Assessment of predictive factors associated with the technical difficulty of endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: Japanese multicenter retrospective study.

OBJECTIVES: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is performed for the treatment of lesions with varied backgrounds and factors. However, the predictive factors associated with the technical difficulty of ESD remain unknown in patients with varied lesions. Therefore, this study aimed to identify the predictive factors associated with the technical difficulty of ESD for ESCC using a retrospective cohort. METHODS: This multicenter, retrospective study was conducted in 10 hospitals in Japan. Consecutive patients who underwent esophageal ESD between January 2013 and December 2019 were enrolled. Lesions of subepithelial tumors, adenocarcinoma, and adenoma were excluded. Difficult lesions were defined as ESD requiring a long procedure time (≥120 min), perforation development, piecemeal resection, or discontinued ESD. In the present study, the clinical factors were assessed to identify the technical difficulty of ESD using univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: Among 1708 lesions treated with esophageal ESD, eight subepithelial tumors, 44 adenocarcinomas, and two adenomas were excluded. Finally, 1505 patients with 1654 lesions were analyzed, and 217 patients with 217 lesions (13.1%) were classified as patients with difficult lesions. In multivariate analysis, the predictive factors associated with the technical difficulty of ESD were as follows: tumors with varices, tumors with diverticulum, antiplatelet use (discontinued), circumference of tumor (≥1/2), preoperative tumor size ≥30 mm, trainee, and nonhigh-volume center. CONCLUSION: This multicenter retrospective study identified the predictive factors associated with the technical difficulty of ESD for ESCC with varied backgrounds and factors.

Complications of colonoscopy in Japan: An analysis using large-scale health insurance claims data.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: In Japan, screening colonoscopy for colorectal cancer is expected to reduce colorectal cancer mortality, although its complication rate has not been sufficiently examined. The aim of this study is to analyze severe complications due to colonoscopy. METHODS: As a study population, we retrospectively used commercially anonymized health insurance claims data covering 5.71 million patients from January 2005 to August 2018. We extracted patients who received colonoscopy with lesions resection or without treatment. Main outcomes were rates of hemorrhage, perforation, fatal events, and their risk factors. RESULTS: Among 341 852 colonoscopy without treatment in 260 128 patients (mean age: 49.6 ± 11.7 years), the rates of hemorrhage, perforation, and fatal events were 0.0059% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.0031-0.0085), 0.0032% (95% CI 0.0011-0.0052), and 0.00029% (95% CI 0-0.0012), respectively. Regarding hemorrhage, compared with the rate for patients <50 years old (0.0050%), the rates for those 50-59, 60-69, and ≥70 years old were 0.0095% (P = 0.17), 0.0031% (P = 0.17), and 0%, respectively. Regarding perforation, compared with patients <50 years old (0.0056%), the rates for those 50-59, 60-69, and ≥70 years old were 0%, 0.0015% (P = 0.99), and 0.0102% (P = 0.99), respectively. A multivariate analysis for risk factors showed no significant findings for hemorrhage and perforation without treatment. Among 123 087 colonoscopy with lesions resection in 102 058 patients (mean age: 53.7 ± 9.3 years), the rates of hemorrhage, perforation, and fatal events were 0.136% (95% CI 0.1157-0.1572), 0.033% (95% CI 0.0228-0.0437), and 0.00081% (95% CI 0-0.0035), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The analysis using health insurance claims data demonstrated the safety of colonoscopy.

Validation of a simple classification system for endoscopic diagnosis of small colorectal polyps using narrow-band imaging.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Almost all colorectal polyps ≤ 5 mm are benign, yet current practice requires costly pathologic analysis. We aimed to develop and evaluate the validity of a simple narrow-band imaging (NBI)-based classification system for differentiating hyperplastic from adenomatous polyps. METHODS: The study was conducted in 4 phases: (1) evaluation of accuracy and reliability of histologic prediction by NBI-experienced colonoscopists; (2) development of a classification based on color, vessels, and surface pattern criteria, using a modified Delphi method; (3) validation of the component criteria by people not experienced in endoscopy or NBI analysis (25 medical students, 19 gastroenterology fellows) using 118 high-definition colorectal polyp images of known histology; and (4) validation of the classification system by NBI-trained gastroenterology fellows, using still images. We performed a pilot evaluation during real-time colonoscopy. RESULTS: We developed a classification system for the endoscopic diagnosis of colorectal polyp histology and established its predictive validity. When all 3 criteria were used, the specificity ranged from 94.9% to 100% and the combined sensitivity ranged from 8.5% to 61.0%. The specificities of the individual criteria were lower although the sensitivities were higher. During real-time colonoscopy, endoscopists made diagnoses with high confidence for 75% of consecutive small colorectal polyps, with 89% accuracy, 98% sensitivity, and 95% negative predictive values. CONCLUSIONS: We developed and established the validity of an NBI classification system that can be used to diagnose colorectal polyps. In preliminary real-time evaluation, the system allowed endoscopic diagnoses of colorectal polyp histology.

American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute technology assessment on image-enhanced endoscopy.

This document presents the official recommendations of the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute Technology Assessment on "Image-Enhanced Endoscopy." It was approved by the Clinical Practice and Economics Committee on August 3, 2007, and by the AGA Institute Governing Board September 27, 2007.