Implementation of esophageal endoscopic submucosal dissection in Spain: Results from the nationwide registry. / Implementación de la disección endoscópica submucosa esofágica en España: resultados del registro nacional.

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: The outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the esophagus have not been assessed in our country. Our primary aim was to analyze the effectiveness and safety of the technique. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Analysis of the prospectively maintained national registry of ESD. We included all superficial esophageal lesions removed by ESD in 17 hospitals (20 endoscopists) between January 2016 and December 2021. Subepithelial lesions were excluded. The primary outcome was curative resection. We conducted a survival analysis and used logistic regression analysis to assess predictors of non-curative resection. RESULTS: A total of 102 ESD were performed on 96 patients. The technical success rate was 100% and the percentage of en-bloc resection was 98%. The percentage of R0 and curative resection was 77.5% (n=79; 95%CI: 68%-84%) and 63.7% (n=65; 95%CI: 54%-72%), respectively. The most frequent histology was Barrett-related neoplasia (n=55 [53.9%]). The main reason for non-curative resection was deep submucosal invasion (n=25). The centers with a lower volume of ESD obtained worse results in terms of curative resection. The rate of perforation, delayed bleeding and post-procedural stenosis were 5%, 5% and 15.7%, respectively. No patient died or required surgery due to an adverse effect. After a median follow-up of 14months, 20patients (20.8%) underwent surgery and/or chemoradiotherapy, and 9 patients died (mortality 9.4%). CONCLUSIONS: In Spain, esophageal ESD is curative in approximately two out of three patients, with an acceptable risk of adverse events.

Predicting residual neoplasia after a non-curative gastric ESD: validation and modification of the eCura system in the Western setting: the W-eCura score.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the risk factors for lymph node metastasis (LNM) after a non-curative (NC) gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and to validate and eventually refine the eCura scoring system in the Western setting. Also, to assess the rate and risk factors for parietal residual disease. DESIGN: Retrospective multicentre multinational study of prospectively collected registries from 19 Western centres. Patients who had been submitted to surgery or had at least one follow-up endoscopy were included. The eCura system was applied to assess its accuracy in the Western setting, and a modified version was created according to the results (W-eCura score). The discriminative capacities of the eCura and W-eCura scores to predict LNM were assessed and compared. RESULTS: A total of 314 NC gastric ESDs were analysed (72% high-risk resection (HRR); 28% local-risk resection). Among HRR patients submitted to surgery, 25% had parietal disease and 15% had LNM in the surgical specimen. The risk of LNM was significantly different across the eCura groups (areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC) of 0.900 (95% CI 0.852 to 0.949)). The AUC-ROC of the W-eCura for LNM (0.916, 95% CI 0.870 to 0.961; p=0.012) was significantly higher compared with the original eCura. Positive vertical margin, lymphatic invasion and younger age were associated with a higher risk of parietal residual lesion in the surgical specimen. CONCLUSION: The eCura scoring system may be applied in Western countries to stratify the risk of LNM after a gastric HRR. A new score is proposed that may further decrease the number of unnecessary surgeries.

Risk of Residual Neoplasia after a Local-Risk Resection of Colorectal Lesions by Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection: A Multinational Study.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in colorectal lesions is demanding, and a significant rate of non-curative procedures is expected. We aimed to assess the rate of residual lesion after a piecemeal ESD resection, or after an en bloc resection but with positive horizontal margins (local-risk resection-LocRR), for colorectal benign neoplasia. A retrospective multicenter analysis of consecutive colorectal ESDs was performed. Patients with LocRR ESDs for the treatment of benign colorectal lesions with at least one follow-up endoscopy were included. A cohort of en bloc resected lesions, with negative margins, was used as the control. A total of 2255 colorectal ESDs were reviewed; 352 of the ESDs were "non-curative". Among them, 209 were LocRR: 133 high-grade dysplasia and 76 low-grade dysplasia. Ten cases were excluded due to missing data. A total of 146 consecutive curative resections were retrieved for comparison. Compared to the "curative group", LocRRs were observed in lengthier procedures, with larger lesions, and in non-granular LSTs. Recurrence was higher in the LocRR group (16/199, 8% vs. 1/146, 0.7%; p = 0.002). However, statistical significance was lost when considering only en bloc resections with positive horizontal margins (p = 0.068). In conclusion, a higher rate of residual lesion was found after a piecemeal ESD resection, but not after an en bloc resection with positive horizontal margins.

Underwater cap-suction pseudopolyp formation for endoscopic mucosal resection: a simple technique for treating flat, appendiceal orifice or ileocecal valve colorectal lesions.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to evaluate the safety and technical success of an easy-to-use technique that applies underwater cap suction pseudopolyp formation to facilitate the resection of flat lesions or those at the appendiceal orifice or ileocecal valve. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed a register of consecutive cap suction underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (CAP-UEMR) procedures performed at two centers between September 2020 and December 2021. Procedures were performed using a cone-shaped cap, extending 7 mm from the endoscope tip, to suction the lesion while submerged underwater, followed by underwater snare resection. Our primary end point was technical success, defined as macroscopic complete resection. RESULTS: We treated 83 lesions (median size 20 mm; interquartile range [IQR] 15-30 mm) with CAP-UEMR: 64 depressed or flat lesions (18 previously manipulated, 9 with difficult access), 11 from the appendix, and 8 from the ileocecal valve. Technical success was 100 %. There were seven intraprocedural bleedings and two delayed bleedings, all managed endoscopically. No perforations or other complications occurred. Among the 64 lesions with follow-up colonoscopy, only one recurrence was detected, which was treated endoscopically. CONCLUSIONS: CAP-UEMR was a safe and effective technique for removing nonpolypoid colorectal lesions, including those arising from the appendiceal orifice or ileocecal valve.

Underwater versus conventional EMR of large nonpedunculated colorectal lesions: a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Underwater EMR (UEMR) is an alternative procedure to conventional EMR (CEMR) to treat large, nonpedunculated colorectal lesions (LNPCLs). In this multicenter, randomized controlled clinical trial, we aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of UEMR versus CEMR on LNPCLs. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, randomized controlled clinical trial from February 2018 to February 2020 in 11 hospitals in Spain. A total of 298 patients (311 lesions) were randomized to the UEMR (n = 149) and CEMR (n = 162) groups. The main outcome was the lesion recurrence rate in at least 1 follow-up colonoscopy. Secondary outcomes included technical aspects, en bloc resection rate, R0 resection rates, and adverse events, among others. RESULTS: There were no differences in the overall recurrence rate (9.5% UEMR vs 11.7% CEMR; absolute risk difference, -2.2%; 95% CI, -9.4 to 4.9). However, considering polyp sizes between 20 and 30 mm, the recurrence rate was lower for UEMR (3.4% UEMR vs 13.1% CEMR; absolute risk difference, -9.7%; 95% CI, -19.4 to 0). The R0 resection showed the same tendency, with significant differences favoring UEMR only for polyps between 20 and 30 mm. Overall, UEMR was faster and easier to perform than CEMR. Importantly, the techniques were equally safe. CONCLUSIONS: UEMR is a valid alternative to CEMR for treating LNPCLs and could be considered the first option of treatment for lesions between 20 and 30 mm due to its higher en bloc and R0 resection rates. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03567746.).

Risk of residual neoplasia after a noncurative colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection for malignant lesions: a multinational study.

BACKGROUND : Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in colorectal lesions is technically demanding and a significant rate of noncurative procedures is expected. We aimed to assess the rate of residual lesions after a noncurative ESD for colorectal cancer (CRC) and to establish predictive scores to be applied in the clinical setting. METHODS : Retrospective multicenter analysis of consecutive colorectal ESDs. Patients with noncurative ESDs performed for the treatment of CRC lesions submitted to complementary surgery or with at least one follow-up endoscopy were included. RESULTS : From 2255 colorectal ESDs, 381 (17 %) were noncurative, and 135 of these were performed in CRC lesions. A residual lesion was observed in 24 patients (18 %). Surgery was performed in 96 patients and 76 (79 %) had no residual lesion in the colorectal wall or in the lymph nodes. The residual lesion rate for sm1 cancers was 0 %, and for > sm1 cancers was also 0 % if no other risk factors were present. Independent risk factors for lymph node metastasis were poor differentiation and lymphatic permeation (NC-Lymph score). Risk factors for the presence of a residual lesion in the wall were piecemeal resection, poor differentiation, and positive/indeterminate vertical margin (NC-Wall score). CONCLUSIONS : Lymphatic permeation or poor differentiation warrant surgery owing to their high risk of lymph node metastasis, mainly in > sm1 cancers. In the remaining cases, en bloc and R0 resections resulted in a low risk of residual lesions in the wall. Our scores can be a useful tool for the management of patients who undergo noncurative colorectal ESDs.

Appropriateness of routine pre-endoscopic SARS-CoV-2 screening with RT-PCR in asymptomatic individuals and its impact on delayed diagnosis.

AIMS: Endoscopy units are considered to be at an increased risk of infection by SARS-CoV-2. Our aim is to assess the correlation between pre-endoscopic screening with reverse-transcription-polymerase-chain-reaction (RT-PCR) in asymptomatic individuals scheduled for elective endoscopy and the epidemiological data published by the local Health Administration. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Observational retrospective study collecting the results of our screening strategy spanning June/2020-June/2021, the effective potential growth (EPG), an index measuring the outbreak risk, and the 7 and 14-day cumulative incidence (CI). Indication, delay and the findings of the endoscopic examinations were registered for RT-PCR positive patients. RESULTS: A total of 5808 tests were performed, yielding 125 positive results (2.15%). All positive tests occurred in weeks of high/very high risk (EPG>100) with the highest monthly rate being 9.36%, recorded in January/2021. A significant correlation (rho=0.796; p<0.001) between weekly positive rates and EPG was observed, and a significantly lower weekly number of positive tests was recorded when EPG<100. Planning the screening strategy one week ahead according to EPG>100 would have avoided up to 826 tests with only one positive result to account for. One hundred and thirteen individuals tested positive and 89 endoscopies were delayed. The most common findings were colon polyps, colorectal cancer and gastric metaplasia. Oncological diagnosis was delayed 50±3 days. CONCLUSIONS: No positive RT-PCR test were registered out of high-risk periods. Epidemiological administrative data in the preceding two weeks showed a significant correlation with screening results and could be useful to plan pre-endoscopic screening and avoid unnecessary tests.

Serological levels of IGF-1 and IGFBP-3 in patients with Barrett's esophagus and esophageal adenocarcinoma: Longitudinal study. / Niveles séricos de IGF-1 e IGFBP-3 en pacientes con esófago de Barrett y adenocarcinoma de esófago. Estudio longitudinal.

BACKGROUND: Barrett's esophagus (BE) is an entity with a known histological progression to malignancy. The insulin-like growth factor (IGF) system is involved in the carcinogenesis through obesity-related mechanisms that include IGF and it has been associated with several types of cancer. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the serological levels of IGF-1 and IGFBP-3 in patients with BE and esophageal adenocarcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Prospective study of patients with BE and esophageal adenocarcinoma who underwent upper endoscopy between September 2012 and December 2015. A baseline determination of IGF-1 and IGFBP-3 was performed. We included a control group of patients without BE. RESULTS: One hundred sixteen patients were included: 36 controls, 62 with BE (42 without dysplasia and 20 with dysplasia) and 18 with adenocarcinoma. IGF-1 and IGF-1/IGFBP-3 molar ratio showed a progression to high levels in BE and adenocarcinoma than in controls (IGF-1: 135.55±66.07ng/ml, 148.33±81.5ng/ml, 108.19±46.69ng/ml, respectively; P=.049) (molar ratio: 0.23±0.91, 0.29±0.11, 0.19±0.06, respectively; P=.001), without differences between the histological types of BE. Fifty-four out of the 65 patients with BE were followed up (median of 58.50 months, range 12-113) and 11 of them (20.4%) presented progression to low-grade dysplasia (n=8) or high-grade dysplasia/adenocarcinoma (n=3), without differences in the IGF system compared with patients without progression. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with BE and esophageal adenocarcinoma have changes in the IGF system although the serological levels of IGF-1 and IGFBP-3 do not correlate with histological progression of BE.

Endoscopic management of difficult laterally spreading tumors in colorectum.

Due to the advent of the screening programs for colorectal cancer and the era of quality assurance colonoscopy the number the polyps that can be considered difficult, including large (> 20 mm) laterally spreading tumors (LSTs), has increased in the last decade. All LSTs should be assessed carefully, looking for suspicious areas of submucosal invasion (SMI), such as nodules or depressed areas, describing the morphology according to the Paris classification, the pit pattern, and vascular pattern. The simplest, most appropriate and safest endoscopic treatment with curative intent should be selected. For LST-granular homogeneous type, piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection should be the first option due to its biological low risk of SMI. LST-nongranular pseudodepressed type has an increased risk of SMI, and en bloc resection should be mandatory. Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection is useful in situations where submucosal injection alters the operative field, e.g., for the resection of scar lesions, with no lifting, adjacent tattoo, incomplete resection attempts, lesions into a colonic diverticulum, in ileocecal valve and lesions with intra-appendicular involvement. Endoscopic full thickness resection is very useful for the treatment of difficult to resect lesions of less than 20 up to 25 mm. Among the indications, we highlight the treatment of polyps with suspected malignancy because the acquired tissue allows an exact histologic risk stratification to assign patients individually to the best treatment and avoid surgery for low-risk lesions. Endoscopic submucosal dissection is the only endoscopic procedure that allows completes en bloc resection regardless of the size of the lesion. It should therefore be indicated in the treatment of lesions with risk of SMI.

Implementation of endoscopic submucosal dissection in a country with a low incidence of gastric cancer: Results from a prospective national registry.

INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has become the treatment of choice for early gastric malignancies. In recent years, the ESD technique has been implemented in Western countries with increasing use. OBJECTIVES: To describe the results of gastric ESD in a Western country with a low incidence of gastric cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The prospective national registry was conducted over 4 years in 23 hospitals, including 30 endoscopists. Epithelial and subepithelial lesions (SEL) qualified to complete removal with ESD were assessed. The technique, instruments, and solution for submucosal injection varied at the endoscopist's discretion. ESD was defined as difficult when: en-bloc resection was not achieved, had to be converted to a hybrid resection, lasted more than 2 h or an intraprocedural perforation occurred. Additionally, independent risk factors for difficult ESD were analyzed. RESULTS: Two hundred and thirty gastric ESD in 225 patients were performed from January 2016 to December 2019 (196 epithelial and 34 SEL). Most lesions were located in the lower stomach (111; 48.3%). One hundred and twenty-eight (55.6%) ESD were considered difficult. The median procedure time was 105 min (interquartile range [IQR]: 60-150). The procedure time for SEL was shorter than for epithelial lesions (90 min [45-121] vs. 110 min [62-160]; p = 0.038). En-bloc, R0, and curative resection rates were 91.3%, 75.2%, and 70.9%, respectively. Difficult ESD had lower R0 resection rates than ESD that did not meet the difficulty criteria (64.8% and 87.6%; p = 0.000, respectively). Fibrosis and poor maneuverability were independent factors associated with difficult ESD (OR 3.6, 95%CI 1.1-11.74 and OR 5.07, 95%CI 1.6-16.08; respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Although the number of cases is limited, the results of this analysis show acceptable en-bloc and R0 rates in gastric ESD considering the wide variability in experience among the operators. Fibrosis and poor maneuverability were associated with more difficulty in completing ESD.