Outcomes in colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection for large protruded lesions: A retrospective multicenter study.

Background and study aims Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is increasingly used for treating early-stage colorectal cancer, including large, protruded lesions (LPL). However, the challenges posed by LPLs, especially those accompanied by severe fibrosis or muscle-retracting sign (MRS), remain unclear. This study aims to investigate ESD outcomes for LPL, focusing on factors such as tumor size and, submucosal fibrosis. Patients and methods In a multicenter retrospective study (June 2012 to May 2023), data from 526 patients with 542 LPL lesions (≥ 2 cm) were analyzed. Parameters included lesion size, procedure time, dissection speed, physician experience, submucosal fibrosis, and adverse events. The tunnel method, including the double tunnel method, was used for cases with severe fibrosis or MRS. Multivariate analysis assessed factors affecting procedure difficulty, particularly LPLs ≥ 4 cm. Results The study revealed an impressive en bloc resection rate of 97.8% and a curative resection rate of 78.6% for LPLs. Notably, fibrosis and MRS were present in 25% and 18% of 4-cm LPLs, respectively, and their frequency tended to increase as the tumor diameter increased. One treatment strategy for LPLs was the tunneling method, which was used most frequently (41 cases, 7.6%). Factors affecting dissection speed included larger tumor size, submucosal fibrosis, MRS, and physician experience. Conclusions Treating LPLs through colorectal ESD presents significant challenges, especially in patients with fibrosis and MRS. This study highlights the importance of recognizing these complexities, and that more reliable resection strategy must be established for accurate pathological evaluation.

Effectiveness of Strategy-Focused Training in Colorectal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection: A Retrospective Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal ESD, an advanced minimally invasive treatment, presents technical challenges, with globally varying training methods. We analyzed the learning curve of ESD training, emphasizing preoperative strategies, notably gravity traction, to guide ESD instructors and trainee programs. METHOD: This retrospective study included 881 cases guided by an experienced supervisor. Six trainees received "strategy-focused" instruction. To evaluate the number of ESD experiences in steps, the following phases were classified based on ESD experiences of each trainees: Phase 0 (0-50 ESD), Phase 1 (51-100 ESD), Phase 2 (101-150 ESD), and Phase 3 (151-200 ESD). Lesion background, outcomes, and safety were compared across phases. Factors contributing to technical difficulty in early (Phase 0 and 1) and late phases (Phase 2 and 3) were identified, along with the utility of traction ESD with device assistance. RESULT: Treatment outcomes were favorable, with 99.8% and 94.7% en bloc resection and curative resection rates, respectively. Approximately 90% self-completion rate could be achieved after experiencing about 50 cases (92.7% in Phase 1), signifying proficiency growth despite increased case difficulty. In early phases, factors such as left-sided colon, LST-NG morphology, and severe fibrosis pose challenges. In late phases, LST-NG morphology, mild and severe fibrosis remained significant. Traction-assisted ESD, utilized in 3% of cases, comprised planned (1.1%) and rescue (1.9%) methods. Planned traction aided specific lesions, while rescue traction was common in the right colon. CONCLUSION: "Strategy-focused" ESD training consistently yields successful outcomes, effectively adapting to varying difficulty factors in different proficient stages.

The Management of Direct Oral Anticoagulants for Colorectal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection: A Multicenter Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of reports on the use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) during colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). AIMS: We aimed to assess whether the use of DOACs is associated with a higher incidence of delayed bleeding (DB) after ESD. METHODS: A total of 4175 colorectal neoplasms in 3515 patients were dissected at our hospitals during study period. We included 3909 lesions in the final analysis. The lesions were divided into two groups: the no-AT group (3668 neoplasms) and the DOAC group (241 neoplasms). We also compared the DOAC withdrawal group (154 neoplasms) and the DOAC continuation group (87 neoplasms). RESULTS: Among the 3909 lesions, DB occurred in a total of 90 cases (2.3%). The rate of DB was 2.2% (82/3668), and 3.3% (8/241), respectively. There were no significant differences in the rate of DB between the no-AT group and the DOAC group. In the DOAC group, there were no significant differences in the rate of DB between the withdrawal group (5.2%, 8/154) and the continuation group (0%, 0/87). The multivariable analysis identified the location of the lesion in the rectum (odds ratio [OR], 4.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.614-6.242; p < 0.001) and lesions ≥ 30 mm in diameter (OR, 4.14; 95% CI, 2.349-7.34; p < 0.001) as independent risk factors for DB. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that DOAC use has no significant important on the rate of DB. Prospective studies are warranted to determine whether treatment with DOACs should be interrupted prior to colorectal ESD.

Feasibility and Safety of Endoscopic Control for Patients with Serrated Polyposis Syndrome.

INTRODUCTION: Despite advances in endoscopic treatment, patients with serrated polyposis syndrome (SPS) occasionally require surgery due to numerous or unresectable polyps, recurrence, and treatment-related adverse events. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 43 patients with SPS undergoing diagnosis and treatment at Omori Red Cross Hospital from 2011 to 2022. Resection of all polyps ≥3 mm in size was planned during the clearing phase; endoscopic control was defined as complete, endoscopic polyp removal. During the surveillance phase, patients underwent annual colonoscopy and resection of newly detected polyps ≥3 mm in size. RESULTS: Thirty-eight patients (88%) achieved endoscopic control, two (5%) required surgery after endoscopic treatment because of colorectal cancer (CRC), and three (7%) have not yet achieved endoscopic control and are planning treatment. Endoscopic control was achieved with a median of four colonoscopies at 8 months. Ten polyps (median value) were resected per patient during the clearing phase. Three polyps ≥50 mm in size, six located in the appendiceal orifice, and seven with severe fibrosis could be resected by endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). All patients underwent treatment with a combination of cold snare polypectomy (CSP), endoscopic mucosal resection/hot polypectomy, and/or ESD. No case required surgery due to difficulty with endoscopic treatment. Delayed bleeding was observed in 2 cases (0.3%). Twenty-one patients underwent colonoscopies during the surveillance phase. Fifty-three polyps were resected using CSP; no CRC, sessile serrated lesions with dysplasia, or advanced adenoma were detected. CONCLUSION: SPS can be effectively, efficiently, and safely controlled with appropriate endoscopic management.

Cold snare defect protrusion and incomplete polyp resection after forced cold snare polypectomy: a prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Cold snare defect protrusions (CSDPs) that occur after cold snare polypectomy (CSP) are considered indicators of incomplete polyp resection (IPR). We have sometimes experienced difficulty resecting polyps with snaring alone; in such cases, a forcible pull on the snare by the endoscopist is necessary. We call this procedure "forced CSP (FCSP)." However, no previous studies have evaluated this procedure. METHODS: This was a prospective observational study. From November 2020 to June 2021, the frequency, safety, and validity of FCSP were evaluated at our hospital. We distinguished CSP with snaring alone performed by the assistant as conventional CSP, and CSP requiring a forcible pull on the snare by the endoscopist as FCSP. RESULTS: Of 1315 polyps removed, 105 underwent FCSP (8%). The perforation rate was 0% in both groups. The rate of CSDP after the procedure was 96.2% (101/105) with FCSP and 6.4% (77/1210) with conventional CSP (P<0.001). The rate of IPR was 12.5% (13/104) with FCSP and 6.2% (75/1208) with conventional CSP (P=0.02). Multivariable analysis identified polyps located in the cecum (risk ratio [RR], 1.13; 95%CI 1.050-1.179; P=0.003) and polyps ≥6mm in diameter (RR, 2.37; 95%CI 2.146-2.542; P<0.001) as independent risk factors for FCSP. CONCLUSIONS: FCSP was performed on 105 polyps (8%) in this study. FCSP may be associated with the occurrence of CSDP and IPR. Further studies are necessary to confirm our results.

Effectiveness of switching endoscopists for repeat surveillance colonoscopy: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Surveillance colonoscopy decreases colorectal cancer mortality; however, lesions are occasionally missed. Although an appropriate surveillance interval is indicated, variations may occur in the methods used, such as scope manipulation or observation. Therefore, individual endoscopists may miss certain areas. This study aimed to verify the effectiveness of performing repeat colonoscopies with a different endoscopist from the initial procedure. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed a database of 8093 consecutive colonoscopies performed in the Omori Red Cross Hospital from January 1st 2018 to June 30th 2021. Data from repeat total colonoscopies performed within three months were collected to assess missed lesions. The patients were divided into two groups according to whether the two examinations were performed by different endoscopists (group D) or the same endoscopist (group S). The primary outcome in both groups was the missed lesion detection rate (MLDR). RESULTS: Overall, 205 eligible patients were analyzed. In total, 102 and 103 patients were enrolled in groups D and S, respectively. The MLDR was significantly higher in group D (61.8% vs. 31.1%, P < 0.0001). Multivariate logistic regression analysis for the detection of missed lesions identified performance by the different endoscopists (odds ratio, 3.38; 95% CI, 1.81-6.30), and sufficient withdrawal time (> 6 min) (odds ratio, 3.10; 95% CI, 1.12-8.61) as significant variables. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, our study showed a significant improvement in the detection of missed lesions when performed by different endoscopists. When performing repeat colonoscopy, it is desirable that a different endoscopist perform the second colonoscopy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the Omori Red Cross Hospital on November 28, 2022 (approval number:22-43).

Safety and efficacy of a new cold snare technique with clipping for colorectal angioectasia.

Colorectal angioectasia is a major cause of lower gastrointestinal bleeding. Use of antithrombotic agents is expected to increase with aging of the population, and bleeding from angioectasia is an important issue. Although the effectiveness of endoscopic mucosal resection for colorectal angioectasia has been reported, there are no reports of cold snare technique for angioectasia (CSA). From February 2018 to February 2022, the safety of CSA was evaluated at Omori Red Cross Hospital. We investigated the incidence of bleeding (delayed post-polypectomy bleeding (DPPB) and immediate bleeding) after CSA and the incidence of rebleeding requiring repeated endoscopic treatment. During the study period, 106 angioectasias were identified during colonoscopy. We only targeted patients with bloody stools and/or anemia requiring treatment for bleeding from angioectasia. Finally, we included 11 angioectasias in this study. Rates of DPPB and rebleeding after CSA were 0 %. The rate of immediate bleeding during CSA was 27.3 % (3/11). Dilated capillaries could be observed pathologically in nine of 11 lesions (81.8 %). CSA was safe and can be a new treatment option in the future. To confirm our results and verify the long-term safety and efficacy of CSA, further studies are desirable.

Clinicopathological features of endoscopically treated early gastric cancer with lymphovascular infiltration.

PURPOSE: Lymphovascular infiltration (LVI) may play a critical role in radicality and prognostic assessment of early gastric cancer (EGC). However, risk factors for LVI in endoscopically resected EGC remain unknown. This study evaluated the clinicopathological characteristics and prognoses of patients who underwent endoscopic resection of EGC to identify potential risk factors of LVI. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of patients who received gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection between February 1, 2012, and December 31, 2019, at two institutions was conducted. Among 1,462 lesions, 943 met the criteria for radical treatment considering features other than LVI and were included. The lesions were classified based on the presence of LVI. The clinicopathological characteristics of the two groups were compared. RESULTS: LVI was detected in 17 lesions (1.8%). The positivity rates of LVI were 0.7% (7/903) for intramucosal cancer and 25% (10/40) for submucosally invasive cancer. The LVI positivity rate was significantly higher for mixed-type cancer (lesions containing differentiated and undifferentiated-type carcinoma) than for non-mixed-type cancer (35.3 vs. 2.8%; P < 0.001) and for submucosally invasive cancer than for intramucosal cancer (58.8 vs. 3.2%; P < 0.001). In the multivariate logistic regression analysis, independent risk factors for LVI were mixed-type cancer (odds ratio; 95% confidence interval: 23.9; 5.0-115; P < 0.001) and submucosal invasion (58.7; 16.0-215; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Mixed-type cancer and submucosal invasion were risk factors for LVI in endoscopically resected EGC. These factors may play a critical role in the radicality and prognostic assessment of EGC.

The feasibility and safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection of gastric lesions larger than 5 cm.

BACKGROUND: As the indications for endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for early gastric cancer have been revised, diagnostic ESD has increased. However, despite the technical difficulty of ESD for large lesions, the degree to which curative resection can be achieved has not been clarified. This study investigated the feasibility and safety of ESD for gastric lesions larger than 5 cm. METHODS: This retrospective multicenter study included 3474 gastric lesions treated by ESD from April 2012 to December 2021. We compared clinicopathological characteristics and treatment outcomes between lesions ≥ 5 cm and lesions < 5 cm. RESULTS: There were 128 lesions in the ≥ 5 cm group and 3282 lesions in the < 5 cm group. In the ≥ 5 cm group, upper location and fibrosis during ESD were more common, with a lower rate of 0-IIc type. Both en bloc resection rate and R0 resection rate were comparable, but there was a difference in curative resection rate (65.6% in the ≥ 5 cm group and 91.5% in the < 5 cm group). The frequency of adverse events (post-ESD bleeding, perforation, or stenosis) was almost similar, but delayed perforation was significantly more common (1.6% in the ≥ 5 cm group vs. 0.1% in the < 5 cm group). CONCLUSIONS: About two-thirds of curative resections were obtained with ESD for early gastric lesions larger than 5 cm, but delayed complications should be noted (Number: UMIN000047725).

Rationale and design of a multicentre, 12-week, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, investigator-initiated trial to investigate the efficacy and safety of elobixibat for chronic constipation.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic constipation (CC) is a functional disorder that negatively impacts the quality of life of patients. This is a protocol for a multicentre, 12-week, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to test the efficacy and safety of elobixibat (EXB) versus placebo in patients with CC. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This will be a multicentre, double-blind, placebo-control, randomised controlled trial. A total of 100 adult patients with CC, diagnosed based on Rome IV criteria, who fulfil the inclusion/exclusion criteria will be enrolled. The patients will be randomly assigned to receive EXB (10 mg) or placebo treatment (n=50 per group). Blood tests and stool sampling will be performed 12 weeks following initiation of treatment and questionnaires will be issued to participants. The primary outcome will be the change in complete spontaneous bowel movements after 12 weeks of administration. The secondary outcomes will include the change in Japanese Patient Assessment of Constipation Quality of Life and absolute serum and faecal bile acid. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval has been obtained from Yokohama City University Certified Institutional Review Board before participant enrolment. The results of this study will be submitted for publication in international peer-reviewed journals and the key findings will be presented at international scientific conferences. PROTOCOL VERSION: V.3.0, 15 June 2021. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov (number NCT04784780).

The feasibility of endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal lesions larger than 10 cm.

BACKGROUND: Although endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) enables en bloc removal of colorectal neoplasms, its effectiveness for larger lesions (≥ 10 cm in diameter) is undetermined. We aimed to investigate the feasibility and safety of ESD for colorectal lesions ≥ 10 cm wide. METHODS: This retrospective study included 3591 consecutive colorectal lesions managed with ESD from June 2012 through December 2020. Clinicopathological characteristics and treatment outcomes were compared between lesions ≥ 10 cm wide and lesions 5-10 cm wide. RESULTS: There were 50 patients in the ≥ 10 cm group and 270 patients in the 5-10 cm group. Among patients in the ≥ 10 cm group, lesions were most often in the rectum (50.0%), and the laterally spreading tumor-granular nodular mixed type (LST-G-M) was most prevalent (41/50, 82%). Although patients in the ≥ 10 cm group a longer mean ESD procedure time (186.0 vs. 94.4 min, p < 0.001), the dissection speed was significantly higher in this group (0.50 vs. 0.41 cm2/min, p = 0.003). The en bloc and curative resection rates were comparable between the ≥ 10 cm and 5-10 cm groups (100% vs. 99.6% and 86.0% vs. 88.5%, respectively). Although the stenosis rate was higher in the ≥ 10 cm group (4% vs. 0%), the delayed bleeding and perforation rates were similar between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: ESD for colorectal lesions ≥ 10 cm wide is feasible and curative, even though it is associated with higher technical difficulty and longer procedure times compared with ESD for smaller lesions (Number: UMIN 000044313).

Effects of colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection on postoperative abdominal symptoms: a prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is an effective procedure to resect large superficial gastrointestinal neoplasms. In gastric ESD, several studies showed the relationship between postoperative abdominal symptoms and endoscopic treatment. However, the influence of colorectal ESD on abdominal symptoms after treatment is still unknown. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first prospective multicenter study performed to investigate the impact of colorectal ESD on postoperative abdominal symptoms. This study aimed to clarify the association between change of abdominal symptoms and ESD. METHODS: This study was a prospective multicenter observational trial that enrolled 141 out of 171 patients who underwent colorectal ESD and answered the Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale (GSRS) questionnaire from March 2015 to August 2019. We evaluated abdominal symptoms in the patients using the GSRS questionnaire before ESD and a few weeks after ESD. RESULTS: Comparing the GSRS before and after ESD, overall scores changed from 1.58 ± 0.58 to 1.48 ± 0.48, and the five subscales (reflux syndrome, abdominal pain, indigestion syndrome, diarrhea syndrome, and constipation syndrome) were slightly improved. Overall scores, indigestion syndrome, and constipation syndrome were statistically significantly different before and after ESD (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In GSRS, a score of ≥ 3 is often treated as a clinically significant symptom. Therefore, our findings indicated that there was no clinically significant difference. For this reason, colorectal ESD does not affect postoperative abdominal symptoms and is considered a minimally invasive treatment. The analysis of the impact of colon ESD on gastrointestinal symptoms UMIN000016914.

Evaluation of cold snare polypectomy for small pedunculated (Ip) polyps with thin stalks: a prospective clinical feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: Although the use of cold snare polypectomy (CSP) has spread rapidly, no prospective studies evaluating the safety of CSP for pedunculated (Ip) polyps have been carried out. AIM: We performed this study to provide an accurate evaluation of the safety of CSP for Ip polyps. METHODS: This is a prospective study (UMIN000035687). From January 2019 to February 2021, the safety of CSP for use on Ip polyps <10 mm with thin stalks was evaluated at our hospital. The primary outcome measure was the incidence of bleeding (delayed post-polypectomy bleeding (DPPB) and immediate bleeding). RESULTS: During the study period, 89 consecutive patients (including 92 colonoscopies and 114 polyps) were prospectively enrolled. The en-bloc resection rate was 100%. The rate of DPPB after CSP was 0%, however, DPPB after conversion to HSP occurred in 1 case (33.3% (1/3)). The rate of immediate bleeding during CSP was 28.9% (33/114). Polyps with diameters ≥6 mm (OR (95% CI): 2.77 (1.041-7.376); p = .041) were extracted as independent risk factors for immediate bleeding during CSP for Ip polyps. In all, 104 (91.2%) polyps were low-grade adenomas, and the percentage of cases with negative pathological margins was 96.5% (110/114). CONCLUSIONS: CSP for Ip polyps was safe and had good outcomes. We believe that Ip polyps could be included as an indication for CSP, and that CSP may become the next step in the 'cold revolution.' To confirm our results and verify CSP's inclusion in future guidelines, prospective, randomized studies are necessary.

Freestyle endoscopic submucosal dissection using a multifunctional snare.

Video 1Endoscopic submucosal dissection using the SOUTEN snare (SOUTEN-ESD) procedure. By adjusting the working length of the knife according to the situation, the SOUTEN snare achieve a good balance between safety and efficiency.

Recurrence of gastric cancer caused by implantation of tumor cells after curative endoscopic submucosal dissection.

A 93-year-old female underwent curative endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for intramucosal gastric cancer (70 mm in diameter) in the antrum. The lesion showed an irregularly villous structure covered with mucus. En bloc resection was performed. The large resected specimen induced a longitudinal laceration on the right wall of the esophagogastric junction (EGJ) during retrieval. Unavoidably, we segmented the specimen in the stomach to facilitate retrieval. Histopathological evaluation of the specimen revealed well-to-moderately differentiated tubular and papillary adenocarcinoma. A new elevated lesion (15 mm in diameter) was found at the gastric side of the EGJ laceration scar 6 months after the first ESD, necessitating a second resection with ESD. Endoscopic, histopathological, and immunohistochemical features of the new lesion resembled those of the antral lesion. We assessed the new lesion as a recurrence of cancer caused by implantation of tumor cells in the mucosal laceration after ESD.We experienced recurrence caused by implantation of tumor cells in a mucosal laceration after curative gastric ESD. Endoscopist should be aware of the risk of implantation after gastric ESD.

Impact of obesity in colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: single-center retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: When performing colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in obese patients, technically difficult cases are sometimes experienced because of difficulty with the insertion of the colonoscope, poor scope maneuverability, or an abundance of fat tissue in the submucosal layer. Since the association between obesity and colorectal ESD has not been investigated, we evaluated the clinical impact of obesity in patients who underwent colorectal ESD. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 535 patients who underwent colorectal ESD between April 2012 and February 2019. Patients were divided into three groups based on their body mass index (BMI): a control group (BMI < 25 kg/m2), an overweight group (25 kg/m2 ≤ BMI < 30 kg/m2), and an obese group (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2), and the short-term clinical outcomes were analyzed to assess the safety and difficulty of colorectal ESD. RESULTS: No significant difference in the procedure times, en bloc resection rates, pathological diagnoses, or complications were seen among the groups. While the amount of sedative per body weight was significantly lower in the group with a higher BMI (flunitrazepam: 1.75 × 10-2 [1.27 × 10-2-2.34 × 10-2] mg/kg vs. 1.48 × 10-2 [1.08 × 10-2-2.03 × 10-2] mg/kg vs. 1.16 × 10-2 [0.98 × 10-2-1.54 × 10-2] mg/kg, P < 0.001; pethidine: 0.63 [0.55-0.72] mg/kg vs. 0.50 [0.46-0.56] mg/kg vs. 0.39 [0.32-0.45] mg/kg, P < 0.001), a reduction in percutaneous arterial oxygen saturation occurred significantly more frequently in the group with a higher BMI (123 [30.2%] vs. 43 [43.9%] vs. 10 [55.6%], P = 0.005). When the procedures were performed by trainees, the number of cases that required a procedure time of longer than 90 min was significantly larger in the group with a higher BMI (27 [10.8%] vs. 14 [21.9%] vs. 3 [25.0%], P = 0.033). CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that colorectal ESD could be performed safely and effectively in obese patients. However, ESD in obese patients requires attention, particularly to changes in respiratory conditions.

Efficacy of sedation with dexmedetomidine plus propofol during esophageal endoscopic submucosal dissection.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: During endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial esophageal cancer, patient body movement can sometimes occur, which may cause discontinuation of the procedure. Propofol and dexmedetomidine have recently been found to be useful sedatives for endoscopic submucosal dissection. This study investigated whether sedation using propofol plus dexmedetomidine can suppress the patient's body movements during esophageal endoscopic submucosal dissection and compared this combination with sedation using propofol alone. METHODS: This was a prospective double-blind randomized controlled trial. Patients with superficial esophageal cancers who underwent esophageal endoscopic submucosal dissection at Yokohama City University Hospital were prospectively enrolled and were randomly assigned to the propofol and the propofol plus dexmedetomidine groups. The primary endpoint was the incidence of restlessness. The secondary endpoints were the satisfaction score, maintenance dose of propofol, and number of rescue propofol injections. RESULTS: Sixty-six patients (propofol group: n = 33; combination group: n = 33) were included. The combination group had a significantly lower incidence of restlessness than the propofol group (3.0% vs 27.3%, P = 0.02). In the combination group, the satisfaction scores of the endoscopists were significantly higher, the maintenance dose of propofol was significantly lower, and the number of rescue propofol injections was lower than those in the propofol group (3.0% vs 18.2%, P < 0.001). Although the incidence of bradycardia was significantly higher in the combination group (30.3% vs 3.0%, P < 0.01), no serious adverse effects occurred. CONCLUSION: The propofol plus dexmedetomidine combination provided excellent sedation that effectively suppressed the patient's body movements during esophageal endoscopic submucosal dissection.