Endoscopic En Bloc Versus Piecemeal Resection of Large Nonpedunculated Colonic Adenomas : A Randomized Comparative Trial.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic resection of adenomas prevents colorectal cancer, but the optimal technique for larger lesions is controversial. Piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) has a low adverse event (AE) rate but a variable recurrence rate necessitating early follow-up. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) can reduce recurrence but may increase AEs. OBJECTIVE: To compare ESD and EMR for large colonic adenomas. DESIGN: Participant-masked, parallel-group, superiority, randomized controlled trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03962868). SETTING: Multicenter study involving 6 French referral centers from November 2019 to February 2021. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with large (≥25 mm) benign colonic lesions referred for resection. INTERVENTION: The patients were randomly assigned by computer 1:1 (stratification by lesion location and center) to ESD or EMR. MEASUREMENTS: The primary end point was 6-month local recurrence (neoplastic tissue on endoscopic assessment and scar biopsy). The secondary end points were technical failure, en bloc R0 resection, and cumulative AEs. RESULTS: In total, 360 patients were randomly assigned to ESD (n = 178) or EMR (n = 182). In the primary analysis set (n = 318 lesions in 318 patients), recurrence occurred after 1 of 161 ESDs (0.6%) and 8 of 157 EMRs (5.1%) (relative risk, 0.12 [95% CI, 0.01 to 0.96]). No recurrence occurred in R0-resected cases (90%) after ESD. The AEs occurred more often after ESD than EMR (35.6% vs. 24.5%, respectively; relative risk, 1.4 [CI, 1.0 to 2.0]). LIMITATION: Procedures were performed under general anesthesia during hospitalization in accordance with the French health system. CONCLUSION: Compared with EMR, ESD reduces the 6-month recurrence rate, obviating the need for systematic early follow-up colonoscopy at the cost of more AEs. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: French Ministry of Health.

Impact of Annual Case Volume on Colorectal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection Outcomes in a Large Prospective Cohort Study.

INTRODUCTION: The adoption of colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is still limited in the West. A recent randomized trial showed that ESD is more effective and only slightly riskier than piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection; reproducibility outside expert centers was questioned. We evaluated the results according to the annual case volume in a multicentric prospective cohort. METHODS: Between September 2019 and September 2022, colorectal ESD was consecutively performed at 13 participating centers classified as low volume (LV), middle volume (MV), and high volume (HV). The main procedural outcomes were assessed. Multivariate and propensity score matching analyses were performed. RESULTS: Three thousand seven hundred seventy ESDs were included. HV centers treated larger and more often colonic lesions than MV and LV centers. En bloc , R0, and curative resection rates were 95.2%, 87.4%, and 83.2%, respectively, and were higher at HV than at MV and LV centers. HV centers also achieved a faster dissection speed. Delayed bleeding and surgery for complications rates were 5.4% and 0.8%, respectively, without significant differences. The perforation rate (overall: 9%) was higher at MV than at LV and HV centers. Lesion characteristics, but not volume center, were independently associated with both R1 resection and perforation. However, after propensity score matching, R0 rates were significantly higher at HV than at LV centers, and perforation rates were significantly higher at MV than at HV centers. DISCUSSION: Colorectal ESD can be successfully implemented in the West, even in nonexpert centers. However, difficult lesions must still be referred to experts.

Prevalence and clinical significance of the muscle retracting sign during endoscopic submucosal dissection of large macronodular colorectal lesions (with videos).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The muscle retracting sign (MRS) can be present during endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) of macronodular colorectal lesions. The prevalence of MRS and its pathologic and clinical implications is unclear. This study evaluated the effect of MRS on the technical and clinical outcomes of ESD. METHODS: All patients referred for ESD of protruding lesions or granular mixed lesions with >10 mm macronodule granular mixed laterally spreading tumors (LST-GMs) in 2 academic centers from January 2017 to October 2022 were prospectively included. Size of the macronodule was analyzed retrospectively. The primary outcome was the curative resection rate according to MRS status. Secondary outcomes were R0 resection, perforation, secondary surgery rate, and risk factors for MRS. RESULTS: Of 694 lesions, 84 (12%) had MRS (MRS+). The curative resection rate was decreased by MRS (MRS+ 41.6% vs lesions without MRS [MRS-] 81.3%), whereas the perforation (MRS+ 22.6% vs MRS- 9.2%), submucosal cancer (MRS+ 34.9% vs MRS- 9.2%), and surgery (MRS+ 45.2% vs MRS- 6%) rates were increased. The R0 resection rate of MRS+ colonic lesions was lower than that of rectal lesions (53% vs 74.3%). In multivariate analysis, protruding lesions (odds ratio, 2.47; 95% confidence interval, 1.27-4.80) and macronodules >4 cm (odds ratio, 4.24; 95% confidence interval, 2.23-8.05) were risk factors for MRS. CONCLUSIONS: MRS reduces oncologic outcomes and increases the perforation rate. Consequently, procedures in the colon should be stopped if MRS is detected, and those in the rectum should be continued due to the morbidity of alternative therapy.

Risk of delayed bleeding after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: the Limoges Bleeding Score.

BACKGROUND: Clinically significant delayed bleeding (CSDB) is a frequent, and sometimes severe, adverse event after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). We evaluated risk factors of CSDB after colorectal ESD. METHODS: We analyzed a prospective registry of 940 colorectal ESDs performed from 2013 to 2022. The incidence of bleeding was evaluated up to 30 days. Risk factors for delayed bleeding were evaluated by multivariate logistic regression. A Korean scoring model was tested, and a new risk-scoring model was developed and internally validated. RESULTS: CSDB occurred in 75 patients (8.0%). The Korean score performed poorly in our cohort, with a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of 0.567. In the multivariate analysis, risk factors were age ≥75 years (odds ratio [OR] 1.63; 95%CI 0.97-2.73; 1 point), use of antithrombotics (OR 1.72; 95%CI 1.01-2.94; 1 point), rectal location (OR 1.51; 95%CI 0.92-2.48; 1 point), size >50 mm (OR 3.67; 95%CI 2.02-7.14; 3 points), and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score of III or IV (OR 2.26; 95%CI 1.32-3.92; 2 points). The model showed fair calibration and good discrimination, with an area under the ROC curve of 0.751 (95%CI 0.690-0.812). The score was used to define two groups of patients, those with low-medium risk (0 to 4 points) and high risk (5 to 8 points) for CSDB (respective bleeding rates 4.1% and 17.5%). CONCLUSION: A score based on five simple and meaningful variables was predictive of CSDB.

Double-clip traction for colonic endoscopic submucosal dissection: a multicenter study of 599 consecutive cases (with video).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Colonic endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is particularly challenging and limited to a few expert centers. We recently conducted a pilot study on improvement of colonic ESD with systematic use of a countertraction device (double-clip traction with rubber band [DCT-ESD]). METHODS: A French prospective multicenter study was conducted between March 2017 and September 2019, including all consecutive cases of naive colonic ESD. Since the first case of DCT-ESD in March 2017, all cases of colonic ESD have been performed using the DCT-ESD strategy in the 3 centers involved in the study. RESULTS: Five hundred ninety-nine lesions with a mean size of 53 mm were included in this study, resected by 5 operators in 3 centers. The en bloc, R0, and curative resection rates were 95.7%, 83.5%, and 81.1%, respectively. The adverse event rates were 4.9% for perforation and 4.2% for postprocedure bleeding. Between 2017 and 2019, the rates of R0 and curative resections increased significantly from 74.7% in 2017 to 88.4% in 2019 (P = .003) and from 72.6% in 2017 to 86.3% in 2019 (P = .004), respectively. Procedure duration and speed of resection were 62.4 minutes and 39.4 mm2/minute, respectively. No differences were noted between operators. CONCLUSION: DCT-ESD is a safe and reproducible technique, with results comparable with those of the large Japanese teams with speed of resection twice as high as previously reported studies. The DCT strategy is promising, cheap, and seems to be reproducible. Physicians performing colonic ESD should be aware of this promising tool to improve their results in ESD.

Double-clip traction could be superior to the pocket-creation method with cylindrical cap for colonic ESD: a randomized study in an ex vivo model.

INTRODUCTION: In Western countries, debates between ESD vs piece-meal EMR as the best treatment for large colorectal adenomas persist regarding the difficulty of ESD the colon, and the safety and relatively good results of piece-meal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). Pocket-creation method (PCM) and double-clip countertraction (DCT) are two strategies recently published to facilitate ESD in this challenging situation. METHOD: This is a randomized animal study to compare PCM and DCT strategies for colonic ESD on ex vivo models (bovine colon) performed by 3 operators novice in ESD. Hybridknife type T was used to inject normal saline tinted with a small amount of blue dye in all procedures. Randomization was stratified according to the use of gravity assist. Primary endpoint was the difference in resection speed between PCM and DCT strategies. RESULTS: Resection speed was significantly higher in the DCT group than in the PCM group (56.3 vs. 31.6 mm2/min, p = 0.01). Technical success rate, defined as en bloc resection in under 60 min, was significantly better in the DCT group than in the PCM group (100% vs. 84.4%, p = 0.024), perforation rate was lower (0% vs. 18.8%, p = 0.012), and difficulty score was better (2.4 vs. 6.2, p < 0.0001) as was procedure duration (24.2 vs. 40.2 min, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: DCT was superior to PCM for ESD in our validated bovine colon model. This strategy is inexpensive, easy to use and adaptive. It might facilitate the widespread use of colonic ESD in Western countries and change Western ideas regarding the use of colonic ESD compared with piece-meal EMR for large benign lesions.

Outcomes from an international multicenter registry of patients with acute gastrointestinal bleeding undergoing endoscopic treatment with Hemospray.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Acute gastrointestinal bleeding carries poor outcomes unless prompt endoscopic hemostasis is achieved. Mortality in these patients remains significant. Hemospray is a novel intervention that creates a mechanical barrier over bleeding sites. We report the largest dataset of patient outcomes after treatment with Hemospray from an international multicenter registry. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Prospective data (Jan 2016-May 2018) from 12 centers across Europe were collected. Immediate hemostasis was defined as endoscopic cessation of bleeding within 5 min after application of Hemospray. Rebleeding was defined as subsequent drop in hemoglobin, hematemesis, persistent melena with hemodynamic compromise post-therapy. RESULTS: Three hundred and fourteen cases were recruited worldwide (231 males, 83 females). Median pretreatment Blatchford score was 11 (IQR: 8-14) and median complete Rockall score (RS) was 7 (IQR: 6-8) for all patients. Peptic ulcer disease (PUD) was the most common pathology (167/314 = 53%) and Forrest Ib the most common bleed type in PUD (100/167 = 60%). 281 patients (89.5%) achieved immediate hemostasis after successful endoscopic therapy with Hemospray. Rebleeding occurred in 29 (10.3%) of the 281 patients who achieved immediate hemostasis. Seven-day and 30-day all-cause mortality were 11.5% (36/314) and 20.1% (63/314), respectively (lower than the predicted rates as per the RS). Similar hemostasis rates were noted in the Hemospray monotherapy (92.4%), combination therapy (88.7%) and rescue therapy (85.5%) groups. CONCLUSIONS: These data show high rates of immediate hemostasis overall and in all subgroups. Rebleeding and mortality rates were in keeping/lower than predicted rates.

Risk factors for stent dysfunction during long-term follow-up after EUS-guided biliary drainage using lumen-apposing metal stents: A prospective study.

Background: EUS-guided choledoco-duodenostomy using electrocautery-enhanced lumen-apposing metal stents (ECE-LAMS) is becoming the gold standard in case of endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography failure for distal malignant obstruction. Long-term data in larger samples are lacking. Methods: This was a prospective monocentric study including all patients who underwent EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (CDS) between September 2016 and December 2021. The primary endpoint was the rate of biliary obstruction during follow-up. Secondary endpoints were technical and clinical success rates, adverse event rates, and identification of risk factors for biliary obstruction. Results: One hundred and twenty-three EUS-guided CDS using ECE-LAMS were performed at Limoges University Hospital were performed during the study period and included in the study. The main cause of obstruction was pancreatic adenocarcinoma in 91 (74.5%) cases. The technical and clinical success rates were 97.5% and 91%, respectively. Twenty patients (16.3%) suffered from biliary obstructions during a mean follow-up of 242 days. The clinical success rate for endoscopic desobstruction was 80% (16/20). In uni- and multivariate analyses, only the presence of a duodenal stent (odds ratio [OR]: 3.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] 95%: 1.2-10.2; P = 0.018) and a bile duct thinner than 15 mm (OR: 3.9, CI 95%: 1.3-11.7; P = 0.015) were the significant risk factors for biliary obstruction during the follow-up. Conclusion: Obstruction of LAMS occurred in 16.3% of cases during follow-up and endoscopic desobstruction is efficacious in 80% of cases. The presence of duodenal stent and a bile duct thinner than 15 mm are the risk factors of obstruction. Except in these situation, EUS-CDS with ECE-LAMS could be proposed in the first intent in case of distal malignant obstruction.

The COlorectal NEoplasia Endoscopic Classification to Choose the Treatment classification for identification of large laterally spreading lesions lacking submucosal carcinomas: A prospective study of 663 lesions.

INTRODUCTION: Optical diagnosis is necessary when selecting the resection modality for large superficial colorectal lesions. The COlorectal NEoplasia Endoscopic Classification to Choose the Treatment (CONECCT) encompasses overt (irregular pit or vascular pattern) and covert (macroscopic features) signs of carcinoma in an all-in-one classification using validated criteria. The CONECCT IIC subtype corresponds to adenomas with a high risk of superficial carcinoma that should be resected en bloc with free margins. METHODS: This prospective multicentre study investigated the diagnostic accuracy of the CONECCT classification for predicting submucosal invasion in colorectal lesions >20 mm. Optical diagnosis before en bloc resection by endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) was compared with the final histological diagnosis. Diagnostic accuracy for the CONECCT IIC subtype was compared with literature-validated features of concern considered to be risk factors for submucosal invasion (non-granular large spreading tumour [NG LST], macronodule >1 cm, SANO IIIA area, and Paris 0-IIC area). RESULTS: Six hundred 63 lesions removed by ESD were assessed. The en bloc, R0, and curative resection rates were respectively 96%, 85%, and 81%. The CONECCT classification had a sensitivity (Se) of 100%, specificity (Sp) of 26.2%, positive predictive value of 11.6%, and negative predictive value (NPV) of 100% for predicting at least submucosal adenocarcinoma. The sensitivity of CONECCT IIC (100%) to predict submucosal cancer was superior to all other criteria evaluated. COlorectal NEoplasia Endoscopic Classification to Choose the Treatment IIC lesions constituted 11.5% of all submucosal carcinomas. CONCLUSION: The CONECCT classification, which combines covert and overt signs of carcinoma, identifies with very perfect sensitivity (Se 100%, NPV 100%) the 30% of low-risk adenomas in large laterally spreading lesions treatable by piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection or ESD according to expertise without undertreatment. However, the low specificity of CONECCT leads to a large number of potentially not indicated ESDs for suspected high-risk lesions.

Effect of implementing a regional referral network on surgical referral rate of benign polyps found during a colorectal cancer screening program: A population-based study.

INTRODUCTION: Surgical management is too often performed as the first-line treatment for large, benign colorectal polyps. We report the management of benign lesions detected by organised colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. METHODS: Population-based study in 2012, 2016, and 2017, analyzing the evolution of surgical management of benign polyps of≥2cm diameter discovered in the context of organised CRC screening after the implementation of a regional referral network for the management of superficial colorectal lesions. RESULTS: A total of 1571 patients underwent colonoscopy following a positive test during the study period, among which 981 colonoscopies yielded at least one lesion. The adenoma detection rate was lower in 2012 (Guaiac test) than in 2016 and 2017 (fecal immunochemical test) (40% vs. 60% vs. 57%, P<0.0001). The surgery rate for benign lesions decreased from 14.6% in 2012 to 7.7% in 2016 and 5% in 2017 (P=0.017). The risk factors for surgery for benign lesions were year 2012 (odds ratio [OR]=3.35, P=0.022), high-grade dysplasia (OR=2.49, P=0.04), in situ carcinoma (OR=5, P=0.003), size≥20mm (OR=17.39, P<0.0001), and private sector (OR=6.6, P=0.0002). The morbidity rate of surgery for benign polyp≥2cm was 20.4% at 1month and its cost was sixfold higher than that of endoscopy. CONCLUSION: The establishment of a regional referral network for the management of large colorectal polyps reduces the rate of surgical management of such lesions.

What is the cost of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD)? A medico-economic study.

Introduction: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is the gold-standard treatment for superficial lesions of the digestive tract. No medico-economic study has been conducted in Europe. Material and methods: A monocentric study was conducted including all patients undergoing ESD between January 2015 and December 2017. The global cost of hospital stays was measured by microcosting, and revenue was based on the diagnosis-related group (DRG) system. The primary objective was to assess the cost/revenue balance. A medico-economic comparison with surgery was performed as a secondary outcome. Results: A total of 193 patients were prospectively included. The cost per procedure was €3463.79, subtracted from a €2726.84 revenue, with a deficit of -€736.96 per stay. Presence of comorbidities/complications increasing DRG value was the only predictive factor for a positive budgetary balance in a multivariate analysis (odds ratio 49.21, 95% confidence interval 11.3-214.25, p < 0.0001). In comparison with surgery, ESD was associated with shorter length of stay (11 vs 2 days; p < 0.0001) and lower morbidity (28% vs 14%; p = 0.061), lower cost (€8960 vs €1770; p < 0.0001). Conclusion: The ESD cost/revenue balance is negative in 80% of cases. Given the benefits of ESD in terms of patient morbidity and financial savings compared with surgery, the implementation of a specific ESD reimbursement is warranted.