Comparison of two methods for endoscopic full-thickness resection of gastrointestinal lesions using OTSC.

Background and aims: The aim of this study was to compare and analyze the feasibility and safety of two methods of endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) for the management of challenging epithelial and subepithelial neoplasms that are not amenable to resection techniques.Material and methods: This was a retrospective case series study of patients who underwent one of two methods of EFTR, resection using ESD knives and post-resection closure with OTSC (Group 1), or closure with OTSC and secondary EFTR with snare (Group 2).Results: Of 11 patients, six were in Group 1 and five in Group 2. The mean time of the EFTR procedure was 76.83 ± 34.97 min in Group 1 which is significantly longer than that of Group 2 (p = .0128). The mean time of OSTC closure and length of hospital stay of Group 1 were also longer compared to Group 2, but the difference was not significant. Complete resection (R0) and technical success rates of Group 1 and Group 2 were 83.3% and 100% (p = .338), respectively. VAS scores of Group 1 immediately after the operation and after 24 h are significantly higher than those of Group 2 (p = .047 and p = .009, respectively). In Group 1, one patient had delayed perforation which led to fever and pneumoperitoneum, and one patient developed abdominal pain. No complications associated with the endoscopic procedure were observed in Group 2.Conclusion: EFTR of pre-resection closure are potentially faster compared with the concept of applying closure after EFTR. Larger prospective controlled studies comparing these two techniques are warranted in the future.