The Outcome of Snare-Assisted Traction Endoscopic Full-Thickness Resection for the Gastric Fundus Submucosal Tumors Originating from the Muscularis Propria.

Aim: To explore the feasibility and effectiveness of snare-assisted traction endoscopic full thickness resection (EFTR) on gastric fundus submucosal tumors (SMTs). Methods: The clinical and pathological data of patients with gastric SMTs who underwent EFTR treatment at the Endoscopy Center of Kaifeng Central Hospital from January 2018 to June 2023 were collected. Among them, 36 patients underwent snare-assisted traction EFTR (SAT-EFTR) and 46 patients underwent standard EFTR (S-EFTR). The clinical baseline data, operative data, adverse events, and follow-up results of the two groups were collected and compared. Results: All patients successfully completed EFTR technique. There were 34 male and 48 female patients, with an average age of (56.62 ± 11.31) years. The average operation time was shorter in the snare-assisted EFTR group than the S-EFTR group (73.39 ± 31.33 minutes versus 92.89 ± 37.57 minutes, P = .014). In addition, the resection speed of the snare-assisted EFTR group was also significantly faster than that of the S-EFTR group (4.04 ± 2.23 versus 2.48 ± 0.93 mm2/min, P < .001). There was no statistically significant difference in the age, gender, lesion size, postoperative fasting duration, and postoperative hospitalization stay between the two groups (P > .05). One patient in the SAT-EFTR group developed delayed postoperative perforation which was close with purse­string suture technique. All patients were discharged successfully, and there was no recurrence or metastasis during the follow-up period. Conclusion: Snare-assisted traction of EFTR could shorten the operation time, reduce the difficulty of the operation, and improve the efficiency of the operation. At the same time, this method is simple and easy to learn, more suitable for beginners, and worthy of clinical promotion and application.

Safe and effective hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection with ALL IN ONE snare in porcine gastric model (with video).

This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficiency of hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection (H-ESD) using a newly developed ALL IN ONE (AIO) snare. This was a matched control study in a porcine model. Five paired simulated stomach lesions 2-2.5 cm in size were removed by H-ESD using an AIO snare or conventional ESD (C-ESD) using an endoscopic knife. The outcomes of the two procedures were compared, including en-bloc resection rates, procedure times, intraprocedural bleeding volumes, muscular injuries, perforations, thicknesses of the submucosal layer in resected specimens, and stomach defects. All simulated lesions were resected en-bloc. Specimens resected by H-ESD and C-ESD were similar in size (7.68 ± 2.92 vs. 8.42 ± 2.42 cm2; P = 0.676). H-ESD required a significantly shorter procedure time (13.39 ± 3.78 vs. 25.99 ± 4.52 min; P = 0.031) and submucosal dissection time (3.99 ± 1.73 vs. 13.1 ± 4.58 min; P = 0.003) versus C-ESD; H-ESD also yielded a faster dissection speed (241.37 ± 156.84 vs. 68.56 ± 28.53 mm2/min; P = 0.042) and caused fewer intraprocedural bleeding events (0.40 ± 0.55 vs. 3.40 ± 1.95 times/per lesion; P = 0.016) than C-ESD. The thicknesses of the submucosal layer of the resected specimen (1190.98 ± 134.07 vs. 1055.90 ± 151.76 µm; P = 0.174) and the residual submucosal layer of the stomach defect (1607.94 ± 1026.74 vs. 985.98 ± 445.58 µm; P = 0.249) were similar with both procedures. The AIO snare is a safe and effective device for H-ESD and improves the treatment outcomes of gastric lesions by shortening the procedure time.

The efficacy and safety of snare traction-assisted endoscopic submucosal dissection for circumferential superficial esophageal cancer.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to investigate the efficacy and safety of snare traction-assisted endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for the management of circumferential superficial esophageal cancer. METHODS: A total of 68 patients who underwent ESD for circumferential superficial esophageal cancer were included in this study. All the patients were divided into two groups based on whether the snare traction was used or not; the snare traction group (S-ESD, group n = 35) and the control group (C-ESD, group n = 33). RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the size of the resected area between the groups [21.98 (18.30, 27.00) cm2 vs 24.00 (15.28, 30.72) cm2, P = 0.976]. The snare traction group had a shorter dissection time [92.00 (74.00, 121.00) min vs 110.00 (92.50, 137.00) min, P = 0.017] and a faster resection speed [0.28 ± 0.13 cm2/min vs 0.22 ± 0.11cm2/min, P = 0.040] compared to the control group. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of hospital stay, cost, en bloc resection rate, R0 resection rate, curative resection rate, bleeding rate, perforation rate, stricture rate, and recurrence rate (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Snare traction-assisted ESD is a safe and efficient approach for the treatment of circumferential superficial esophageal cancer. Its advantages includes shorter procedure so the anesthesia requirement, clear operative filed view, improved mucosal dissection efficiency, simple, and easily accessible equipment.

Efficacy and Safety of Cold Snare Polypectomy versus Cold Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for Resecting 3-10 mm Colorectal Polyps: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

INTRODUCTION: The safety and efficacy of cold snare polypectomy (CSP) compared to those of cold endoscopic mucosal resection (CEMR) have been reported. This meta-analysis compared the efficacy and safety of CEMR and CSP. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched to identify randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy and safety of CEMR and CSP in removing 3-10 mm polyps. The outcomes assessed included complete resection rate, intraoperative bleeding rate, delayed bleeding rate, perforation, and polyp removal time. The results are reported as risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) derived from a Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model. RESULTS: Seven studies comprising 1,911 polyps were included in the analysis. The complete resection rate of CEMR was comparable to that of CSP (RR: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.99-1.04, p = 0.32). Comparable results were also demonstrated for intraoperative bleeding rate (polyp-based analysis: RR: 1.22, 95% CI: 0.33-4.43, p = 0.77), delayed bleeding rate (polyp-based analysis: RR: 1.34, 95% CI: 0.44-4.15, p = 0.61), and polyp removal time (mean difference: 28.31 s, 95% CI: -21.40-78.02, p = 0.26). No studies reported cases of perforation. CONCLUSION: CEMR has comparable efficacy and safety to CSP in removing 3-10 mm polyps. Further randomized controlled trials with long-term follow-up are warranted to compare and validate efficacy.

Novel miniature transendoscopic telerobotic system for endoscopic submucosal dissection (with videos).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The lack of tissue traction and instrument dexterity to allow for adequate visualization and effective dissection were the main issues in performing endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). Robot-assisted systems may provide advantages. In this study we developed a novel transendoscopic telerobotic system and evaluated its performance in ESD. METHODS: A miniature dual-arm robotic endoscopic assistant for minimally invasive surgery (DREAMS) was developed. The DREAMS system contained the current smallest robotic ESD instruments and was compatible with the commercially available dual-channel endoscope. After the system was established, a prospective randomized controlled study was conducted to validate the performance of the DREAMS-assisted ESD in terms of efficacy, safety, and workload by comparing it with the conventional technique. RESULTS: Two robotic instruments can achieve safe collaboration and provide sufficient visualization and efficient dissection during ESD. Forty ESDs in the stomach and esophagus of 8 pigs were completed by DREAMS-assisted ESD or conventional ESD. Submucosal dissection time was comparable between the 2 techniques, but DREAMS-assisted ESD demonstrated a significantly lower muscular injury rate (15% vs 50%, P = .018) and workload scores (22.30 vs 32.45, P < .001). In the subgroup analysis of esophageal ESD, DREAMS-assisted ESD showed significantly improved submucosal dissection time (6.45 vs 16.37 minutes, P = .002), muscular injury rate (25% vs 87.5%, P = .041), and workload (21.13 vs 40.63, P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: We developed a novel transendoscopic telerobotic system, named DREAMS. The safety profile and technical feasibility of ESD were significantly improved with the assistance of the DREAMS system, especially in the narrower esophageal lumen.