Peroral endoscopic myotomy vs laparoscopic myotomy and partial fundoplication for esophageal achalasia: A single-center randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Achalasia is a rare benign esophageal motor disorder characterized by incomplete relaxation of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES). The treatment of achalasia is not curative, but rather is aimed at reducing LES pressure. In patients who have failed noninvasive therapy, surgery should be considered. Myotomy with partial fundoplication has been considered the first-line treatment for non-advanced achalasia. Recently, peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM), a technique that employs the principles of submucosal endoscopy to perform the equivalent of a surgical myotomy, has emerged as a promising minimally invasive technique for the management of this condition. AIM: To compare POEM and laparoscopic myotomy and partial fundoplication (LM-PF) regarding their efficacy and outcomes for the treatment of achalasia. METHODS: Forty treatment-naive adult patients who had been diagnosed with achalasia based on clinical and manometric criteria (dysphagia score ≥ II and Eckardt score > 3) were randomized to undergo either LM-PF or POEM. The outcome measures were anesthesia time, procedure time, symptom improvement, reflux esophagitis (as determined with the Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Questionnaire), barium column height at 1 and 5 min (on a barium esophagogram), pressure at the LES, the occurrence of adverse events (AEs), length of stay (LOS), and quality of life (QoL). RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between the LM-PF and POEM groups regarding symptom improvement at 1, 6, and 12 mo of follow-up (P = 0.192, P = 0.242, and P = 0.242, respectively). However, the rates of reflux esophagitis at 1, 6, and 12 mo of follow-up were significantly higher in the POEM group (P = 0.014, P < 0.001, and P = 0.002, respectively). There were also no statistical differences regarding the manometry values, the occurrence of AEs, or LOS. Anesthesia time and procedure time were significantly shorter in the POEM group than in the LM-PF group (185.00 ± 56.89 and 95.70 ± 30.47 min vs 296.75 ± 56.13 and 218.75 ± 50.88 min, respectively; P = 0.001 for both). In the POEM group, there were improvements in all domains of the QoL questionnaire, whereas there were improvements in only three domains in the LM-PF group. CONCLUSION: POEM and LM-PF appear to be equally effective in controlling the symptoms of achalasia, shortening LOS, and minimizing AEs. Nevertheless, POEM has the advantage of improving all domains of QoL, and shortening anesthesia and procedure times but with a significantly higher rate of gastroesophageal reflux.

UNDERWATER ENDOSCOPIC MUCOSAL RESECTION FOR SMALL RECTAL NEUROENDOCRINE TUMORS.

BACKGROUND: A common site of neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) is the rectum. The technique most often used is endoscopic mucosal resection with saline injection. However, deep margins are often difficult to obtain because submucosal invasion is common. Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) is a technique in which the bowel lumen is filled with water rather than air, precluding the need for submucosal lifting. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of UEMR for removing small rectal neuroendocrine tumors (rNETs). METHODS: Retrospective study with patients who underwent UEMR in two centers. UEMR was performed using a standard colonoscope. No submucosal injection was performed. Board-certified pathologists conducted histopathologic assessment. RESULTS: UEMR for small rNET was performed on 11 patients (nine female) with a mean age of 55.8 years and 11 lesions (mean size 7 mm, range 3-12 mm). There were 9 (81%) patients with G1 rNET and two patients with G2, and all tumors invaded the submucosa with only one restricted to the mucosa. None case showed vascular or perineural invasion. All lesions were removed en bloc. Nine (81%) resections had free margins. Two patients had deep margin involvement; one had negative biopsies via endoscopic surveillance, and the other was lost to follow-up. No perforations or delayed bleeding occurred. CONCLUSION: UEMR appeared to be an effective and safe alternative for treatment of small rNETs without adverse events and with high en bloc and R0 resection rates. Further prospective studies are needed to compare available endoscopic interventions and to elucidate the most appropriate endoscopic technique for resection of rNETs.

Ressecção endoscópica sob imersão d'água de pequenos tumores neuroendócrinos retais / Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection for small rectal neuroendocrine tumors

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: A common site of neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) is the rectum. The technique most often used is endoscopic mucosal resection with saline injection. However, deep margins are often difficult to obtain because submucosal invasion is common. Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) is a technique in which the bowel lumen is filled with water rather than air, precluding the need for submucosal lifting. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of UEMR for removing small rectal neuroendocrine tumors (rNETs). METHODS: Retrospective study with patients who underwent UEMR in two centers. UEMR was performed using a standard colonoscope. No submucosal injection was performed. Board-certified pathologists conducted histopathologic assessment. RESULTS: UEMR for small rNET was performed on 11 patients (nine female) with a mean age of 55.8 years and 11 lesions (mean size 7 mm, range 3-12 mm). There were 9 (81%) patients with G1 rNET and two patients with G2, and all tumors invaded the submucosa with only one restricted to the mucosa. None case showed vascular or perineural invasion. All lesions were removed en bloc. Nine (81%) resections had free margins. Two patients had deep margin involvement; one had negative biopsies via endoscopic surveillance, and the other was lost to follow-up. No perforations or delayed bleeding occurred. CONCLUSION: UEMR appeared to be an effective and safe alternative for treatment of small rNETs without adverse events and with high en bloc and R0 resection rates. Further prospective studies are needed to compare available endoscopic interventions and to elucidate the most appropriate endoscopic technique for resection of rNETs.

RESUMO CONTEXTO: Um local comum de tumores neuroendócrinos (TNEs) é o reto. A técnica mais utilizada é a ressecção endoscópica da mucosa com injeção de solução salina. No entanto, as margens profundas costumam ser difíceis de ressecar porque a invasão da submucosa é comum. A ressecção endoscópica sob imersão d'água (RESI) é uma técnica em que o lúmen intestinal é preenchido com água em vez de ar, evitando a necessidade de elevação submucosa. OBJETIVO: Este estudo teve como objetivo avaliar a eficácia e segurança da RESI para a remoção de pequenos TNEs retais (rTNEs). MÉTODOS: Estudo retrospectivo com pacientes que realizaram RESI em dois centros. RESI foi realizada usando um colonoscópio padrão. Nenhuma injeção submucosa foi realizada. Patologistas certificados conduziram avaliação histopatológica. RESULTADOS: RESI foi realizada para pequenos rTNEs em 11 pacientes (nove mulheres) com média de idade de 55,8 anos e 11 lesões (tamanho médio de 7 mm, variando de 3-12 mm). Havia 9 (81%) pacientes com G1 rTNEs e dois pacientes com G2, sendo que todos os tumores invadiam a submucosa sendo apenas um restrito a mucosa. Nenhum caso mostrou invasão vascular ou perineural. Todas as lesões foram removidas em bloco. Nove (81%) ressecções tiveram margens livres. Dois pacientes tiveram envolvimento de margens profundas; um teve biópsias negativas por meio de vigilância endoscópica e o outro perdeu o acompanhamento. Não ocorreram perfurações ou sangramento tardios. CONCLUSÃO: A RESI parece ser uma alternativa eficaz e segura para o tratamento de pequenos rTNEs sem eventos adversos e com altas taxas de ressecção em bloco e R0. Mais estudos prospectivos são necessários para comparar as intervenções endoscópicas disponíveis e para elucidar a técnica endoscópica mais adequada para ressecção de rTNEs.