EEL group and 68 in the ESD group, and compared indicators such as surgical time, intraoperative and postoperative complications, postoperative hospital stay, and surgical cost, between the EEL and ESD group. RESULTS: EEL surgery time (8.9 ± 1.1 min) was significantly shorter than the ESD group (62.3 ± 2.8 min) (p < .05), EEL surgery cost (5126.8 ± 26.5 yuan) was significantly lower than the ESD group (15721.3 ± 39.6 yuan) (p < .05), and intraoperative blood loss was also markedly lower in the EEL group (5.6 ± 1.7 ml) compared to the ESD group (42.3 ± 3.5 ml) (p < .05). There was no statistically significant difference in postoperative hospitalization time or postoperative complication incidence between the two groups (p > .05). CONCLUSIONS: In treating gastric muscular, mucosal, or submucosal tumors with a diameter of less than 10 mm, the EEL surgical method was superior to the ESD surgical method in terms of surgical time, intraoperative blood loss, and cost. There was no difference in hospital stay and postoperative complication rate between the two methods, which was worthy of clinical application.

Multicenter retrospective analysis of complications and risk factors in endoscopic resection for esophageal cancer across Japan.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic resection (ER) is a minimally invasive treatment for esophageal cancer that sometimes causes complications. To understand the real-world incidence and risk factors for these complications, a nationwide survey was conducted across Japan. METHODS: This retrospective multicenter study included patients who underwent ER for esophageal cancer from April 2017 to March 2018 (2017 complication analysis) and April 2021 to March 2022 (2021 complication analysis). The study assessed the complication rates and conducted risk factor analyses for endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) using data for these patients, with exclusions based on specific criteria to ensure data accuracy. RESULTS: In the 2021 complication analysis, there were two mortalities highly likely attributable (0.03%) to ER and one mortality possibly attributable (0.01%) to ER. Intraoperative perforation, delayed bleeding, and pneumonia occurred in 137 cases (1.8%), 44 cases (0.6%), and 130 cases (1.7%), respectively. In the multivariate analysis for complications after ESD, low ER volume of the facility was an independent risk factor for perforation, while lesion location in the cervical or upper thoracic esophagus was an independent factor for reduced risk of perforation. Age ≥ 80 years was a risk factor for pneumonia, while use of traction techniques was a factor for reduced risk of pneumonia. Lesions located in the middle thoracic esophagus had a lower risk of stricture, and the risk of stricture increased as the circumferential extent of the lesion increased. CONCLUSIONS: This large-scale study provided detailed insights into the complications associated with esophageal ER and identified significant risk factors.

High proficiency of esophageal endoscopic submucosal dissection with a "tunnel + clip traction" strategy: a large French multicentric study.

BACKGROUND: Esophageal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is the gold standard for the treatment of precancerous lesions or superficial esophageal cancers. This procedure is currently performed by expert endoscopists only, and poorly standardized. We aimed to assess the technical results and outcomes of a "tunnel + clip" strategy for esophageal ESD procedures performed by less experienced operators for the treatment of superficial neoplasms. METHODS: All consecutive esophageal ESDs performed with the "tunnel + clip" technique for patients with early esophageal cancer in 3 centers were enrolled. Procedural characteristics, clinical outcomes, and complications were recorded. RESULTS: Among 195 esophageal ESD procedures performed, early adenocarcinomas or high-grade dysplasia complicating Barrett's esophagus were predominant (132/195, 67.7%) compared with early squamous cell carcinomas (63/195, 32.3%). The en bloc, R0 and curative resection rates were 100% (195/195), 78.5% (153/195) and 67.2% (131/195), respectively. The mean rate of ESD was 29.7 mm2/min. One (0.5%) perprocedural perforation and 7 (3.6%) postprocedural bleedings occurred, all managed endoscopically. No delayed perforation occurred. Overall, 31 patients (31/195; 15.9%) of patients developed stenosis. CONCLUSIONS: The "tunnel + clip" strategy is safe, and allows to achieve high en bloc, R0 and curative resection rates. This standardized procedure could be used by physicians with little experience and might help spreading esophageal ESD in Western countries.

Endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection with an external additional working channel (EMR+ and ESD+) are equivalent to using a double-channel endoscope: a systematic evaluation in a porcine ex vivo model.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: With an external additional working channel (AWC) endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) as well as endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) can be extended to techniques termed "EMR+" and "ESD+." These novel techniques are systematically compared to EMR and ESD under the use of a double-channel endoscope (DC). METHODS: Our trial was conducted prospectively in a pre-clinical porcine animal model (EASIE-R simulator) with standardized gastric lesions measuring 3 or 4 cm. RESULTS: EMR+ and EMR DC showed both good results for 3 cm lesions with no adverse events and an en bloc resection rate of 73.33% (EMR+) and 60.00% (EMR DC, p = 0.70). They came to their limits in 4 cm lesions with muscularis damages of 20.00% (EMR+), 13.33% (EMR DC, p ≥ 0.99) and decreasing en bloc resection rates of 60.00% (EMR+) and 46.67% (EMR DC, p = 0.72). ESD+ and ESD DC were both reliable concerning en bloc resection rates (100% in all groups) and adverse events (0.00% in 3 cm lesions, 12.50% muscularis damages in both ESD+ and ESD DC in 4 cm lesions). Resection time was slightly shorter in all groups with the AWC compared to DC although only reaching significance in 3 cm ESD lesions (p < 0.05*). CONCLUSIONS: With the AWC, a standard endoscope can easily be transformed to double-channel functionality. We could show that EMR+ and ESD+ are non-inferior to EMR and ESD under the use of a double-channel endoscope. Consequently, the AWC presents an affordable alternative to a double-channel endoscope for both EMR and ESD.

Efficacy of using red dichromatic imaging throughout endoscopic submucosal dissection procedure.

BACKGROUND: Management of bleeding during endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is critical. Red Dichromatic Imaging (RDI), a novel image-enhanced endoscopy technology, has been reported to improve the visibility of deep vessels and bleeding source compared to white light imaging (WLI). We hypothesized that using RDI during the entire cutting process (full time RDI ESD: FTR-ESD), higher R0 resection rate, shorter procedure time and fewer complications could be achieved. Therefore, the aims of the present study were to investigate the efficacy and safety of FTR-ESD. METHODS: This retrospective observational study included a total of 82 consecutive patients who underwent ESD by a single expert endoscopist for 40 esophageal, 17 gastric and 25 colorectal cancers at our institution from January 2018 to March 2021. The clinicopathological data were collected from patients' medical records and the treatment outcomes were analyzed according to the treatment phase (early; 57 WLI-ESD and late; 25 FTR-ESD). RESULTS: The median of the greatest diameter of resected specimen was 40.0 mm. The median procedure time was relatively shorter in the FTR-ESD group (35 min) than in the WLI-ESD group (40 min), but the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.34). The median dissection speed in the FTR-ESD group (27.23 mm2/min) was significantly faster than that in the WLI-ESD group (20.94 mm2/min) (p = 0.025). The dissection speed was not different among different organs. A multivariate analysis revealed that tumor size (more than 30 mm) and FTR-ESD were significant independent factors contributing to faster dissection speed (p < 0.05). There were no significant differences in the rates of en bloc resection, HM0, VM0 or occurrence of adverse events between WLI-ESD and FTR-ESD. CONCLUSIONS: FTR-ESD significantly increases the dissection speed compared to WLI-ESD. FTR-ESD can be performed safely and therapeutic outcomes in FTR-ESD are comparable with WLI-ESD. A further multicenter prospective study is warranted to confirm our results.

Prevention and management of esophageal stricture after esophageal ESD: 10 years of experience in a single medical center.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a minimally invasive endoscopic procedure to deal with local early esophageal neoplasm, although post-ESD esophageal stricture is a major delayed complication of esophageal ESD greatly influencing the patient's quality of life. This retrospective study was conducted to analyze the esophageal stricture after esophageal ESD while determining further treatment and outcome of stricture management. METHODS: From 2009 to 2021, we reviewed all patients who underwent ESD for esophageal squamous cell neoplasia in Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital. RESULTS: Totally, 133 patients with esophageal squamous cell neoplasm were enrolled. Among these 133 patients, 108 patients had lesions less than three-fourths in circumferential and 25 patients had lesions in excess of three-fourths circumferentially. Totally, 18 patients (13.5%) had symptomatic esophageal stricture and 17 patients (94.4%) had stricture existing over the upper or middle esophagus. The most important risk factor of esophageal stricture was the extent of resection of esophageal circumference, especially whole circumferential resection. Although oral steroid prevention medication was prescribed for high-risk patients with lesions more than three-fourth circumferential ESD, the stricture rate was still up to 40% (10/25). Endoscopic/luminal management with balloon dilation, radial incision and self-bougination achieved 83% (15/18) symptom remission. Three patients received surgical intervention with esophagectomy or jejunostomy. CONCLUSION: Esophageal stricture is frequently encountered in esophageal ESD. Aggressive preventative strategy is warranted for the high-risk group. Endoscopy/luminal management has high efficacy for post-ESD esophageal stricture.

Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection for rectal neuroendocrine tumors (with videos): a single center retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UMER) is a new method of endoscopic resection to completely remove the lesion without submucosal injection. But few attempts have been carried out for rectal neuroendocrine tumors (rectal NETs). METHODS: We retrospectively investigated data on the tumor characteristics and outcomes of patients with ≤ 10 mm rectal NETs who underwent UEMR or endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) from January 2019 to June 2021 in our institute. RESULTS: The endoscopic resection rate was 100% in both UEMR and ESD groups. The histological complete resection rate of the UEMR group (95.5%) was lower than that of the ESD group (96.4%) with no significant difference. The average operation time, hospitalization time and operation cost of UEMR group were less than those of ESD group (P < 0.05). The incidence of postoperative abdominal pain and abdominal distention in the UEMR group was lower than that in the ESD group (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the incidence of delayed bleeding and perforation between the two groups. There was no local recurrence or distant metastasis in the two groups during the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: Both the UEMR and ESD can effectively treat ≤ 10 mm rectal NETs with invasion depth confined to the mucosa and submucosa. UEMR is superior to ESD in operation time, hospitalization time, operation cost, postoperative abdominal pain and abdominal distention.

A prospective randomized controlled trial of the safety and efficacy of carbon dioxide insufflation compared with room air insufflation during gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Carbon dioxide (CO2 ) insufflation during gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection (GESD) under sedation can be used instead of room air insufflation. Appropriate monitoring of the partial pressure of CO2 during GESD is necessary due to the impaired respiration. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of CO2 insufflation during GESD compared with conventional room air insufflation. METHODS: Patients with a gastric epithelial neoplasm or early gastric cancer were enrolled. A total of 76 consecutive patients were randomly assigned to the CO2 insufflation group (CO2 group) or the room air insufflation group (air group). The primary outcome was the mean difference of end-tidal CO2 (EtCO2 ) between two groups. RESULTS: The upper bound of the 95% CI for the mean EtCO2 difference between the two groups before the procedure and at 15, 30 and 45 min after insufflation met the criteria for noninferiority. In a subgroup analysis of patients 70 years and older, the mean difference of EtCO2 was not significantly different between two groups. However, the air group received more analgesics than the CO2 group after the procedure (67.6% vs 35.1%, P = 0.005). In addition, in terms of improvement of abdominal pain or bowel gas after 24 h of GESD, CO2 group showed better results than air group (both P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: CO2 insufflation during GESD is as safe as using room air, and patients, including elderly patients, receiving CO2 achieve more rapid relief of abdominal pain and intra-abdominal residual gas during and after the procedure.

Comparison of endoscopic treatments for small gastric adenomas.

BACKGROUND: Gastric adenomas can be successfully treated with endoscopic resection, including endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the efficacy of ESD and EMR with circumferential precutting (EMR-P) in the treatment of small gastric adenomas. METHODS: This study included 1014 gastric adenomas ≤ 15 mm in diameter treated with ESD or EMR-P from 2012 to 2019, retrospectively. Propensity score matching between the ESD and EMR-P groups (1:1 to 3:1) was performed according to age, sex, tumor size, tumor location (upper, middle, and lower thirds), morphology, and preprocedural histology. The procedure time and the rates of en bloc resection, complete resection, adverse events, and local recurrence were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: After propensity score matching, 478 lesions (ESD: 295, EMR-P: 183) were analyzed. The rates of en bloc resection (94.9% vs. 93.4%, p = 0.498), complete resection (93.6% vs. 90.2%, p = 0.177), bleeding (8.1% vs. 3.8%, p = 0.063), and local recurrence (0.0% vs. 1.4%, p = 0.185) did not significantly differ between the two groups. The procedure time was significantly longer for ESD than for EMR-P (p < 0.001). In the EMR-P group, the complete resection rate was significantly lower in the upper third than in the middle and lower thirds (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: EMR-P is as effective as ESD for the treatment of small gastric adenomas. However, the efficacy of EMR-P is lower for gastric adenomas in the proximal stomach.

Effectiveness of a novel traction device in endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal lesions.

BACKGROUND: Among all types of superficial gastrointestinal (GI) neoplasms, colorectal lesions are recognized as one of the most difficult locations to operate, due to the limited operation space, physiological bends, poor visualization of the submucosal dissection plane sheltered by colorectal crinkle wall, and the thin intestinal mucosa layer which is easy to perforation. The purpose of this prospective study is to evaluate the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of a novel endoscopic traction technique in assisting the endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) procedure in colorectal lesions. METHOD: A total of 117 patients with colonic lesions who underwent endoscopic treatment were enrolled between August 2020 and January 2021 at the endoscopic center of Beijing Chao-yang Hospital of Capital Medical University. Based on whether traction device was used during the operation, 60 and 57 patients were assigned to the conventional ESD group and clips and rubber band triangle traction-assisted ESD group (CRT-ESD, in which three clips and a rubber band were used to form an elastic triangular traction device), respectively. The total procedure time (TPT), submucosal dissection time (SDT), submucosal dissection speed (SDS), and rate of adverse events of the two groups were analyzed. RESULTS: After excluding patients who did not undergo treatment (conventional ESD, 1; CRT-ESD, 4), 112 patients were included in the study (conventional ESD, 59; CRT-ESD, 53). The baseline characteristics of the patients were well balanced between the two groups. The TPT (58.71 ± 26.22 min vs 33.58 ± 9.88 min, p < 0.001) and SDT (49.24 ± 23.75 min vs 26.34 ± 8.75 min, p < 0.001) were significantly different between the conventional ESD group and CRT-ESD group. The CRT-ESD group had significantly higher SDS than that of the traditional ESD group (0.54 ± 0.42 cm2/min vs 0.89 ± 0.40 cm2/min, p < 0.001). There were 4 (6.8%) cases of perforation in the traditional ESD group, and no perforation occurred in traction-assisted ESD. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with traditional ESD, CRT-ESD with clip and rubber band is both safer and more effective in the treatment of colorectal lesions.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD): how do Western endoscopists value animal models?

INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection (ESD)was introduced in the West later than in the East. Our aim was to assess how Western endoscopists performing ESD have been trained and how they value animal models for training. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An online survey regarding training in ESD was sent to Western endoscopists who published articles on advanced resection techniques. RESULTS: From 279 endoscopists, 58 (21%) completed the questionnaire, of which 50 confirmed performance of clinical ESD. Endoscopists had a median of 15 years of endoscopic experience (IQR 9.75-20.25) and all of them were performing conventional EMR, before starting ESD. Prior to clinical ESD, 74% (n = 37) underwent training with ex vivo models, 84% (n = 42) with live animal models and 92% (n = 46) with at least, one of the two models. After starting clinical ESD, as trainers, 52% (n = 26) were involved with ex vivo and 60% (n = 30) with live animal models. Personal usefulness of ex vivo and live animal models was rated with a median of 9 (IQR 8-10) and 10 (IQR 8-10), out of 10, respectively. Courses with ex vivo and live animal models were considered a prerequisite before clinical practice by 84% (n = 42) and 78% (n = 39), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Western endoscopists have extensive endoscopic experience before starting ESD. The majority had pre-clinical training with ex vivo and live animal models and more than half are acting as trainers of other endoscopists with these models. Animal models are considered very useful and deemed a prerequisite before clinical practice by the majority of the endoscopists.

Long-term prognosis after endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal tumors in patients aged over 80 years.

BACKGROUND: In Japan, endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is standardized for large colorectal tumors. However, its validity in the elderly population is unclear. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ESD for colorectal tumors in elderly patients aged over 80 years. METHODS: ESD was performed on 178 tumors in 165 consecutive patients aged over 80 years between December 2008 and December 2018. We retrospectively evaluated the clinicopathological characteristics and clinical outcomes of ESD. We also assessed the prognosis of 160 patients followed up for more than 12 months. RESULTS: The mean patient age was 83.7 ± 3.1 years. The number of patients with comorbidities was 100 (62.5%). Among all patients, 106 (64.2%) were categorized as class 1 or 2 according to the American Society of Anesthesiologists classification of physical status (ASA-PS), and 59 (35.8%) were classified as class 3. The mean procedure time was 97.7 ± 79.3 min. The rate of histological en bloc resection was 93.8% (167/178). Delayed bleeding in 11 cases (6.2%) and perforation in 7 cases (3.9%) were treated conservatively. The 5-year survival rate was 89.9%. No deaths from primary disease (mean follow-up time: 35.3 ± 27.5 months) were observed. Overall survival rates were significantly lower in the non-curative resection group that did not undergo additional surgery than in the curative resection group (P = 0.0152) and non-curative group that underwent additional surgery (P = 0.0259). Overall survival rates were higher for ASA-PS class 1 or 2 patients than class 3 patients (P = 0.0105). Metachronous tumors (> 5 mm) developed in 9.4% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: ESD for colorectal tumors in patients aged over 80 years is safe. Colorectal cancer-associated deaths were prevented although comorbidities pose a high risk of poor prognosis.

A nonrandomized, single-arm confirmatory trial of expanded endoscopic submucosal dissection indication for undifferentiated early gastric cancer: Japan Clinical Oncology Group study (JCOG1009/1010).

BACKGROUND: While endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is recognized as a minimally invasive standard treatment for differentiated early gastric cancers (EGCs), it has not been indicated for undifferentiated EGC (UD-EGC) because of a relatively high risk of lymph node metastasis (LNM). However, patients with surgically resected mucosal (cT1a) UD-EGC ≤ 2 cm in size with no lymphovascular invasion or ulceration are reported to be at a very low risk of LNM. This multicenter, single-arm, confirmatory trial was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ESD for UD-EGC. METHODS: The key eligibility criteria were endoscopically diagnosed cT1a/N0/M0, single primary lesion, size ≤ 2 cm, no ulceration and histologically proven components of undifferentiated adenocarcinoma on biopsy. Based on the histological findings after ESD, additional gastrectomy was indicated if the criteria for curative resection were not satisfied. The subjects of the primary analysis were patients with UD-EGC as the dominant component. The primary endpoint was 5-year overall survival (OS) of patients with UD-EGC. RESULTS: Three hundred 46 patients were enrolled from 49 institutions. The proportion of en bloc resection was 99%. No ESD-related Grade 4 adverse events were noted. Delayed bleeding and intraoperative and delayed perforation occurred in 25 (7.3%), 13 (3.8%), and 6 (1.7%) patients, respectively. Among the 275 patients who were the subjects of the primary analysis, curative resection was achieved in 195 patients (71%), and 5-year OS was 99.3% (95% CI: 97.1-99.8). CONCLUSIONS: ESD can be a curative and less invasive treatment for UD-EGC for patients meeting the eligibility criteria of this study.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection with an additional working channel (ESD+): a novel technique to improve procedure time and safety of ESD.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: A new external additional working channel (AWC) was recently introduced by which endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) can be converted to a technique termed "ESD+ ". We aim to systematically evaluate this novel technique in flat gastric lesions and compare it to classical ESD. METHODS: The study was prospectively conducted in a pre-clinical ex vivo animal model (EASIE-R simulator) with porcine stomachs. Prior to intervention, we set standardized lesions measuring 3 cm or 4 cm in antegrade as well as in retrograde positions. RESULTS: Overall, 64 procedures were performed by an experienced endoscopist. Both techniques were reliable and showed en bloc resection rates of 100%. Overall, ESD+ reduced time of procedure compared to ESD (24.5 vs. 32.5 min, p = 0.025*). Particularly, ESD+ was significantly faster in retrograde lesions with a median of 22.5 vs. 34.0 min in 3 cm retrograde lesions (p = 0.002*) and 34.5 vs. 41.0 min (p = 0.011*) in 4 cm retrograde lesions. There were 0 perforations with both techniques. In ESD+ , 1 muscularis damage occurred (3.13%) compared to 6 muscularis damages with ESD (18.75%, p = 0.045*). CONCLUSIONS: By its grasp-and-mobilize technique, ESD+ allows potentially faster and safer resections of flat gastric lesions compared to conventional ESD in an ex vivo porcine model. The potential advantages of ESD+ in terms of procedure time may be particularly relevant for difficult lesions in retrograde positions.

EMR + with the AWC improves endoscopic resection speed compared to ESD: a porcine ex-vivo pilot study.

INTRODUCTION: To improve resection speed and to reach higher en bloc resection rates in lesions ≥ 2 cm, a novel grasp and snare EMR technique termed "EMR+", accomplished by an additional working channel (AWC), was developed. Its use compared to endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is evaluated for the first time. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We prospectively conducted a randomized pre-clinical ex-vivo pilot study in explanted porcine stomachs for the comparison of EMR + with classical ESD of mucosal-based lesions. Prior to intervention, we set flat lesions with a standardized size of 3 × 3 cm. RESULTS: The median time of procedure was significantly shorter in the EMR + group (median 10.5 min, range 4.4-24 min) than in the ESD group (median 32 min, range 14-61.6 min, p < .0001). The rate of en bloc resection was significantly lower in the EMR + group (38 % vs. 95 %) (p < .0001). Nevertheless, an improvement in the learning curve for EMR + was achieved after the first 12 procedures, with a subsequent en bloc resection rate of 100 %. CONCLUSIONS: EMR + could improve the efficiency of mucosal resection procedures. Initial experience demonstrates a higher and satisfactory en bloc resection rate after going through the learning curve of EMR+.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) versus transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) for treatment of rectal tumors: a comparative systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: While multiple studies have evaluated endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) to remove large rectal tumors, there remains a paucity of data to evaluate their comparative efficacy and safety. The primary aim of this study was to perform a structured systematic review and meta-analysis to compare efficacy and safety of ESD versus TEM for the treatment of rectal tumors. METHODS: Individualized search strategies were developed from inception through November 2018 in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Measured outcomes included pooled enbloc resection rates, margin-negative (R0) resection rates, procedure-associated adverse events, and rates of recurrence. This was a cumulative meta-analysis performed by calculating pooled proportions. Heterogeneity was assessed with Cochran Q test and I2 statistics, and publication bias by funnel plot using Egger and Begg tests. RESULTS: Three studies (n = 158 patients; 55.22% male) were included in this meta-analysis. Patients with ESD compared to TEM had similar age (P = 0.090), rectal tumor size (P = 0.108), and diagnosis rate of adenoma to cancer (P = 0.53). ESD lesions were more proximal as compared to TEM (8.41 ± 3.49 vs. 5.11 ± 1.43 cm from the anal verge; P < 0.001). Procedure time and hospital stay were shorter for ESD compared to TEM [(79.78 ± 24.45 vs. 116.61 ± 19.35 min; P < 0.001) and (3.99 ± 0.32 vs. 5.83 ± 0.94 days; P < 0.001), respectively]. No significant differences between enbloc resection rates [OR 0.98 (95% CI 0.22-4.33); P = 0.98; I2 = 0.00%] and R0 resection rates [OR 1.16 (95% CI 0.36-3.76); P = 0.80; I2 = 0.00%] were noted between ESD and TEM. ESD and TEM reported similar rates of adverse events [OR 1.15 (95% CI 0.47-2.77); P = 0.80; I2 = 0.00%] and rates of recurrence [OR 0.46 (95% CI 0.07-3.14); P = 0.43; I2 = 0.00%]. CONCLUSION: ESD and TEM possess similar rates of resection, adverse events, and recurrence for patients with large rectal tumors; however, ESD is associated with significantly shorter procedure times and duration of hospitalization. Future studies are needed to evaluate healthcare utilization for these two strategies.

Lesion size and circumferential range identified as independent risk factors for esophageal stricture after endoscopic submucosal dissection.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is used to treat early esophageal cancer and precancerous lesions. Patients undergoing ESD are prone to esophageal stenosis, which impairs therapeutic efficacy and quality of life. This retrospective study aimed to investigate the potential association between patient demographics and esophageal lesion characteristics with the risk of esophageal stenosis following ESD. METHODS: For this retrospective study 190 consecutive patients who underwent ESD between January 2013 and January 2015 were recruited. Data on patient demographics, esophageal lesion-related factors, operation details, esophageal stenosis occurrence and measures taken to prevent or treat stricture were collected, and the normality of distribution of each indicator was assessed with a Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. Stenosis risk factors were then identified using univariate and multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Post-ESD esophageal stenosis occurred in 51 cases. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify independent risk factors. A history of EMR/ESD (OR = 4.185, 95% CI: 1.511-11.589), resection circumferential diameter (OR = 1.721, 95% CI: 1.135-2.610), non-en bloc resection (OR = 7.413, 95% CI: 2.398-22.921), submucosal infiltration (OR = 3.449, 95% CI: 1.014-11.734) and circumferential resection range (OR = 57.493, 95% CI: 17.236-191.782) were identified as independent risk factors for post-ESD esophageal stenosis. Spraying porcine fibrin adhesive on the resection bed reduced neither the incidence of postoperative stenosis nor the extent of postoperative dilation. CONCLUSION: Post-ESD esophageal stenosis is significantly related to size and circumferential range of lesion resection. EMR/ESD history, non-en bloc resection and submucosal infiltration may be additional risk factors.

Current state of education and training for endoscopic submucosal dissection: Translating strategy and success to the USA.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a rigorous and technically sophisticated method for removal of lesions within the gastrointestinal tract. Despite having advantages of en-bloc resection of lesions, regardless of size, and widespread use in Japan and Asia, ESD has not become widely adopted in the USA for a variety of reasons. Based upon Japanese education and the master-apprentice model, modification to the education system and additional techniques designed to facilitate broader adoption are required for trainees in the USA. This article will review the current state of education and training for ESD in the USA.

Multiband mucosectomy versus endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic submucosal excavation for GI submucosal tumors: short and long term follow-up.

AIMS: To evaluate the short- and long-term outcomes of 3 different endoscopic dissection techniques for upper gastrointestinal (GI) submucosal tumours (SMTs). METHODS: Data for 135 patients withGI SMTs who underwent multiband mucosectomy (MBM), endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), or endoscopic submucosal excavation (ESE) were retrospectively assessed. The en bloc resection rate, endoscopic complete resection rate, operation time, potential complications and local recurrence rate were compared. RESULTS: No significant differences were observed in the rate of endoscopic complete resections and pathologic complete resections among the three groups. For SMTs > 15 mm in width, the lowest en bloc resection rate was found for MBM (P = 0.000). MBM was also associated with the shortest procedure time, lowest perforation rate and lowest rate of major bleeding. ESE was the most effective procedure for muscularis propria (MP) lesions but was associated with the longest operation time (P < 0.01). The ESD and ESE groups had similar perforation rates (P > 0.05). No differences were observed in 4-year local recurrence rates among the groups (P = 0.945). CONCLUSIONS: MBM is a simple and effective method for the treatment of small SMTs and achieves clinical success rates similar to those of ESD and ESE. However, ESD and ESE are preferable for larger and deep lesions and are associated with a longer operation time. Nonetheless, all 3 techniques resulted in a low 4-year local recurrence rate. Large-scale randomized clinical trials are needed to further investigate these results.

Competency assessment for gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection using an endoscopic part-task training box.

BACKGROUND: Objective assessment of endoscopist competency is important. Recently, the endoscopic part-task training box (Thompson Endoscopic Skills Trainer [TEST]) was developed to assess endoscopist competency. We aimed to evaluate the ability of the TEST to assess competency during endoscopic procedures, especially endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). METHODS: Twenty-three physicians were included in this study. Correlations between TEST scores and the following factors were evaluated: years of endoscopic experience, number of esophagogastroduodenoscopies (EGDs) performed, number of colonoscopies (CSs) performed, cecal intubation rate, number of gastric ESDs performed, gastric ESD procedure time/lesion size (min/mm2), and gastric ESD self-completion rate. Also, correlation coefficients between the number of gastric ESDs performed and each of gastric ESD procedure time/lesion size and gastric ESD self-completion rate were calculated. RESULTS: TEST scores showed strong correlations to different factors: years of experience in endoscopy: 0.957 (p < 0.01); number of EGDs: 0.947 (p < 0.01); number of CSs: 0.947, (p < 0.01); number of gastric ESDs: 0.924 (p < 0.01); gastric ESD procedure time/lesion size: - 0.9 (p < 0.01); self-completion rate of gastric ESDs: 0.857 (p < 0.005). The number of gastric ESDs performed was not more strongly correlated to procedure time of gastric ESDs or self-completion rate of gastric ESDs compared to TEST scores (- 0.824 (p < 0.01) and 0.704 (p < 0.05), respectively). TEST scores of endoscopists with a cecal intubation rate ≥ 90% were > 380, while the scores of physicians with a gastric ESD self-completion rate ≥ 90% were > 700. CONCLUSIONS: TEST score correlates with both basic and advanced endoscopic procedures. TEST is therefore a promising option for assessing endoscopist competency, and might be useful for providing threshold scores as competency markers for specific endoscopic procedures such as gastric ESD.