ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: The adoption of colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is still limited in the West. A recent randomized trial showed ESD is more effective and only slightly riskier than piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR); reproducibility outside expert centers was questioned. We evaluated the results according to the annual case volume in a multicentric prospective cohort. METHODS: Between 09/2019 and 09/2022, colorectal ESD was consecutively performed at 13 participating centers classified as low-volume (LV), middle-volume (MV), and high-volume (HV). The main procedural outcomes were assessed. Multivariate and propensity score matching (PSM) analyses were performed. RESULTS: 3770 ESDs were included. HV centers treated larger and more often colonic lesions than MV and LV centers. En bloc, R0 and curative resection rates were 95.2%, 87.4%, and 83.2%, respectively, and were higher at HV than at MV and LV centers. HV centers achieved also a faster dissection speed. Delayed bleeding and surgery for complications rates were 5.4% and 0.8%, respectively, without significant differences. The perforation rate (overall: 9%) was higher at MV than at LV and HV centers. Lesion characteristics, but not volume center, were independently associated with both R1 resection and perforation. However, after PSM, R0 rates were significantly higher at HV than at LV centers, and perforation rates were significantly higher at MV than at HV centers. CONCLUSIONS: Colorectal ESD can be successfully implemented in the West, even in nonexpert centers. However, difficult lesions must still be referred to experts.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: We aimed to compare the long-term outcomes of patients with high-risk T1 colorectal cancer (CRC) resected endoscopically who received either additional surgery or surveillance. METHODS: We used data from routine care to emulate a target trial aimed at comparing 2 strategies after endoscopic resection of high-risk T1 CRC: surgery with lymph node dissection (treatment group) versus surveillance alone (control group). All patients from 14 tertiary centers who underwent an endoscopic resection for high-risk T1 CRC between March 2012 and August 2019 were included. The primary outcome was a composite outcome of cancer recurrence or death at 48 months. RESULTS: Of 197 patients included in the analysis, 107 were categorized in the treatment group and 90 were categorized in the control group. From baseline to 48 months, 4 of 107 patients (3.7%) died in the treatment group and 6 of 90 patients (6.7%) died in the control group. Four of 107 patients (3.7%) in the treatment group experienced a cancer recurrence and 4 of 90 patients (4.4%) in the control group experienced a cancer recurrence. After balancing the baseline covariates by inverse probability of treatment weighting, we found no significant difference in the rate of death and cancer recurrence between patients in the 2 groups (weighted hazard ratio, .95; 95% confidence interval, .52-1.75). CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that patients with high-risk T1 CRC initially treated with endoscopic resection may not benefit from additional surgery.
Subject(s)
Colorectal Neoplasms , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local , Humans , Retrospective Studies , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/pathology , Colorectal Neoplasms/surgery , Colorectal Neoplasms/pathology , Endoscopy/methods , Lymph Node Excision , Risk Factors , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: When initial resection of rectal neuroendocrine tumors (r-NETs) is not R0, persistence of local residue could lead to disease recurrence. This study aimed to evaluate the interest of systematic resection of non-R0 r-NET scars. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of all the consecutive endoscopic revisions and resections of the scar after non-R0 resections of r-NETs. RESULTS: A total of 100 patients were included. Salvage endoscopic procedure using endoscopic submucosal dissection or endoscopic full-thickness resection showed an R0 rate of near 100%. Residual r-NET was found in 43% of cases. DISCUSSION: In case of non-R0 resected r-NET, systematic scar resection by endoscopic full-thickness resection or endoscopic submucosal dissection seems necessary.
Subject(s)
Endoscopic Mucosal Resection , Neuroendocrine Tumors , Rectal Neoplasms , Humans , Neuroendocrine Tumors/surgery , Cicatrix/etiology , Cicatrix/pathology , Retrospective Studies , Treatment Outcome , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/surgery , Rectal Neoplasms/surgery , Rectal Neoplasms/pathology , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection/methodsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Circumferential endoscopic submucosal dissection (cESD) in the esophagus has been reported to be feasible in small Eastern case series. We assessed the outcomes of cESD in the treatment of early esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) in Western countries. METHODS: We conducted an international study at 25 referral centers in Europe and Australia using prospective databases. We included all patients with ESCC treated with cESD before November 2022. Our main outcomes were curative resection according to European guidelines and adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 171 cESDs were performed on 165 patients. En bloc and R0 resections rates were 98.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 95.0-99.4) and 69.6% (95% CI, 62.3-76.0), respectively. Curative resection was achieved in 49.1% (95% CI, 41.7-56.6) of the lesions. The most common reason for noncurative resection was deep submucosal invasion (21.6%). The risk of stricture requiring 6 or more dilations or additional techniques (incisional therapy/stent) was high (71%), despite the use of prophylactic measures in 93% of the procedures. The rates of intraprocedural perforation, delayed bleeding, and adverse cardiorespiratory events were 4.1%, 0.6%, and 4.7%, respectively. Two patients died (1.2%) of a cESD-related adverse event. Overall and disease-free survival rates at 2 years were 91% and 79%. CONCLUSIONS: In Western referral centers, cESD for ESCC is curative in approximately half of the lesions. It can be considered a feasible treatment in selected patients. Our results suggest the need to improve patient selection and to develop more effective therapies to prevent esophageal strictures.
Subject(s)
Endoscopic Mucosal Resection , Esophageal Neoplasms , Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma , Humans , Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma/surgery , Esophageal Neoplasms/pathology , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection/methods , Esophagoscopy/methods , Treatment Outcome , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic resection of adenomas prevents colorectal cancer, but the optimal technique for larger lesions is controversial. Piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) has a low adverse event (AE) rate but a variable recurrence rate necessitating early follow-up. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) can reduce recurrence but may increase AEs. OBJECTIVE: To compare ESD and EMR for large colonic adenomas. DESIGN: Participant-masked, parallel-group, superiority, randomized controlled trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03962868). SETTING: Multicenter study involving 6 French referral centers from November 2019 to February 2021. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with large (≥25 mm) benign colonic lesions referred for resection. INTERVENTION: The patients were randomly assigned by computer 1:1 (stratification by lesion location and center) to ESD or EMR. MEASUREMENTS: The primary end point was 6-month local recurrence (neoplastic tissue on endoscopic assessment and scar biopsy). The secondary end points were technical failure, en bloc R0 resection, and cumulative AEs. RESULTS: In total, 360 patients were randomly assigned to ESD (n = 178) or EMR (n = 182). In the primary analysis set (n = 318 lesions in 318 patients), recurrence occurred after 1 of 161 ESDs (0.6%) and 8 of 157 EMRs (5.1%) (relative risk, 0.12 [95% CI, 0.01 to 0.96]). No recurrence occurred in R0-resected cases (90%) after ESD. The AEs occurred more often after ESD than EMR (35.6% vs. 24.5%, respectively; relative risk, 1.4 [CI, 1.0 to 2.0]). LIMITATION: Procedures were performed under general anesthesia during hospitalization in accordance with the French health system. CONCLUSION: Compared with EMR, ESD reduces the 6-month recurrence rate, obviating the need for systematic early follow-up colonoscopy at the cost of more AEs. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: French Ministry of Health.
Subject(s)
Adenoma , Colonic Neoplasms , Colorectal Neoplasms , Humans , Colonic Neoplasms/surgery , Colonic Neoplasms/pathology , Colonoscopy/adverse effects , Colonoscopy/methods , Biopsy , Adenoma/surgery , Adenoma/pathology , Treatment Outcome , Colorectal Neoplasms/surgery , Colorectal Neoplasms/pathology , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local , Intestinal Mucosa/pathology , Intestinal Mucosa/surgery , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is challenging for appendicular lesions. We report the outcomes of ESD in this context. METHODS: We collected data of ESD procedures for appendiceal neoplasia in a multicenter prospective registry. Main study endpoints were R0, en-bloc, and curative resection rates and adverse event rate. RESULTS: One hundred twelve patients were included, 47 (42%) with previous appendectomy. Fifty-six (50%) were Toyonaga type 3 lesions (15 [13.4%] postappendectomy). En-bloc and R0 resection rates were 86.6% and 80.4%, respectively, with no significant difference associated with different grades of appendiceal invasion (P = .9 and P = .4, respectively) or previous appendectomy (P = .3 for both). The curative resection rate was 78.6%. Additional surgery was performed in 16 cases (14.3%), including 10 (62.5%) Toyonaga type 3 lesions (P = .04). This included the treatment of 5 cases (4.5%) of delayed perforation and 1 acute appendicitis. CONCLUSIONS: ESD for appendicular lesions is a potentially safer and effective alternative to surgery for a significant proportion of patients.
Subject(s)
Appendix , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection , Humans , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection/adverse effects , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection/methods , Retrospective Studies , Appendectomy , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Liver cirrhosis and esophageal cancer share several risk factors, such as alcohol intake and excess weight. Endoscopic resection is the gold standard treatment for superficial tumors. Portal hypertension and coagulopathy may increase the bleeding risk in these patients. This study aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of endoscopic resection for early esophageal neoplasia in patients with cirrhosis or portal hypertension. METHODS: This retrospective multicenter international study included consecutive patients with cirrhosis or portal hypertension who underwent endoscopic resection in the esophagus from January 2005 to March 2021. RESULTS: 134 lesions in 112 patients were treated, including by endoscopic submucosal dissection in 101 cases (75â%). Most lesions (128/134, 96â%) were in patients with liver cirrhosis, with esophageal varices in 71 procedures. To prevent bleeding, 7 patients received a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt, 8 underwent endoscopic band ligation (EBL) before resection, 15 received vasoactive drugs, 8 received platelet transfusion, and 9 underwent EBL during the resection procedure. Rates of complete macroscopic resection, en bloc resection, and curative resection were 92â%, 86â%, and 63â%, respectively. Adverse events included 3 perforations, 8 delayed bleedings, 8 sepsis, 6 cirrhosis decompensations within 30 days, and 22 esophageal strictures; none required surgery. In univariate analysis, cap-assisted endoscopic mucosal resection was associated with delayed bleeding (Pâ=â0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with liver cirrhosis or portal hypertension, endoscopic resection of early esophageal neoplasia appeared to be effective and should be considered in expert centers with choice of resection technique, following European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines to avoid undertreatment.
Subject(s)
Esophageal Neoplasms , Esophageal and Gastric Varices , Hypertension, Portal , Humans , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/prevention & control , Hypertension, Portal/complications , Hypertension, Portal/surgery , Endoscopy , Esophageal Neoplasms/complications , Esophageal Neoplasms/surgery , Esophageal Neoplasms/pathology , Esophageal and Gastric Varices/complications , Esophageal and Gastric Varices/surgery , Liver Cirrhosis/complications , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: In case of high risk of lymph node invasion after endoscopic resection (ER) of superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) can be an alternative to surgery. We assessed long-term clinical outcomes of adjuvant therapy by CRT after non-curative ER for superficial SCC. METHODS: We performed a retrospective multicenter study. From April 1999 to April 2018, all consecutive patients who underwent ER for SCC with tumor infiltration beyond the muscularis mucosae were included. RESULTS: A total of 137 ER were analyzed. The overall nodal or metastatic recurrence-free survival rate at 5 years was 88% and specific recurrence-free survival rates at 5 years with and without adjuvant therapy were, respectively, 97.9% and 79.1% (p = 0.011). Independent factors for nodal and/or distal metastatic recurrence were age (HR = 1.075, p = 0.031), Sm infiltration depth > 200 µm (HR = 4.129, p = 0.040), and the absence of adjuvant CRT or surgery (HR = 11.322, p = 0.029). CONCLUSION: In this study, adjuvant therapy is associated with a higher recurrence-free survival rate at 5 years after non-curative ER. This result suggests this approach may be considered as an alternative to surgery in selected patients.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is potentially a curative treatment for T1 colorectal cancer under certain conditions. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of ESD for lesions with a suspicion of focal deep invasion. METHODS: In this retrospective multicenter study, consecutive patients with colorectal neoplasia displaying a focal (< 15âmm) deep invasive pattern (FDIP) that were treated by ESD were included. We excluded ulcerated lesions (Paris III), lesions with distant metastasis, and clearly advanced tumors (tumoral strictures). RESULTS: 124 patients benefited from 126 diagnostic dissection attempts for FDIP lesions. Dissection was feasible in 120/126 attempts (95.2â%) and, where possible, the en bloc and R0 resection rates were 95.8â% (115/120) and 76.7â% (92/120), respectively. Thirty-three resections (26.2â%) were for very low risk tumors, so considered curative, and 38 (30.2â%) were for low risk lesions. Noncurative R0 resections were for lesions with lymphatic or vascular invasion (LVI; nâ=â8), or significant budding (nâ=â9), and LVIâ+âbudding combination (nâ=â4). CONCLUSION: ESD is feasible and safe for colorectal lesions with an FDIPâ≤â15âmm. It was curative in 26.6â% of patients and could be a valid option for a further 30.6â% of patients with low risk T1 cancers, especially for frail patients with co-morbidities.
Subject(s)
Colorectal Neoplasms , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection , Humans , Colorectal Neoplasms/surgery , Colorectal Neoplasms/pathology , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection/adverse effects , Retrospective Studies , Treatment Outcome , Feasibility StudiesABSTRACT
Background and study aims The aim of this study was to validate the COlorectal NEoplasia Classification to Choose the Treatment (CONECCT) classification that groups all published criteria (including covert signs of carcinoma) in a single table. Patients and methods For this multicenter comparative study an expert endoscopist created an image library (nâ=â206 lesions; from hyperplastic to deep invasive cancers) with at least white light Imaging and chromoendoscopy images (virtual ± dye based). Lesions were resected/biopsied to assess histology. Participants characterized lesions using the Paris, Laterally Spreading Tumours, Kudo, Sano, NBI International Colorectal Endoscopic Classification (NICE), Workgroup serrAted polypS and Polyposis (WASP), and CONECCT classifications, and assessed the quality of images on a web-based platform. Krippendorff alpha and Cohen's Kappa were used to assess interobserver and intra-observer agreement, respectively. Answers were cross-referenced with histology. Results Eleven experts, 19 non-experts, and 10 gastroenterology fellows participated. The CONECCT classification had a higher interobserver agreement (Krippendorff alphaâ=â0.738) than for all the other classifications and increased with expertise and with quality of pictures. CONECCT classification had a higher intra-observer agreement than all other existing classifications except WASP (only describing Sessile Serrated Adenoma Polyp). Specificity of CONECCT IIA (89.2, 95â% CI [80.4;94.9]) to diagnose adenomas was higher than the NICE2 category (71.1, 95â% CI [60.1;80.5]). The sensitivity of Kudo Vi, Sano IIIa, NICE 2 and CONECCT IIC to detect adenocarcinoma were statistically different ( P â<â0.001): the highest sensitivities were for NICE 2 (84.2â%) and CONECCT IIC (78.9â%), and the lowest for Kudo Vi (31.6â%). Conclusions The CONECCT classification currently offers the best interobserver and intra-observer agreement, including between experts and non-experts. CONECCT IIA is the best classification for excluding presence of adenocarcinoma in a colorectal lesion and CONECCT IIC offers the better compromise for diagnosing superficial adenocarcinoma.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Benign biliary strictures (BBS) are complications of chronic pancreatitis (CP). Endotherapy using multiple plastic stents (MPS) or a fully covered self-expanding metal stent (FCSEMS) are acceptable treatment options for biliary obstructive symptoms in these patients. METHODS: Patients with symptomatic CP-associated BBS enrolled in a multicenter randomized noninferiority trial comparing 12-month treatment with MPS vs FCSEMS. Primary outcome was stricture resolution status at 24 months, defined as absence of restenting and 24-month serum alkaline phosphatase not exceeding twice the level at stenting completion. Secondary outcomes included crossover rate, numbers of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCPs) and stents, and stent- or procedure-related serious adverse events. RESULTS: Eighty-four patients were randomized to MPS and 80 to FCSEMS. Baseline technical success was 97.6% for MPS and 98.6% for FCSEMS. Eleven patients crossed over from MPS to FCSEMS, and 10 from FCSEMS to MPS. For MPS vs FCSEMS, respectively, stricture resolution status at 24 months was 77.1% (54/70) vs 75.8% (47/62) (P = .008 for noninferiority intention-to-treat analysis), mean number of ERCPs was 3.9 ± 1.3 vs 2.6 ± 1.3 (P < .001, intention-to-treat), and mean number of stents placed was 7.0 ± 4.4 vs 1.3 ± .6 (P < .001, as-treated). Serious adverse events occurred in 16 (19.0%) MPS and 19 (23.8%) FCSEMS patients (P = .568), including cholangitis/fever/jaundice (9 vs 7 patients respectively), abdominal pain (5 vs 5), cholecystitis (1 vs 3) and post-ERCP pancreatitis (0 vs 2). No stent- or procedure-related deaths occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Endotherapy of CP-associated BBS has similar efficacy and safety for 12-month treatment using MPS compared with a single FCSEMS, with FCSEMS requiring fewer ERCPs over 2 years. (ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT01543256.).
Subject(s)
Cholestasis/therapy , Coated Materials, Biocompatible , Drainage/instrumentation , Pancreatitis, Chronic/complications , Plastics , Self Expandable Metallic Stents , Stents , Adult , Aged , Cholestasis/diagnostic imaging , Cholestasis/etiology , Drainage/adverse effects , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pancreatitis, Chronic/diagnosis , Prosthesis Design , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Superficial oesophageal adenocarcinoma can be resected endoscopically, but data to define a curative endoscopic resection are scarce. OBJECTIVE: Our study aimed to assess the risk of lymph node metastasis depending on the depth of invasion and histological features of oesophageal adenocarcinoma. METHODS: We retrospectively included all patients undergoing an endoscopic resection for T1 oesophageal adenocarcinoma among seven expert centres in France in 2004-2016. Mural invasion was defined as either intramucosal or submucosal tumours; the latter were further divided into superficial submucosal (<1000 mm) and deep submucosal (>1000 mm). Absence or presence of lymphovascular invasion and/or poorly differentiated cancer (G3) defined a low-risk or a high-risk tumour, respectively. For submucosal tumours, invasion depth and histological features were systematically confirmed after a second dedicated histological assessment (new 2-mm thick slices) performed by a second pathologist. Occurrence of lymph node metastasis was recorded during the follow-up from histological or PET CT reports when an invasive procedure was not possible. RESULTS: In total, 188 superficial oesophageal adenocarcinomas were included with a median follow-up of 34 months. No lymph node metastases occurred for intramucosal oesophageal adenocarcinomas (n = 135) even with high-risk histological features. Among submucosal oesophageal adenocarcinomas, only tumours with lymphovascular invasion or poorly differentiated cancer or with a depth of invasion >1000 µm developed lymph node metastasis tumours (n = 10/53%; 18.9%; hazard ratio 12.04). No metastatic evolution occurred under a 1000-mm threshold for all low-risk tumours (0/25), nor under 1200 mm (0/1) and three over this threshold (3/13%, 23.1%). CONCLUSION: Intramucosal and low-risk tumours with shallow submucosal invasion up to 1200 mm were not associated with lymph node metastasis during follow-up. In case of high-risk features and/or deep submucosal invasion, endoscopic resections are not sufficient to eliminate the risk of lymph node metastasis, and surgical oesophagectomy should be carried out. These results must be confirmed by larger prospective series.
Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma/pathology , Adenocarcinoma/surgery , Barrett Esophagus/pathology , Barrett Esophagus/surgery , Esophageal Mucosa/pathology , Esophageal Neoplasms/pathology , Esophageal Neoplasms/surgery , Esophagoscopy , Adenocarcinoma/diagnostic imaging , Adenocarcinoma/mortality , Aged , Barrett Esophagus/diagnostic imaging , Barrett Esophagus/mortality , Esophageal Mucosa/diagnostic imaging , Esophageal Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Esophageal Neoplasms/mortality , Esophagoscopy/adverse effects , Female , Follow-Up Studies , France , Humans , Lymphatic Metastasis , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Invasiveness , Positron-Emission Tomography , Retrospective Studies , RiskABSTRACT
Background and study aims Endoscopic full-thickness resection allows resection of early gastrointestinal neoplasms not amenable to conventional endoscopic resection techniques, due to their location, presence of submucosal fibrosis, or suspected deep mural invasion. It is typically achieved using a dedicated over-the-scope device (full-thickness resection device or FTRD). The aim of our study was to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and clinical outcomes of endoscopic full-thickness resection using an endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) knife. Patients and methods Consecutive patients who underwent full-thickness endoscopic resection at six tertiary care centers from August 2010 to June 2017 were retrospectively included. We conducted a comparative analysis of patient characteristics, technical success, adverse events, and time to discharge between patients treated by a full-thickness resection using an ESD knife. Results Twenty-one procedures were performed using an ESD knife. En-bloc resection and R0 resection rates were 95.2â% and 65â%, respectively. Clinical symptoms of perforation occurred in 66.7â%. There was no need for surgery or additional endoscopic procedures. Conclusion Endoscopic full-thickness resection of early colorectal neoplasms using an ESD knife might be feasible and safe. It allows complete resection of lesions with no limitation in size. The technique may be preferable to an other-the-scope resection device in lesions larger than 20âmm, and to surgery in selected cases of low-risk T1 colorectal carcinomas, non-lifting adenomas, submucosal tumors, or technically challenging lesion locations.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Minimally invasive treatments of anastomotic benign biliary stricture (BBS) after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) include endoscopic placement of multiple plastic stents or fully covered self-expandable metal stents (FCSEMSs). No multiyear efficacy data are available on FCSEMS treatment after OLT. METHODS: We prospectively studied long-term efficacy and safety of FCSEMS treatment in adults aged ≥18 years with past OLT, cholangiographically confirmed BBS, and an indication for ERCP with stent placement. Stent removal was planned after 4 to 6 months, with subsequent follow-up until 5 years or stricture recurrence. Long-term outcomes were freedom from stricture recurrence, freedom from recurrent stent placement, and stent-related serious adverse events (SAEs). RESULTS: In 41 patients, long-term follow-up began after FCSEMS removal (n = 33) or observation of complete distal migration (CDM) (n = 8). On an intention-to-treat basis, the 5-year probability of remaining stent-free after FCSEMS removal or observation of CDM was 48.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 33.2%-64.7%) among all patients and 60.9% (95% CI, 43.6%-78.2%) among 31 patients with over 4 months of FCSEMS indwell time. In 28 patients with stricture resolution at FCSEMS removal or observed CDM (median, 5.0 months indwell time), the 5-year probability of no stricture recurrence was 72.6% (95% CI, 55.3%-90%). Sixteen patients (39%) had at least 1 related SAE, most commonly cholangitis (n = 10). CONCLUSIONS: By 5 years after temporary FCSEMS treatment of post-OLT BBS, approximately half of all patients remained stent-free on an intention-to-treat basis. Stent-related SAEs (especially cholangitis) were common. FCSEMS placement is a viable long-term treatment option for patients with post-OLT BBS. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT01014390.).
Subject(s)
Bile Duct Diseases/surgery , Constriction, Pathologic/surgery , Liver Transplantation , Self Expandable Metallic Stents , Adult , Aged , Bile Duct Diseases/etiology , Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde , Constriction, Pathologic/etiology , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Prosthesis Implantation , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Gastric hyperplastic polyps (GHPs) have a risk of neoplastic transformation reaching 5â%. Current endoscopic resection techniques appear suboptimal with a high risk of local recurrence. This study assessed the outcomes of endoscopic resection for GHPs and identified risk factors for recurrence and neoplastic transformation. METHODS: This retrospective, multicenter, European study included adult patients with at least one GHP ≥â10âmm who underwent endoscopic resection and at least one follow-up endoscopy. Patients with recurrent GHPs or hereditary gastric polyposis were excluded. All data were retrieved from the endoscopy, pathology, and hospitalization reports. RESULTS: From June 2007 to August 2018, 145 GHPs in 108 patients were included. Recurrence after endoscopic resection was 51.0â% (74â/145) in 55 patients. R0 resection or en bloc resection did not impact the risk of polyp recurrence. In multivariate analysis, cirrhosis was the only risk factor for recurrence (odds ratio [OR] 4.82, 95â% confidence interval [CI] 1.33â-â17.46; Pâ=â0.02). Overall, 15 GHPs (10.4â%) showed neoplastic transformation, with size >â25âmm (OR 10.24, 95â%CI 2.71â-â38.69; Pâ<â0.001) and presence of intestinal metaplasia (OR 5.93, 95â%CI 1.56â-â22.47; Pâ=â0.01) being associated with an increased risk of neoplastic transformation in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Results confirmed the risk of recurrence and neoplastic transformation of large GHPs. The risk of neoplastic change was significantly increased for lesions >â25âmm, with a risk of high grade dysplasia appearing in polyps ≥â50âmm. The risk of recurrence was high, particularly in cirrhosis patients, and long-term follow-up is recommended in such patients.
Subject(s)
Adenomatous Polyps , Polyps , Stomach Neoplasms , Adult , Endoscopy , Humans , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local , Polyps/surgery , Retrospective Studies , Stomach Neoplasms/surgeryABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic resection has developed over the years. The main complications are perforation and bleeding. This study aimed to evaluate safety and effectiveness of digestive endoscopic resection in patients with cirrhosis. METHODS: This retrospective, open-label, single-center study included all consecutive patients with cirrhosis who were admitted for endoscopic resection between 2009 and 2016. Safety, efficacy, and risk factors for delayed bleeding were analyzed. RESULTS: 126 patients undergoing 164 procedures were included: 65 endoscopic resections (49 patients) in the upper gastrointestinal tract (esophagus 34, stomach 20, duodenum 11) and 99 in the lower gastrointestinal tract (77 patients). Mean Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score was 9.9 (standard deviation 4.5). Esophageal varices were present in 50 patients, and 21 patients had decompensated cirrhosis. The overall curative rate of endoscopic resection was 84.0â%. No patients died during 30-day follow-up. Immediate overall morbidity was 6.1â%, with two postoperative fevers and eight bleeds. Risk factors for delayed bleeding were duodenal location (Pâ<â0.01), antiplatelet medication (Pâ=â0.02), and lower glomerular filtration rate (GFR) (Pâ=â0.01) in univariate analysis. Duodenal location and lower GFR remained statistically significant in multivariate analysis, with respective odds ratios for bleeding of 52.12 and 1.04. No liver decompensation occurred after endoscopic resection. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic resection was safe and effective in patients with mild (Childâ-âPugh class A/B) cirrhosis, and should be proposed as a first option for treatment of superficial neoplasia. Additional data in patients with severe cirrhosis are needed to confirm the safety in this population.
Subject(s)
End Stage Liver Disease , Esophageal and Gastric Varices , Child , Esophageal and Gastric Varices/complications , Esophageal and Gastric Varices/surgery , Humans , Liver Cirrhosis/complications , Retrospective Studies , Severity of Illness Index , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend performing esophagectomy after endoscopic resection for early esophageal cancer when the risk of lymph node metastasis or residual cancer is found to be significant and endoscopic treatment is therefore noncurative. Our aim was to assess the safety and oncological outcomes of esophagogastric resection in this specific clinical setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective review from 2012 to 2018 was performed at four tertiary referral centers. All patients had a noncurative endoscopic resection of a clinical T1 esophageal cancer, followed by esophagectomy. Outcome measures were the rates of T0N0 specimens, overall survival, disease-free and cancer-specific survival, postoperative morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 30 patients (13 with squamous cell carcinoma and 17 with adenocarcinoma) were included. The reasons for noncurative endoscopic resection were: positive vertical margins (n = 12), squamous cell carcinoma with muscularis mucosae or submucosal layer invasion (n = 3 and 9), adenocarcinoma with deep submucosal invasion (n = 11), poorly differentiated tumor (n = 6) and lymphovascular invasion (n = 6). Overall, 63% of the esophagi were T0N0: most residual lesions were T1a metachronous lesions, and four (13%) patients had advanced pT status (n = 3) or lymph node metastases (n = 2). Overall survival, disease-free survival and cancer-specific survival were 83%, 75%, and 90% respectively. A total of 43% of patients had severe postoperative complications, and postoperative mortality was 7%. CONCLUSION: In this cohort, esophagectomy allowed the resection of residual advanced cancer or lymph node metastases in 13% of cases, at the cost of 43% severe morbidity and 7% mortality. Therefore, the possibility of close follow up needs to be balanced with a highly morbid surgical management in these patients.
ABSTRACT
Background Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) with snare is the recommended technique to resect non-invasive colorectal neoplastic lesions between 10 and 30âmm in diameter. The objective of EMR is to resect completely the neoplastic tissue en bloc and preferably with free margins (R0), avoiding recurrences. Anchoring the tip of the snare in the submucosa is a technical trick that allows snare sliding to be reduced and larger pieces to be caught. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of anchoring-EMR (A-EMR). Methods This was a retrospective analysis of A-EMR procedures for lesions of diameter between 10 and 30âmm (endoscopic evaluation) performed consecutively in four French centers between May 2017 and January 2018. A-EMR was routinely performed for all EMR using Olympus conventional snares (10 or 25âmm). The primary outcome was evaluation of the proportion of R0 resections. Results A total of 141 A-EMR procedures were performed by 10 operators. Mean lesion size was 19.8âmm. Anchoring was feasible in 96.5â% of cases. There were 81.6â% en bloc resections and 70.2â% R0 resections, with the percentage of procedures decreasing with increasing lesion size (82.8â% <â20âmm, 55.3â% 21â-â30âmm, and 50.0â% >â30âmm, P â=â0.002). Complete perforations closed endoscopically occurred in 3/141 cases (2.1â%); none occurred in lesionsâ<â20âmm in size (0â/87). Conclusion The A-EMR technique appears to be promising with a high proportion of R0 for lesions of 10â-â20âmm in size without any perforations. It could also offer an alternative to endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), or to hybrid techniques to reach R0 for lesions between 20 and 30âmm in size.
ABSTRACT
Introduction and study aims Accurate real-time endoscopic characterization of colorectal polyps is key to choosing the most appropriate treatment. Mastering the currently available classifications is challenging. We used validated criteria for these classifications to create a single table, named CONECCT, and evaluated the impact of a teaching program based on this tool. Methods A prospective multicenter study involving GI fellows and attending physicians was conducted. During the first session, each trainee completed a pretest consisting in histological prediction and choice of treatment of 20 colorectal polyps still frames. This was followed by a 30-minute course on the CONECCT table, before taking a post-test using the same still frames reshuffled. During a second session at 3â-â6 months, a last test (T3âM) was performed, including these same still frames and 20 new ones. Results A total 419 participants followed the teaching program between April 2017 and April 2018.âThe mean proportion of correctly predicted/treated lesions improved significantly from pretest to post-test and to T3âM, from 51.0â% to 74.0â% and to 66.6â% respectively ( P â<â0.001). Between pretest and post-test, 343 (86.6â%) trainees improved, and 153 (75.4â%) at T3âM. Significant improvement occurred for each subtype of polyp for fellows and attending physicians. Between the two sessions, trainees continued to progress in the histology prediction and treatment choice of polyps CONECCT IIA. Over-treatment decreased significantly from 30.1â% to 15.5â% at post-test and to 18.5â% at T3âM ( P â<â0.001). Conclusion The CONECCT teaching program is effective to improve the histology prediction and the treatment choice by gastroenterologists, for each subtype of colorectal polyp.