Endoscopic submucosal dissection with adaptive traction strategy: first prospective multicenter study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Traction has become the reference strategy for colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). One of its major limitations is that the force of traction decreases as dissection progresses. The ATRACT traction device uses a pulley system to increase traction during the procedure, making it easier and faster. A retrospective study of 54 cases showed interesting results in terms of efficacy and safety throughout the digestive tract. We sought to confirm these initial results with a prospective study of resections of colorectal lesions. METHODS: In this prospective multicenter study, 5 experienced operators from 3 different centers each performed 10 procedures using the ATRACT device consecutively for all conventional colorectal ESDs measuring between 4 and 10 cm in conventional locations (no recurrent lesions, appendicular, of the ileo-cecal valve, in contact with the pectinate line or measuring more than 2/3 of the circumference). RESULTS: Between November 2022 and April 2023, 50 ESDs were performed in 49 patients. On average, the main diameter of the lesions was 66.6 mm, with a surface area of 3066 mm2. The mean operating time was 55.2 minutes, resulting in a mean resection speed of 61.4 mm2/min. En Bloc and R0 resection rates were 100% and 98% respectively. Resections were curative in 94% of cases. 4 perforations (8%) occurred, all of which were closed endoscopically without the need for surgery. 1 case of delayed hemorrhage (2%) was noted. To date, this is the series with the highest resection speeds in the literature for colorectal ESD. For comparison, Yamamoto et al. reported a speed of 23.5 mm2/min using the "pocket" strategy and Bordillon et al. reported a speed of 39.1 mm2/min using the double-clip traction technique. These results need to be confirmed in larger studies, and in non-expert centers. CONCLUSIONS: This prospective evaluation confirms the efficacy and safety of the adaptive traction strategy with the ATRACT device for colorectal ESD with high resection speed.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection or piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection for large superficial colorectal lesions: A cost effectiveness study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic management is preferred to surgical management for large superficial colorectal lesions. However, the optimal endoscopic resection strategy (piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection [pEMR] or endoscopic submucosal dissection [ESD]) is still debated from an economical point of view. To date, in France, there is no Health Insurance reimbursement rate for the hospital stays related to ESD. We searched to estimate the global cost of colorectal ESD and to define the most cost-effectiveness endoscopic strategy. METHODS: A model was created to compare the cost-effectiveness of ESD and pEMR according to optical diagnosis (Japan NBI Expert Team [JNET], laterally spreading tumour [LST], CONECCT). We distinguished three groups from the same multicentre ESD cohort and compared the medical and economic outcomes: real-life ESD data (Universal-ESD or U-ESD) compared to modelled selective ESD (S-ESD JNET; S-ESD LST; S-ESD CONECCT) and exclusive pEMR strategies (Universal-EMR or U-EMR). RESULTS: The en-bloc, R0, and curative resection rates were 97.5%, 86.5%, and 82.6%, respectively in the real life French ESD cohort of 833 colorectal lesions. U-ESD was the least-expensive strategy, with a global cost of 2,858,048.17 €, i.e. 3,431.03 €/patient and was also the most effective strategy because it avoided 774 surgeries, which was more than any other strategy. It outperformed S-ESD CONNECT (global cost = 2,951,411.44 €, and 3,543.11 €/patient, 765 surgeries avoided, S-ESD LST (global cost = 3,055,951.53 €, and 3,668.61 €/patient, 749 surgeries avoided), and S-ESD JNET (global cost = 3,547,426.97 € and 4,258.62 €/patient, 704 surgeries avoided) and U-EMR (global cost = 4,060,547.62 € and 4,874.61 €/patient, 620 surgeries avoided). Even though a model which optimized pEMR results (0% technical failure, 0% primary surgery), U-EMR strategy remained the most expansive strategy and the one that avoided the least surgeries. CONCLUSION: ESD for all LSTs upper than 20 mm is more cost-effective than pEMR, and S-ESD.

Role of Rapid Drink Challenge During Esophageal High-resolution Manometry in Predicting Outcome of Peroral Endoscopic Myotomy in Patients With Achalasia

Background/Aims@#Peroral endoscopy myotomy (POEM) is effective to treat achalasia. We aim to determine POEM effect on esophageal function and search for predictive factors of response to POEM and co-occurrence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). @*Methods@#A total of 64 untreated achalasia patients who underwent high-resolution manometry (HRM) before and 3 months after POEM were retrospectively included. Response to treatment was defined as an Eckardt score < 3. Reflux symptoms and patient’s satisfaction were evaluated. Data were compared using paired t test, Chi-square test or log rank test. @*Results@#The 2-year success rate in response to POEM was 90%. All responders reported being satisfied while only 33% of non-responders did (P < 0.001) and 64% of patients with reflux symptoms were satisfied versus 96% of those without (P = 0.009). On HRM, the integrated relaxation pressure and the contractile pattern changed significantly after POEM but were not predictive of response. Between pre and post POEM HRM, a decrease in maximal esophageal pressurization during rapid drink challenge (RDC) was associated with a better response rate than an increase of pressurization (91% vs 50%, P = 0.004). As evidenced by pH monitoring performed after POEM, GERD was pathological or borderline in 50% of patients (18/36) while only 19% (11/59) reported clinically significant reflux symptoms. On post POEM HRM, maximal esophageal pressurization during RDC was lower in patients with pathological or borderline GERD compared to those without (P = 0.054). @*Conclusions@#Esophageal HRM parameters changed significantly after POEM. Maximal esophageal pressurization during RDC may be useful to predict outcome.

Challenges and Future of Wireless Capsule Endoscopy

In 2015, capsule endoscopy was introduced as the main investigation method for small bowel mucosal diseases, and its role in colonic diseases has been gradually revealed. Future challenges for capsule endoscopy, besides improvements of image quality and visualization of each part of the small bowel and colonic mucosa, include the development of gastric capsules, the capacity to perform histological examination of the mucosa, and maybe in the future, some capsule endoscopy-driven therapeutics. The aim of this review was to evaluate the clinical demands and feasibility of achieving the aforementioned objectives.