Efficacy of a Traction Device for Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection Using a Scissor-Type Knife: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Although safe, colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) using a scissor-type knife has a slow resection speed. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of a traction device to hasten the resection speed. METHODS: This multicenter randomized controlled trial was conducted at 3 Japanese institutions. Patients with a 20-50-mm superficial colorectal tumor were enrolled and randomly assigned to a conventional-ESD (C-ESD) group or a traction-assisted ESD (T-ESD) group. The primary outcome was the resection speed. RESULTS: The C-ESD and T-ESD groups comprised 49 and 48 patients, respectively. Although the mean resection speed was not significantly different in the entire cohort between the groups (23.7 vs 25.6 mm 2 /min, respectively; P = 0.43), it was significantly faster with T-ESD than with C-ESD at the cecum (32.4 vs 16.7 mm 2 /min, respectively; P = 0.02). The mean resection speed of tumors ≥30 mm tended to be faster by T-ESD than by C-ESD (34.6 vs 27.8 mm 2 /min, respectively; P = 0.054). The mean procedure time of T-ESD was significantly shorter than that of C-ESD (47.3 vs 62.3 minutes, respectively; P = 0.03). The en bloc (100% vs 100%), complete (98.0% vs 97.9%), and curative resection (93.9% vs 91.7%) rates were similar between the 2 groups. Perforation and delayed hemorrhage occurred in only 1 patient each in the T-ESD group. DISCUSSION: Although the resection rates were sufficiently high and adverse event rates were extremely low in both the groups, the use of a traction device for ESD in the proximal colon and for large lesions may increase the resection speed.

A survey of colonoscopists with and without in-depth knowledge of water-aided colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Endoscopy featured water-aided colonoscopy (WAC) as novel in the Innovation Forum in 2011. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy published a modified Delphi consensus review (MDCR) that supports WAC for clinical practice in 2021. We tested the hypothesis that experience was an important predictor of WAC use, either as water immersion (WI), water exchange (WE), or a combination of WI and WE. METHODS: A questionnaire was sent by email to the MDCR authors with an in-depth knowledge of WAC. They responded and also invited colleagues and trainees without in-depth knowledge to respond. Logistic regression analysis was used with the reasons for WAC use treated as the primary outcome. Reports related to WAC post MDCR were identified. RESULTS: Of 100 respondents, > 80% indicated willingness to adopt and modify practice to accommodate WAC. Higher adenoma detection rate (ADR) incentivized WE use. Procedure time slots ≤ 30 and > 30 min significantly predicted WI and WE use, respectively. Co-authors of the MDCR were significantly more likely to perform WAC (odds ratio [OR] = 7.5, P = 0.037). Unfamiliarity with (OR = 0.11, P = 0.02) and absence of good experience (OR = 0.019, P = 0.002) were associated with colonoscopists less likely to perform WAC. Reports related to WAC post MDCR revealed overall and right colon WE outcomes continued to improve. Network meta-analyses showed that WE was superior to Cap and Endocuff. On-demand sedation with WE shortened nursing recovery time. CONCLUSIONS: An important predictor of WAC use was experience. Superior outcomes continued to be reported with WE.

Accuracy of a no-biopsy approach for the diagnosis of coeliac disease across different adult cohorts.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine the predictive capacity and diagnostic yield of a 10-fold increase in serum IgA antitissue transglutaminase (tTG) antibody levels for detecting small intestinal injury diagnostic of coeliac disease (CD) in adult patients. DESIGN: The study comprised three adult cohorts. Cohort 1: 740 patients assessed in the specialist CD clinic at a UK centre; cohort 2: 532 patients with low suspicion for CD referred for upper GI endoscopy at a UK centre; cohort 3: 145 patients with raised tTG titres from multiple international sites. Marsh 3 histology was used as a reference standard against which we determined the performance characteristics of an IgA tTG titre of ≥10×ULN for a diagnosis of CD. RESULTS: Cohort 1: the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) for IgA tTG levels of ≥10×ULN at identifying individuals with Marsh 3 lesions were 54.0%, 90.0%, 98.7% and 12.5%, respectively. Cohort 2: the sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV for IgA tTG levels of ≥10×ULN at identifying individuals with Marsh 3 lesions were 50.0%, 100.0%, 100.0% and 98.3%, respectively. Cohort 3: the sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV for IgA tTG levels of ≥10×ULN at identifying individuals with Marsh 3 lesions were 30.0%, 83.0%, 95.2% and 9.5%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our results show that IgA tTG titres of ≥10×ULN have a strong predictive value at identifying adults with intestinal changes diagnostic of CD. This study supports the use of a no-biopsy approach for the diagnosis of adult CD.

Water-assisted colonoscopy: an international modified Delphi review on definitions and practice recommendations.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Since 2008, a plethora of research studies has compared the efficacy of water-assisted (aided) colonoscopy (WAC) and underwater resection (UWR) of colorectal lesions with standard colonoscopy. We reviewed and graded the research evidence with potential clinical application. We conducted a modified Delphi consensus among experienced colonoscopists on definitions and practice of water immersion (WI), water exchange (WE), and UWR. METHODS: Major databases were searched to obtain research reports that could potentially shape clinical practice related to WAC and UWR. Pertinent references were graded (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation). Extracted data supporting evidence-based statements were tabulated and provided to respondents. We received responses from 55 (85% surveyed) experienced colonoscopists (37 experts and 18 nonexperts in WAC) from 16 countries in 3 rounds. Voting was conducted anonymously in the second and third round, with ≥80% agreement defined as consensus. We aimed to obtain consensus in all statements. RESULTS: In the first and the second modified Delphi rounds, 20 proposed statements were decreased to 14 and then 11 statements. After the third round, the combined responses from all respondents depicted the consensus in 11 statements (S): definitions of WI (S1) and WE (S2), procedural features (S3-S5), impact on bowel cleanliness (S6), adenoma detection (S7), pain score (S8), and UWR (S9-S11). CONCLUSIONS: The most important consensus statements are that WI and WE are not the same in implementation and outcomes. Because studies that could potentially shape clinical practice of WAC and UWR were chosen for review, this modified Delphi consensus supports recommendations for the use of WAC in clinical practice.

Zenker's Diverticulum: Can Protocolised Measurements with Barium SWALLOW Predict Severity and Treatment Outcomes? The "Zen-Rad" Study.

Although barium swallow imaging is established in the investigation of Zenker's diverticulum (ZD), no agreed measurement protocol exists. We developed a protocol for measuring ZD dimensions and aimed to correlate measurements with symptoms and post-operative outcomes. This prospective study included patients with confirmed ZD who underwent flexible endoscopic septal division (FESD) between 2014 and 2018. ZD was confirmed on barium radiology with measurements reviewed by two consultant radiologists. Symptom severity pre- and post-FESD was measured using the Dysphagia, Regurgitation, Complications (DRC) scale. Regression analyses were conducted to identify dimensions associated with therapeutic success, defined as remission (DRC score ≤ 1) 6 months after index FESD. In total, 67 patients (mean age 74.3) were included. Interobserver reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients-ICCs) was greatest for pouch width (0.981) and pouch depth (0.934), but not oesophageal depth (0.018). Male gender (60.9%) was associated with larger pouch height (P = 0.008) and width (P = 0.004). A positive correlation was identified between baseline DRC score and pouch depth (ρ 0.326, P = 0.011), particularly the regurgitation subset score (ρ 0.330, P = 0.020). The index pouch depth was associated with FESD procedure time (rho 0.358, P = 0.041). Therapeutic success was achieved in 64.2% and was associated with shorter pouch height (median 14.5 mm vs. 19.0 mm, P = 0.030), pouch width (median 19.9 mm vs. 28.8 mm, P = 0.34) and cricopharyngeal length (median 20.2 mm vs. 26.3 mm, P = 0.036). ZD dimensions may be feasible and were evaluated using Barium radiology. Specific parameters appear to correlate with severity and post-FESD outcomes, which aid with pre-procedural planning.

Endoscopic management of gastrointestinal motility disorders - part 1: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline.

ESGE recommends the use of a graded pneumatic dilation protocol in achalasia, starting with a 30-mm dilation and followed by a 35-mm dilation at a planned interval of 2 - 4 weeks, with a subsequent 40-mm dilation when there is insufficient relief, over both a single balloon dilation procedure or the use of a larger balloon from the outset.Strong recommendation, high quality of evidence, level of agreement 100 %.ESGE recommends being cautious in treating spastic motility disorders other than achalasia with peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM).Strong recommendation, very low quality of evidence, level of agreement 87.5 %.ESGE recommends against the routine use of botulinum toxin injections to treat patients with non-achalasia hypercontractile esophageal motility disorders (Jackhammer esophagus, distal esophageal spasm). However, if, in individual patients, endoscopic injection of botulinum toxin is chosen, ESGE recommends performing injections into four quadrants of the lower esophageal sphincter and in the lower third of the esophagus.Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence, level of agreement 78.6 %.ESGE recommends that endoscopic pylorus-directed therapy should be considered only in patients with symptoms suggestive of gastroparesis in combination with objective proof of delayed gastric emptying using a validated test, and only when medical therapy has failed.Strong recommendation, very low quality of evidence, level of agreement 100 %.ESGE recommends against the use of botulinum toxin injection in the treatment of unselected patients with gastroparesis. Strong recommendation, high quality of evidence, level of agreement 92.9 %.ESGE recommends consideration of gastric peroral endoscopic myotomy (G-POEM) in carefully selected patients only, because it is an emerging procedure with limited data on effectiveness, safety, and durability. G-POEM should be performed in expert centers only, preferably in the context of a clinical trial.Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence, level of agreement 100 %.

Endoscopic management of gastrointestinal motility disorders - part 2: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline.

ESGE suggests flexible endoscopic treatment over open surgical treatment as first-line therapy for patients with a symptomatic Zenker's diverticulum of any size.Weak recommendation, low quality of evidence, level of agreement 100 %.ESGE recommends that emerging treatments for Zenker's diverticulum, such as Zenker's peroral endoscopic myotomy (Z-POEM) and tunneling, be considered as experimental; these treatments should be offered in a research setting only.Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence, level of agreement 100 %.ESGE recommends against the widespread clinical use of transoral incisionless fundoplication (TIF) as an alternative to proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy or antireflux surgery in the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), because of the lack of data on the long-term outcomes, the inferiority of TIF to fundoplication, and its modest efficacy in only highly selected patients. TIF may have a role for patients with mild GERD who are not willing to take PPIs or undergo antireflux surgery.Strong recommendation, moderate quality of evidence, level of agreement 92.8 %.ESGE recommends against the use of the Medigus ultrasonic surgical endostapler (MUSE) in clinical practice because of insufficient data showing its effectiveness and safety in patients with GERD. MUSE should be used in clinical trials only.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence, level of agreement 100 %.ESGE recommends against the use of antireflux mucosectomy (ARMS) in routine clinical practice in the treatment of GERD because of the lack of data and its potential complications.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence, level of agreement 100 %.ESGE recommends endoscopic cecostomy only after conservative management with medical therapies or retrograde lavage has failed.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence, level of agreement 93.3 %.ESGE recommends fixing the cecum to the abdominal wall at three points (using T-anchors, a double-needle suturing device, or laparoscopic fixation) to prevent leaks and infectious adverse events, whatever percutaneous endoscopic cecostomy method is used.Strong recommendation, very low quality evidence, level of agreement 86.7 %.ESGE recommends considering endoscopic decompression of the colon in patients with Ogilvie's syndrome that is not improving with conservative treatment.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence, level of agreement 93.8 %.ESGE recommends prompt endoscopic decompression if the cecal diameter is > 12 cm and if the Ogilvie's syndrome exists for a duration of longer than 4 - 6 days.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence, level of agreement 87.5 %.

Long-term success of flexible endoscopic septal division with the stag beetle knife for Zenker's diverticulum: a tertiary center study.

OBJECTIVES: Flexible endoscopic septum division is an established treatment for Zenker's diverticulum (ZD); however, long-term outcome data are lacking. We aimed to evaluate the long-term efficacy of flexible endoscopic septal division (FESD) using the stag beetle knife for ZD and identify predictors of symptom recurrence. METHODS: Patients undergoing the procedure between 2013 and 2018 were prospectively enrolled. Procedures were performed by a single operator. Symptom severity pre- and postprocedure was recorded using the dysphagia, regurgitation, and complications scale. Symptom recurrence was defined as a total score > 1 after the index procedure. Time-to-event analyses were performed using Kaplan-Meier plots, with multivariable analyses performed using Cox regression models. RESULTS: Altogether, 65 patients (mean age 74.0 years, 60% male) were included. Previous stapling had been performed in 44.6% of patients. Over the mean posttreatment follow-up period of 19 months, 5.6% of the treatment naïve group and 34.5% of the recurrent group underwent repeated FESD (P = 0.003), with rates of symptom remission and improvement of 75.4% and 92.7%, respectively. Recurrence at 48 months was higher in patients with recurrent ZD (84.7%) than in treatment-naïve patients (10.7%). On multivariable analysis, recurrent disease (hazard ratio [HR] 20.8, P = 0.005) and younger age (HR 0.96/year, P = 0.047) were associated with symptom recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with treatment-naïve ZD, flexible endoscopic septal division is safe and provides durable symptom remission. However, in patients with poststapling recurrence, the risk of recurrence is high and time-dependent.

Impact of water exchange colonoscopy on endoscopy room efficiency: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Separate randomized controlled trials (RCTs) showed water exchange (WE) colonoscopy outperformed other techniques in minimizing insertion pain and optimizing adenoma detection rate. Longer insertion time required for removal of infused water, residual air, and feces might have hampered its wider adoption. We evaluate the impact of WE compared with air or carbon dioxide insufflation (GAS) on room turnaround efficiency measured by cecal intubation, withdrawal, and total procedure times. METHODS: With a systematic search in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library, we identified RCTs (published before March 18, 2018) that compared WE with GAS. We focused on parameters of turnaround efficiency and patient-centered outcomes. RESULTS: We analyzed 8371 subjects from 17 studies. Demographics and indications were comparable. Mean cecal intubation time (± standard deviation) was WE 12.5 ± 6.1 minutes versus GAS 11.1 ± 7.0 minutes, with a mean difference of 1.4 ± 3.4 minutes. Six studies showed significant differences in insertion time, with mean cecal intubation times of 11.6 ± 5.1 minutes for WE versus 7.7 ± 5.2 minutes for GAS, with a mean difference of 3.9 ± 1.1 minutes. Mean withdrawal time was similar. Mean total procedure time was WE 26.0 ± 9.7 versus GAS 24.2 ± 9.6, with a mean difference of 1.8 ± 6.2 minutes. All mean procedure times were significantly different. Patient-centered outcomes revealed that patients examined with WE had significantly lower real-time insertion pain score, less need for sedation, and higher willingness to repeat the procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Based on parameters of procedural time, the impact of WE colonoscopy on endoscopy room turnaround yields an increase in total procedure time of about 2 minutes and is associated with significant improvement in specific patient-centered outcomes.

G-EYE colonoscopy is superior to standard colonoscopy for increasing adenoma detection rate: an international randomized controlled trial (with videos).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is largely preventable with routine screening and surveillance colonoscopy; however, interval cancers arising from precancerous lesions missed by standard colonoscopy still occur. An increased adenoma detection rate (ADR) has been found to be inversely associated with interval cancers. The G-EYE device includes a reusable balloon integrated at the distal tip of a standard colonoscope, which flattens haustral folds, centralizes the colonoscope's optics, and reduces bowel slippage. The insufflated balloon also aims to enhance visualization of the colon during withdrawal, thereby increasing the ADR. METHODS: In this randomized, controlled, international, multicenter study (11 centers), patients (aged ≥50 years) referred to colonoscopy for screening, surveillance, or changes in bowel habits were randomized to undergo either balloon-assisted colonoscopy by using an insufflated balloon during withdrawal or standard high-definition colonoscopy. The primary endpoint was the ADR. RESULTS: One thousand patients were enrolled between May 2014 and September 2016 to undergo colonoscopy by experienced endoscopists; 803 were finally analyzed (standard colonoscopy n = 396; balloon-assisted colonoscopy n = 407). Baseline parameters were similar in both groups. Balloon-assisted colonoscopy provided a 48.0% ADR compared with 37.5% in the standard colonoscopy group (28% increase; P = .0027). Additionally, balloon-assisted colonoscopy provided for a significant increase in detection of advanced (P = .0033) flat adenomas (P < .0001) and sessile serrated adenomas/polyps (P = .0026). CONCLUSION: Balloon-assisted colonoscopy yielded a higher ADR and increased the detection of advanced, flat, and sessile serrated adenomas/polyps when compared with standard colonoscopy. Improved detection by the G-EYE device could impact the quality of CRC screening by reducing miss rates and consequently reducing interval cancer incidence. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT01917513.).

Feasibility Trial of the Newly Introduced Optical Enhancement Technology in Patients with Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease.

BACKGROUND: Optical Enhancement technology (OE) combines bandwidth-limited light and image enhancement processing technology to enhance subtle mucosal and vascular details. This is the first study assessing the new technology for the diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients with GERD and controls were prospectively included. The distal esophagus was examined in all quadrants with high definition white-light endoscopy (HD-WLE) followed by OE and biopsies for histopathological analysis. Features observed only by OE were compared between controls and patients with GERD. RESULTS: A total of 100 areas were evaluated. About 56% of patients had a diagnosis of GERD. The mean age of patients was 53 years (range 27-89 years), 60% were female. Compared to controls, patients with diagnosis of GERD showed significantly more often tortuosity (p = 0.042), dilation (p = 0.0003), and increased number (p = 0.001) of intrapapillary capillary loops (IPCLs). In addition, increased vascularity and mucosal breaks were significantly more often found in patients with GERD as compared to controls (p < 0.05). On multivariate analysis, increased number and dilation of IPCL were the best predictors of GERD. CONCLUSIONS: The newly introduced OE technology significantly improves the diagnosis of GERD compared to HD-WLE. The results should be confirmed in a multicenter trial.

Feasibility and outcomes of underwater endoscopic mucosal resection for ≥ 10 mm colorectal polyps.

BACKGROUND: Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) is an emerging strategy for the management of colorectal polyps. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of UEMR for clinically significant (≥ 10 mm) colorectal polyps. METHODS: We performed a prospective dual-centre study of polyps ≥ 10 mm undergoing UEMR between June 2014 and March 2017. Outcomes measured comprised: (1) completeness of resection at index UEMR, (2) intraprocedural and 30-day complications, (3) rates and predictors of submucosal lift, en bloc resection, polyp/adenoma recurrence and (4) pain score. Endoscopy records were correlated with histology. RESULTS: 85 patients underwent UEMR of 97 polyps. Resection was endoscopically complete at index UEMR in 97.9%. The median pain score was 0 (no pain). Submucosal lift was required in 29.9% and correlated with polyp size ≥ 30 mm (p = 0.03) and clip placement (p = 0.004). En bloc resection was achieved in 45.4%, and inversely correlated with polyp size ≥ 20 mm (p < 0.001). 30-day complications (4.1%) were minor and consisted of intraprocedural bleeding (n = 2) and delayed bleeding (n = 2). 60.8% attended endoscopy post-UEMR after a median interval of 6 months, with 20.3% polyp and 13.6% adenoma recurrence. Polyp recurrence was associated with piecemeal resection (p = 0.04), recurrent polyp (p = 0.02), female sex (p = 0.01) and poor access (p = 0.005). Predictors for adenoma recurrence included female gender (p = 0.01) and difficult access (p < 0.001). Recurrence rates did not differ with polyp size, site, morphology, dysplasia status, submucosal injection, patient age, or study centre. CONCLUSIONS: UEMR is an effective, safe and well tolerated option for significant colorectal polyps. Piecemeal resection, recurrent polyp, female gender, and difficult access are predictors of post-UEMR polyp recurrence.

New and emerging techniques for endoscopic treatment of Zenker's diverticulum: State-of-the-art review.

Zenker's diverticulum (ZD), or pharyngeal pouch, is an anatomical defect characterized by herniation of the posterior pharyngeal wall through Killian's dehiscence, and may result in dysphagia and regurgitation. Multiple therapeutic modalities including surgery, rigid and flexible endoscopy have been developed to manage ZD. Although surgical management with open and endoscopically assisted techniques have historically been the mainstay of ZD treatment, minimally invasive flexible endoscopic techniques, carried out under conscious sedation, are increasingly favored. Over the last two decades, the advent of new accessories and techniques have changed the landscape of endotherapy for ZD, with the current armamentarium including, but not limited to, endoscopic stapling, CO2 laser, argon plasma coagulation, needle knife, bipolar forceps, hook knife, clutch cutter, stag beetle knife, and submucosal tunneling endoscopic septum division. We hereby review the latest evidence to support the endoscopic management of ZD.

ROC-king onwards: intraepithelial lymphocyte counts, distribution & role in coeliac disease mucosal interpretation.

OBJECTIVES: Counting intraepithelial lymphocytes (IEL) is central to the histological diagnosis of coeliac disease (CD), but no definitive 'normal' IEL range has ever been published. In this multicentre study, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to determine the optimal cut-off between normal and CD (Marsh III lesion) duodenal mucosa, based on IEL counts on >400 mucosal biopsy specimens. DESIGN: The study was designed at the International Meeting on Digestive Pathology, Bucharest 2015. Investigators from 19 centres, eight countries of three continents, recruited 198 patients with Marsh III histology and 203 controls and used one agreed protocol to count IEL/100 enterocytes in well-oriented duodenal biopsies. Demographic and serological data were also collected. RESULTS: The mean ages of CD and control groups were 45.5 (neonate to 82) and 38.3 (2-88) years. Mean IEL count was 54±18/100 enterocytes in CD and 13±8 in normal controls (p=0.0001). ROC analysis indicated an optimal cut-off point of 25 IEL/100 enterocytes, with 99% sensitivity, 92% specificity and 99.5% area under the curve. Other cut-offs between 20 and 40 IEL were less discriminatory. Additionally, there was a sufficiently high number of biopsies to explore IEL counts across the subclassification of the Marsh III lesion. CONCLUSION: Our ROC curve analyses demonstrate that for Marsh III lesions, a cut-off of 25 IEL/100 enterocytes optimises discrimination between normal control and CD biopsies. No differences in IEL counts were found between Marsh III a, b and c lesions. There was an indication of a continuously graded dose-response by IEL to environmental (gluten) antigenic influence.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection of early colorectal neoplasms with a monopolar scissor-type knife: short- to long-term outcomes.

Background and study aims Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for colorectal neoplasms remains challenging because of technical issues imposed by the complex anatomical features of the large intestine. We evaluated the feasibility, and the short- and long-term clinical outcomes of ESD for early colorectal neoplasms performed using the Stag-beetle Knife Jr. (SB Knife Jr.) Patients and methods We retrospectively assessed 228 patients who underwent ESD for 247 colorectal lesions with the SB Knife Jr. Clinicopathological characteristics of the neoplasms, complications, and various short- and long-term outcomes were evaluated. Results Mean tumor size was 34.3 mm and median procedure time was 76 minutes. The SB Knife Jr. achieved 98.4 % en bloc resection, 93.9 % complete resection, and 85.4 % curative resection. No perforations occurred during the procedure, and a delayed bleeding rate of 2.4 % was observed. Long-term outcomes were favorable with no distant recurrence, 1.1 % local recurrence, a 5-year overall survival rate of 94.1 % and 5-year tumor-specific survival rate of 98.6 % in patients with cancer. Conclusions ESD using the SB Knife Jr. is technically efficient and safe in treating early colorectal neoplasms and is associated with favorable short- and long-term outcomes.

Flexible endoscopic treatment for Zenker's diverticulum: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Flexible endoscopic septum division (FESD) is a rapidly evolving technique for the treatment of Zenker's diverticulum (ZD). The aim was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature focusing on FESD for ZD, including an in-depth evaluation of its efficacy, safety, and limitations. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was completed to identify papers that examined the efficacy and safety of FESD for ZD. Demographic, clinical, and technical information was retrieved. Main outcomes were extracted, pooled, and analyzed. Heterogeneity among studies was assessed using the I(2) statistic. A random effect model was used as the pooling method in cases of high heterogeneity; otherwise the fixed effect model was applied. Meta-regression was also performed. Main outcomes such as rates of success, adverse events, and recurrences were evaluated. RESULTS: Twenty studies with a total of 813 patients were selected. The pooled success, adverse events, and recurrence rates were 91% (95% confidence interval [CI], 86%-95%; I(2) = 69.5%), 11.3% (95% CI, 8%-16%; I(2) = 64%), and 11% (95% CI, 8%-15%; I(2) = 38.4%), respectively. Substantial heterogeneity across studies was found. However, for success rates, excluding 3 studies reduced heterogeneity to non-significant rates [I(2) = 25.6%; P = .154]. Adverse event rates decreased with larger samples (coefficient, -0.0123; 95% CI, -0.03 to -0.003; P = .017), whereas recurrence rates increased (coefficient, 0.006; 95% CI, -0.0010 to 0.0125; P = .093). Year of publication was negatively associated with success rate, whereas the opposite pattern was found for recurrence rates. CONCLUSIONS: FESD is a feasible, safe, and effective treatment for symptomatic ZD, with low adverse event and recurrence rates.