Submucosal injection with waterjet improves endoscopic mucosal resection of colorectal adenoma – a randomised controlled clinical trial

Purpose: Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of colorectal adenomas leads to a reduced incidence of, and mortality from, colorectal carcinoma. Large adenomas are especially difficult to resect. Submucosal injection is a key part of EMR, as it allows for complete resection and decreased complications. We previously demonstrated in both animal models and a clinical trial that a focussed fluid beam applied to the mucosa creates selective fluid cushions in the submucosa selective tissue elevation by pressure (STEP). In this study, we examined the potential of this new technique compared to the standard inject and cut technique.

Methods: This was a monocentric prospective two armed randomised controlled clinical trial comparing the STEP technique to the standard needle injection. We included patients with Yamada I and II adenomas ≥12?mm.

Results: One hundred fifty-five patients were treated in the trial. With the STEP technique there was a significantly higher rate of en-bloc resection, whereas piecemeal resection was more common in the standard arm. The odds ratio of piecemeal resection was 2.422 with a 95% confidence interval of 1.163–5.045 (p value .0195). There was no significant difference in resection time between the two techniques, while there was a significant difference in resections speed for the STEP technique. There was also no difference in complication rates.

Conclusions: This study demonstrated that the new STEP technique leads to a higher rate of en-bloc resections than the standard injection technique in endoscopic mucosa resection of colorectal adenomas. The STEP technique can play an important role in the future of EMR.     

Efficacy and safety of three different endoscopic methods in treatment of 6–20 mm colorectal polyps

Abstract

Objective: Endoscopic resection of colorectal polyps is widely established as the optimal method to manage precancerous lesions. But the optimal technique for removal of the polyps is uncertain. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of three methods for the management of 6–20mm colorectal polyps.

Methods: A prospective, randomised controlled trial was conducted at the 900TH Hospital of Joint Logistics Support Force in Fujian, China. Endoscopically diagnosed colorectal polyps, 6–20 mm in size, were randomly assigned to the cold snare polypectomy (CSP), cold snare endoscopic mucosal resection (CS-EMR) or endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) group. After polypectomy, additional 3–5 forceps biopsies by leading narrow-band imaging (NBI) were performed at the base and margins of polypectomy sites to assess the presence of residual polyp tissue and all samples were sent for histopathological analysis to assess completeness of resection. Polypectomy timing, tissue retrieval and complications were recorded at the time of the procedure.

Results: A total of 781 polyps in 404 patients were assessed and randomly assigned to each group. Of these, 763 polyps were finally analyzed based on the pathology results. The complete resection rates with CSP, CS-EMR and EMR were 81.6%, 94.1% and 95.5%, respectively (p?<?.001). The intraprocedural bleeding rate, immediately after polypectomy, was significantly higher in the CSP group than in the CS-EMR and EMR group (9.4% vs. 4.4% vs. 1.9%; p?<?.001). However,delayed bleeding was higher in the EMR group than in the CSP and CS-EMR group (2.6% vs. 1.2% vs. 0.8%, respectively; p?=?.215). In the multivariate analysis showed that the operation method, lesion size, morphology and the number of resection were independent risk factors for complete resection rate (CRR) (p < .05), but the location and pathological classification of polyps had no significant influence on CRR.

Conclusions: CS-EMR is safe and effective in the treatment of 6–20?mm colorectal polyps. Especially for 6–15?mm non-pedunculated polyps, CS-EMR has a high histological complete resection rate comparable to EMR, and retains the low risk of delayed complications after polypectomy with cold snare. CS-EMR is expected to become a more valuable new cold-cutting technique after cold snare polypectomy.     

Comparative efficacy and safety of resection techniques for treating 6 to 20mm,nonpedunculated colorectal polyps: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

IntroductionVarious endoscopic resection techniques have been proposed for the treatment of nonpedunculated colorectal polyps sized 6–20 mm, however the optimal technique still remains unclear.MethodsA comprehensive literature review was conducted for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), investigating the efficacy of endoscopic treatments for the management of 6–20 mm nonpedunculated colorectal polyps. Primary outcomes were complete and en bloc resection rates and adverse event rate was the secondary. Effect size on outcomes is presented as risk ratio (RR; 95% confidence interval [CI]).ResultsFourteen RCTs (5219 polypectomies) were included. Endoscopic mucosal resection(EMR) significantly outperformed cold snare polypectomy(CSP) in terms of complete [(RR 95%CI): 1.04(1.00–1.07)] and en bloc resection rate [RR:1.12(1.04–1.21)]. EMR was superior to hot snare polypectomy (HSP) [RR:1.04(1.00–1.08)] regarding complete resection, while underwater EMR (U-EMR) achieved significantly higher rate of en bloc resection compared to CSP [RR:1.15(1.01–1.30)]. EMR yielded the highest ranking for complete resection(SUCRA-score 0.81), followed by cold-snare EMR(CS-EMR,SUCRA-score 0.76). None of the modalities was different regarding adverse event rate compared to CSP, however EMR and CS-EMR resulted in fewer adverse events compared to HSP [RR:0.44(0.26–0.77) and 0.43(0.21–0.87),respectively].ConclusionEMR achieved the highest performance in resecting 6–20 mm nonpedunculated colorectal polyps, with this effect being consistent for polyps 6–9 and ≥10 mm; findings supported by very low quality of evidence.     

内镜下黏膜切除术治疗老年及老年前期胃肠道息肉的临床研究

目的探讨内镜下黏膜切除术（endoscopic mucosal resection,EMR）对老年及老年前期胃及大肠息肉的治疗效果,并对其临床病理特征、适应证、并发症等进行讨论。方法 2003年10月至2009年10月共完成老年及非老年胃息肉及大肠息肉EMR手术1076例;对切除标本进行病理检查,记录术中及术后发生的并发症及处理情况,术后定期内镜随访1-60月。结果 348处胃息肉经首次或再次EMR治疗病变均完整清除,病理示炎性息肉、增生性息肉、腺瘤性息肉分别占62.6%（218/348）,27.9%（97/348）,9.5%（33/348）。935处大肠息肉中892处病变经首次或再次EMR治疗病变完整清除,治愈率为95.4%;23处病变（2.5%）术后病理示浸润癌再追加外科开腹手术。病理示炎性息肉、增生性息肉、腺瘤性息肉、腺瘤癌变分别占29.1%（272/935）,20.9%（195/935）,46.2%（432/935）,3.9%（36/935）,随年龄的增加,腺瘤性息肉的比例逐渐升高（P〈0.01）。术中出血52例（4.8%）,均内镜下止血;术后迟发出血（〉24 h）21例（2.0%）,其中15例经内镜下止血,6例经输血及内科保守治疗后止血。无穿孔、感染等并发症发生。随访期间所有病例均无复发。结论 EMR是一种安全和微创的内镜治疗手段,对老年及老年前期胃及大肠息肉治疗的疗效优于传统的内镜下治疗方法。     

Endoscopic full-thickness resection of superficial colorectal neoplasms using a new over-the-scope clip system: A single-centre study

Background and aimEndoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) provides complete en-bloc resection with a histopathological evaluation of submucosal, muscular, and serosal layers. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of a novel over-the-scope device for colorectal EFTR.Material and methodsIn this retrospective, observational, open-label case study, a total of 20 patients with superficial colorectal neoplasms, underwent EFTR using a new endoscopic full-thickness resection device (FTRD; Ovesco Endoscopy, Tübingen, Germany). Endoscopic treatment outcomes (technical success, rate of EFTR, adverse events) and early follow-up at three months, were analyzed.ResultsWe reported a 100% of technical success, defined as full-thickness resection. Among the R1 resections, histology was negative for neoplasm. Non-lifting adenomas had histology positive for adenocarcinoma: seven T1/G1/sm1; one T1/G1/sm2; one, who underwent a surgical resection, T1/G1/sm3. Mean size of the resected lesions was 26 mm, ranging from 10 to 42 mm. One (5%) patient developed abdominal pain, fever and leukocytosis and was treated conservatively with medical therapy. In all specimens, histological complete resection was confirmed.ConclusionsEFTR is a feasible and effective technique that could become a valid alternative to EMR and ESD in the management of recurrent adenomas, no-lifting lesions and scars of R1 resections. However, prospective studies are needed to further evaluate the device and technique.     

Endoscopic mucosal resection with 0.13% hyaluronic acid solution for colorectal polyps less than 20 mm: a randomized controlled trial

Background and Aim: Adequate mucosal elevation by submucosal injection is important for definitive en bloc resection and prevention of perforation during endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). The objective of this study is to determine the efficacy of 0.13% hyaluronic acid (HA) solution for high and sustained mucosal elevation during colorectal EMR. Methods: The study was a prospective randomized controlled trial; a total of 196 patients with colon polyps of < 20 mm diameter were enrolled and randomized in a 1:1 ratio to undergo EMR using either 0.13% HA or normal saline (NS). The primary outcome of the study was histopathologically confirmed complete resection. The secondary outcomes such as maintenance of high mucosal elevation and development of complications were also evaluated. Moreover, the relationship between complete resection and the experience of the endoscopist (veteran vs less experienced) was analyzed. Results: Compete resection was achieved in 74 of 93 polyps (79.5%) in the 0.13% HA group and 63 of 96 polyps (65.6%) in the NS group (P < 0.05). High mucosal elevation was maintained in 83.9% of procedures in the 0.13% HA group and 54.1% in the NS group (P < 0.01). The frequency of complete resection achieved by less‐experienced endoscopists was higher in the 0.13% HA group (79.3%) than in the NS group (62.1%; P < 0.05). Conclusions: Endoscopic mucosal resection using 0.13% HA to colon polyps of less than 20 mm diameter is more effective than NS for complete resection and maintenance of mucosal elevation.     

Endoscopic submucosal dissection vs endoscopic mucosal resection for colorectal tumors: A meta-analysis

AIM: To compare the efficacy and safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for the treatment of colorectal tumors.METHODS: Databases, such as PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Science Citation Index updated to 2013 were searched to include eligible articles. In the meta-analysis, the main outcome measurements were the en bloc resection rate, the histological resection rate and the local recurrence rate. Meanwhile, we also compared the operation time and the incidence of procedure-related complications.RESULTS: Six trials were identified and a total of 1642 lesions were included. The en bloc resection rate was higher and the local recurrence rate was lower in the ESD group compared with the EMR group (OR = 7.94; 95%CI: 3.96-15.91; OR = 0.09; 95%CI: 0.04-0.19). There was no significant difference in histological resection rate(OR = 1.65; 95%CI: 0.29-9.30) and procedure-related complication rate between the two groups (OR = 1.59; 95%CI: 0.92-2.73). The meta-analysis also showed that ESD was more time consuming than EMR.CONCLUSION: Compared with EMR, ESD results in higher en bloc resection rate and lower local recurrence rate for the treatment of colorectal tumors, without increasing the procedure-related complications.     

内镜黏膜切除术治疗大肠广基大息肉

目的探讨内镜黏膜切除术(EMR)对肠道广基大息肉样病变的治疗价值。方法采用结肠镜下大肠黏膜切除术治疗135例共157个结直肠广基大息肉。病灶黏膜下注射肾上腺素生理盐水后,一次圈套整块切除或分次圈套切除病变,回收全部标本送病理检查,术后结肠镜随访。结果全部息肉EMR一次切除,除3个位于直肠黏膜下的病灶小于1 cm外,其余均大于1.5 cm,最大的13 cm×12 cm,无手术并发症。术后病理:腺瘤123个,其中有异型增生80个;黏膜内癌11个;增生性息肉20个;直肠类癌3个。随访中,有2例大于7 cm的直肠腺瘤分别于术后1个月及3个月复查时复发,均给予热活检钳完整钳除,病理分别为增生性息肉和绒毛状腺瘤,再复查6-12个月无复发。结论EMR是治疗大肠癌前病变及黏膜内癌安全、有效的方法。     

内镜下黏膜切除术治疗Peutz-Jeghers巨大十二指肠息肉71例临床研究北大核心CSCD

目的评估内镜下黏膜切除术(EMR)治疗Peutz-Jeghers综合征(PJS)巨大十二指肠息肉的安全性及有效性。方法收集2013年2月至2020年8月在空军特色医学中心确诊为PJS十二指肠息肉并经EMR治疗的病例资料,统计EMR治疗PJS十二指肠巨大息肉的完整切除率、并发症发生率。比较巨大息肉组(直径≥3 cm)与普通息肉组(直径<3 cm)患者EMR手术完整切除率和并发症发生情况,并分析EMR治疗PJS十二指肠息肉手术并发症发生的影响因素。结果共71例患者纳入研究,男44例,女27例,中位年龄为26岁(5~58岁)。内镜下切除息肉最大中位直径为2.0 cm(0.6~13.0 cm),所有患者均成功实施EMR手术,63例患者EMR治疗PJS十二指肠息肉实现完整切除(63/71,88.7%),巨大息肉组EMR手术完整切除率低于普通息肉组(77.4%比97.5%),差异有统计学意义(P=0.023)。EMR手术相关并发症总发生率5.6%(4/71),1例患者同时存在术中创面渗血和术后胰腺炎。巨大息肉组与普通息肉组间并发症发生率(9.7%比2.5%)差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。内镜下EMR切除十二指肠息肉有无并发症发生在患者性别、年龄、有无PJS家族史、手术史、息肉数量、切除方式上的差异均无统计学意义(P值均>0.05),而息肉位于乳头部位者并发症发生率(50%,3/6)显著高于非乳头部位者(1.5%,1/65),差异有统计学意义(P=0.001)。结论EMR治疗PJS巨大十二指肠息肉总体安全有效的,可作为PJS十二指肠息肉的首选治疗方案。息肉部位是EMR手术相关并发症发生的重要影响因素。     

Endoscopic mucosal resection of 161 cases of large sessile or flat colorectal polyps

Objective. Large sessile or flat colorectal polyps, which are traditionally treated surgically, may be amenable to endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), often using a piecemeal method. Appropriate selection of lesions and a careful technique may enhance the efficacy of EMR for polyps ≥20 mm in diameter without compromising safety. The aim of this study was to identify the factors that may be predictive of the risk of polyp recurrence. Material and methods. A retrospective analysis was conducted on the outcome of 161 polyps ≥20 mm in diameter, treated by piecemeal EMR at a single centre using the “lift and cut” technique. All records were reviewed for polyp size, site, morphology and histology. Polypectomy technique, patient follow-up, polyp recurrence and surgical interventions were also recorded. Results. Over an 8-year period, 161 colonic polyps measuring ≥20 mm were removed by EMR. Follow-up data were available for 149 cases (93%) with a mean polyp diameter of 32.5 mm; the total success rate of endoscopic polyp removal was 95.4%. The number of cases requiring 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 attempts at EMR was 89 (60%), 36 (24%), 14 (9%), 2 (1.3%) and 1 (0.7%), respectively. Recurrence was significantly related to polyp size (p<0.001). There was no statistically significant relationship between site and recurrence. Seven patients (4.6%) underwent surgical intervention after EMR because of failed clearance. There were no post-EMR perforations and significant bleeding was reported in only two patients (1.7%). Conclusions. With careful attention to technique, piecemeal EMR is a safe option for the resection of most sessile and flat colorectal polyps ≥20 mm in size. A stricter follow-up may be required for larger lesions because of a higher risk of recurrence.     

Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: Systematic review of mid‐term clinical outcomes

With a drive towards minimally invasive surgery, endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is now gaining popularity. In a number of East Asian countries, ESD is now the treatment of choice for early non‐metastatic gastric cancer, but the outcomes of ESD for colorectal lesions are unclear. The present review summarizes the mid‐term outcomes of colorectal ESD including complication and recurrence rates. A systematic literature search was done in May 2014, identifying 20 publications reporting the outcomes of colorectal ESD which were included in this review. En‐bloc resection rates, complete (R0) resection rates, endoscopic clearance rates, complication and recurrences rates were analyzed. Statistical pooling was done to calculate weighted means using random effects modeling. Twenty studies reporting the outcomes of 3060 colorectal ESD procedures were reported. Overall weighted en‐bloc resection rate was 89% (95% CI: 83–94%), R0 resection rate 76% (95% CI: 69–83%), endoscopic clearance rate 94% (95% CI: 90–97%) and recurrence rate 1% (95% CI: 0.5–2%). Studies that followed up patients for over 1 year were found to have an en‐bloc resection rate of 91% (95% CI: 86–96%), R0 resection rate of 81% (95% CI: 75–88%), endoscopic clearance rate 93% (95% CI: 90–97%) and recurrence rate of 0.8% (95% CI: 0.4–1%). Colorectal ESD can be carried out effectively and safely with a 1% recurrence rate. Further studies with longer follow‐up periods are required to determine whether colorectal ESD is a viable alternative to conventional surgical therapy.     

Endoscopic mucosal resection in the upper gastrointestinal tract

Endoscopic mucosal resection （EMR） is a technique used to locally excise lesions confined to the mucosa. Its main role is the treatment of advanced dysplasia and early gastrointestinal cancers. EMR was originally described as a therapy for early gastric cancer. Recently its use has expanded as a therapeutic option for ampullary masses, colorectal cancer, and large colorectal polyps. In the Western world, the predominant indication for EMR in the upper gastrointestinal tract is the staging and treatment of advance dysplasia and early neoplasia in Barrett＇s esophagus. This review will describe the basis, indications, techniques, and complications of EMR, and its role in the management of Barrett＇s esophagus.     

Endoscopic mucosal resection of colorectal adenomas>20mm:Risk factors for recurrence

AIM: To evaluate risk factors for local recurrence after endoscopic mucosal resection of colorectal adenomas 20 mm.METHODS: Retrospective data analysis of 216 endoscopic mucosal resections for colorectal adenomas 20 mm in 179 patients(40.3% female; median age 68 years; range 35-91 years). All patients had at least 1 follow-up endoscopy with a minimum control interval of 2 mo(mean follow-up 6 mo/2.0-43.4 mo). Possible factors associated with local recurrence were analyzed by univariate and multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Median size of the lesions was 30 mm(20-70 mm),69.0% were localized in the right-sided(cecum,ascending and transverse) colon. Most of the lesions(85.6%) showed a non-pedunculated morphology and the majority of resections was in piecemeal technique(78.7%). Histology showed carcinoma or high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia in 51/216(23.6%) lesions including 4 low risk carcinomas(pT1 a,L0,V0,R0- G1/G2). Histologically proven recurrence was observed in 33/216 patients(15.3%). Patient age65 years,polyp size30 mm,non-pedunculated morphology,localization in the right-sided colon,piecemeal resection and tubular-villous histology were found as associated factors in univariate analysis. On multivariate analysis,only localization in the rightsided colon(HR = 6.842/95%CI:1.540-30.394; P=0.011),tubular-villous histology(HR = 3.713/95%CI: 1.617-8.528;P=0.002) and polyp size30 mm(HR=2.563/95%CI:1.179-5.570; P=0.017) were significantly associated risk factors for adenoma recurrence. CONCLUSION: Meticulous endoscopic follow-up is warranted after endoscopic mucosal resection of adenomas localized in the right-sided colon larger than 30 mm,with tubular-villous histology.     

Risk factors for incomplete resection and complications in endoscopic mucosal resection for lateral spreading tumors

Aim: Lateral spreading tumors (LST) are relatively large flat lesions with diameters exceeding 10 mm in length. Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is a commonly used technique for removing LST. We aimed to evaluate the risk factors for incomplete resection and complications of EMR for LST. Method: Between January 2004 and December 2010, 497 patients who underwent EMR for LST were retrospectively reviewed. Risk factors for endoscopic and histopathological complete resection, complications, and clinical outcomes were investigated. Results: Risks for incomplete resection by piecemeal resection and en bloc resection of a lesion ≥30 mm were higher than for en bloc resection of a lesion <30 mm (OR = 2.688, CI 1.036–6.993; OR = 4.982, CI 1.894–13.101). Risks of post‐EMR bleeding for piecemeal resection and en bloc resection for a lesion ≥40 mm were higher than for en bloc resection of a lesion < 40 mm (OR = 15.231, CI 1.816–127.744; OR = 43.043, CI 4.306–430.314). Conclusion: We found risk factors of EMR for LST and tentatively suggest a protocol for EMR adapted to the size of LST and resection methods. (i) Following piecemeal resection and en bloc resection for LST ≥ 40 mm, hospitalize patients for 36 h and note risk for incomplete resection and delayed bleeding. (ii) After en bloc resection for 40 mm > LST ≥ 30 mm, hospitalize patients for 12 h and note risk for incomplete resection. (iii) Following en bloc resection for LST < 30 mm, hospitalize the patient for 12 h and expect complete resection.     

内镜下黏膜切除术治疗大肠平坦型病变30例

目的：探讨内镜下黏膜切除术（EMR）在大肠平坦型病变中的治疗价值。方法：对30例有大肠平坦型病变患者共36处病灶进行染色放大后行EMR治疗,评价其治疗效果和并发症。结果：36处病灶最大直径0．8～2．5cm（平均1．4±0．5cm）,32处一次性完整切除,4处分块切除;3例出现术中出血,经氩气凝固术（APC）及电凝治疗后止血,1例出现术后迟发性出血,经金属夹治疗后止血。30例患者术后1月复查肠镜,创面愈合,术后随访6～12月（平均9．3月）,未见病变复发及残留。结论：EMR能有效治疗大肠平坦型病变,方法简便易行,创伤小,安全有效,值得临床推广。

Abstract：

Objective： To study the value of endoscopic mucosal resection （EMR） for flat-type colorectal polyps. Methods： Thirty-six lesions in 30 patients with flat-type colorectal polyps were resected by EMR after magnifying endoscope and mucosa staining, and the therapeutic effects and adverse reactions were evaluated. Results： The maximum diameter of 36 lesions was 0. 8-2. 5 cm （mean 1.4 ± 0. 5 cm） ,32 lesions of which were onetime complete resection and four lesions were piece EMR. Bleeding occurred in 3 cases, and the Argon Plasma Coagulation （APC） and electrocoagulation were taken to stop bleeding, 1 case of delayed postoperative bleeding,metal clips was used to stop bleeding after treatment. The colonoscopy after a month in 30 patients showed wound healing, no recurrence and residual lesions were found in these patients followed up for 6- 12 months （average 9. 3 months）. Conclusions： Colorectal flat-type polyps can be effectively treated by EMR, and the method is simple, less traumatic, but safe and worthy to be popularized.     

Higher rate of en bloc resection with underwater than conventional endoscopic mucosal resection: A meta-analysis

ObjectivesPrevious meta-analysis including nonrandomized studies showed marginal benefit of underwater endoscopic mucosal resection(U-EMR) compared to conventional EMR(C-EMR) in terms of polypectomy outcomes. We evaluated U-EMR compared to C-EMR in the treatment of colorectal polyps with respect to effectiveness and safety by analyzing only randomized controlled trials(RCTs).Material and MethodsPubMed and Cochrane Library databases were searched for RCTs published until 11/2020, evaluating U-EMR vs. C-EMR regarding en bloc resection, post-endoscopic resection adenoma recurrence, complete resection, adverse events rates and difference in resection time. Abstracts from Digestive Disease Week, United European Gastroenterology Week and ESGE Days meetings were also searched. Effect size on outcomes is presented as risk ratio(RR; 95% confidence interval[CI]) or mean difference(MD; 95%CI). The I² test was used for quantifying heterogeneity, while Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation(GRADE) was used to assess strength of evidence.ResultsSix RCTs analyzing outcomes from 1157 colorectal polypectomies(U-EMR589;C-EMR,568) were included. U-EMR associated with significant higher rate of en bloc resection compared to C-EMR [RR(95%CI):1.26(1.01–1.58); Chi² for heterogeneity=30.43, P<0.0001; I²=84%, GRADE: Very low]. This effect was more prominent regarding resection of polyps sized ≥20 mm compared to polyps <20 mm [RR(95%CI):1.64(1.22–2.20) vs. 1.10(0.98–1.23)]. Post-resection recurrence [RR(95%CI):0.52(0.28–0.94);GRADE:Low] was lower significantly in U-EMR group. In contrast, no significant difference was detected between U-EMR and C-EMR regarding complete resection [RR(95%CI): 1.06(0.91–1.24) GRADE:Very low] and adverse events occurrence[RR(95%CI):1.00 (0.72–1.39); GRADE:Low].ConclusionMeta-analysis of RCTs supports that U-EMR resection achieves higher rate of en bloc resection compared to conventional EMR. This effect is driven when resecting large(≥20 mm) polyps.     

Endoscopic mucosal resection: not only therapeutic, but a diagnostic procedure for sessile gastric polyps

Background and Aims: Histological examination of specimens obtained by forceps biopsy sampling of gastric lesions is of limited accuracy, and their management on this basis is therefore controversial. Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) was initially developed in Japan for the resection of early gastric cancer (EGC). The potential use of EMR as a diagnostic tool has been suggested. The aims of the present study were to assess the value of forceps biopsy sampling in establishing the correct diagnosis revealed by EMR and to evaluate the efficacy of EMR. Methods: Fifty‐six subjects with sessile gastric polyps of epithelial origin, at least 0.5 cm in diameter, and not associated with polyposis syndromes, were included. Following forceps biopsy sampling, EMR was performed with an inject‐and‐cut technique or with cap‐fitted methods. The histological results on the forceps biopsy and the resected specimens were analyzed. Results: Histology on the resected specimens revealed neoplastic lesions in 34 cases, including seven EGC, and there were hyperplastic‐inflammatory lesions in 21 cases. Complete agreement between the previous histological results of the forceps biopsy samples and the resected specimens was seen in only 76.7% of the lesions. Altogether, the sensitivity and specificity of the forceps biopsy procedure for diagnosing neoplastic lesions were 87.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 76.0–98.9%) and 65.2% (95% CI = 45.7–84.7), respectively. A clinically relevant discrimination between neoplastic and non‐neoplastic lesions was not achieved in seven cases. No complications, such as perforation or massive bleeding necessitating surgical treatment, were encountered. EMR was considered complete in five patients. None of the EGC recurred during the mean 38‐month (6–72) follow up. Conclusions: Forceps biopsy is not fully representative of the entire lesion, and a simple biopsy may therefore lead to a faulty differentiation between neoplastic and non‐neoplastic lesions. EMR proposes diagnostic and staging advantage in assessing patients with EGC as compared to forceps biopsy, because it provides more intact mucosa and submucosa for histological analysis. Sessile gastric polyps should be fully resected by EMR for a final diagnosis and (depending on the lesion size and type) possibly definitive treatment.     

Multicenter study of endoscopic mucosal resection using 0.13 % hyaluronic acid solution of colorectal polyps less than 20 mm in size

Purpose

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of colorectal polyps should be curative and safe. This study aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of colorectal EMR using 0.13 % hyaluronic acid (HA) solution.

Methods

This was a single-armed multicenter prospective open trial conducted at 11 Japanese institutions. Lesion characteristics and various measures of clinical outcome, including en bloc resection, histopathologically complete resection, and postoperative bleeding were analyzed for 624 consecutive patients who underwent EMR of colorectal polyps at ≤20 mm in size from August 2010 to September 2011.

Results

En bloc and complete resection were achieved in 93.3 and 78.3 % of 624 lesions. The median EMR procedure time was 2.1?±?1.5 min. The rates of postoperative bleeding and perforation were 1.1 and 0 %. The rate of en bloc resection was higher for polyps at 5–10 mm than for polyps at 11–20 mm (95.1 vs. 85.1 %; P?<?0.001) and was higher for protruding polyps than for superficial polyps (94.5 vs. 87.1 %; P?<?0.05). The rate of en bloc resection was also higher for polyps in the left-side colon than for those in the right-side colon or rectum (96.7 vs. 91.6 vs. 90.8 %; P?<?0.05). Multivariate analysis showed that polyp at 11–20 mm in size and location not on the left-side colon was significantly independent risk factors for failure of en bloc resection.

Conclusion

EMR using 0.13 % HA of colorectal polyps less than 20 mm in size had high rates of en bloc and complete resection and few complications.     

Endoscopic resection techniques for colorectal neoplasia:Current developments

Endoscopic polypectomy and endoscopic mucosal resection(EMR) are the established treatment standards for colorectal polyps. Current research aims at the reduction of both complication and recurrence rates as well as on shortening procedure times. Cold snare resection is the emerging standard for the treatment of smaller(< 5 mm) polyps and is possibly also suitable for the removal of noncancerous polyps up to 9 mm. The method avoids thermal damage, has reduced procedure times and probably also a lower risk for delayed bleeding. On the other end of the treatment spectrum, endoscopic submucosal dissection(ESD)offers en bloc resection of larger flat or sessile lesions. The technique has obvious advantages in the treatment of high-grade dysplasia and early cancer. Due to its minimal recurrence rate, it may also be an alternative to fractionated EMR of larger flat or sessile lesions. However, ESD is technically demanding and burdened by longer procedure times and higher costs. It should therefore be restricted to lesions suspicious for high-grade dysplasia or early invasive cancer.The latest addition to endoscopic resection techniques is endoscopic fullthickness resection with specifically developed devices for flexible endoscopy.This method is very useful for the treatment of smaller difficult-to-resect lesions,e.g., recurrence with scar formation after previous endoscopic resections.     

What can be the criteria of outpatient-based endoscopic resection for colon polyp?

AIM: To investigate whether out-patient based endo-scopic mucosal resection(EMR) for colon polyps ≤ 10 mm is safe.METHODS: Between January 2004 and December 2012, a total of 3015 EMR cases conducted in 1320 patients were retrospectively reviewed. The factors contributing delayed hemorrhage were analyzed. We calculated the probability of delayed bleeding after stratifying conditions of specific risk factors.RESULTS: The size of the polyp(95%CI: 1.096-1.164, P 0.001) and patients with chronic renal failure(95%CI: 1.856-45.106, P = 0.007) were identified as independent risk factors for delayed bleeding in multi-variate analysis. 95%CI for percent of delayed bleedingaccording to polyp size was determined for the fol-lowing conditions: size ≤ 10 mm, 0.05%-0.43%; 20 mm ≥ size 10 mm, 0.54%-2.08%; size 20 mm, 4.22%-11.41%. 95%CI was determined for the risk of serious immediate bleeding for a polyp ≤ 10 mm was 0.10%-0.56%. Finally, 95%CI for percent of incomplete resection was 0.07%-0.49% in polyps ≤ 10 mm. CONCLUSION: It seems acceptable to perform outpa-tient-based EMR for colon polyps ≤ 10 mm.