Endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection vs conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection for large colorectal neoplasms: a single-centre retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is still not widely used due to its technical difficulty and the risk of complications. Several techniques, such as traction techniques, pocket techniques and others, have been proposed to facilitate it. One modified pocket technique especially suitable for large lesions is endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD). The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ESTD and compare ESTD to the conventional ESD (CESD) for treating large colorectal lesions. METHODS: The charts of consecutive patients referred to the Arcispedale Santa Maria Nuova (Reggio Emilia, Italy) for colorectal ESD between January 2014 and February 2021 for colorectal neoplasms > 40 mm were retrospectively analysed. The primary outcome of the study was the en bloc resection rate. Secondary outcomes were complete and curative resection rates, procedure speed, the adverse events rate and the recurrence rate. RESULTS: There were 59 patients (M:F ratio 29:30, median age 70 years [range 50-93 years]). Of 59 colorectal lesions > 40 mm, 25 were removed by ESTD and 34 by CESD. The en bloc resection rate was 100% in both groups and the complete resection rate was similar (ESTD 92% vs CESD 97.1%, p = 0.569), while the curative resection rate was higher in the CESD group, but not significantly (94.1% vs 76%, p = 0.061). Procedure speed was significantly faster with ESTD (22 vs 17 mm2/min, p = 0.045), and the overall incidence of adverse events was low (6.8%). Eight patients were referred to surgery due to non-curative resection. During follow-up, no recurrence was observed in either treatment group. CONCLUSION: ESTD achieves a very high en bloc resection rate and is faster than CESD.

Colo-rectal endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) with the over-the-scope device (FTRD®): A multicenter Italian experience.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Endoscopic full-thickness resection(EFTR) with FTRD® in colo-rectum may be useful for several indications.The aim was to assess its efficacy and safety. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this retrospective multicenter study 114 patients were screened; 110 (61M/49F, mean age 68 ±â€¯11 years, range 20-90) underwent EFTR using FTRD®. Indications were:residual/recurrent adenoma (39), incomplete resection at histology (R1 resection) (26), non-lifting lesion (12), adenoma involving the appendix (2) or diverticulum (2), subepithelial lesions(10), suspected T1 carcinoma (16), diagnostic resection (3). Technical success (TS: lesion reached and resected), R0 resection (negative lateral and deep margins),EFTR rate(all layers documented in the specimen) and safety have been evaluated. RESULTS: TS was achieved in 94.4% of cases. EFTR was achieved in 91% with lateral and deep R0 resection in 90% and 92%. Mean size of specimens was 20 mm (range 6-42). In residual/recurrent adenomas, final analysis revealed: low-risk T1 (11), adenoma with low-grade dysplasia (LGD) (24) and high-grade dysplasia (HGD) (3), scar tissue (1). Histology reports of R1 resections were: adenoma with LGD (6), with HGD (1), low-risk (6) and high-risk (1) T1, scar tissue (12). Non-lifting lesions were diagnosed as: adenoma with HGD (3), low-risk (7) and high risk (2) T1. Adverse clinical events occurred in 12 patients (11%),while adverse technical events in11%. Three-months follow-up was available in 100 cases and residual disease was evident in only seven patients. CONCLUSIONS: EFTR using FTRD® seems to be a feasible, effective and safe technique for treating selected colo-rectal lesions. Comparative prospective studies are needed to confirm these promising results.

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt: a case report of rescue management of unrestrainable variceal bleeding in a pregnant woman.

Liver cirrhosis complications in pregnant women are frequent and death rate secondary to variceal bleeding is relevant. Both sclerotherapy and banding ligation seem to be safe procedures in pregnancy; when bleeding is not arrested endoscopically an emergency transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt should be considered, but data regarding pregnant cirrhotic women are scarce. We describe the case of a pregnant woman at 14 weeks of gestation who underwent management of acute variceal bleeding by transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt. Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt may represent a rescue treatment for failed attempts of band ligation or sclerotherapy.