Beyond the snare: technically accessible large en bloc colonic resection in the West: an animal study

Background: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and circumferential submucosal incision endoscopic mucosal resection (CSI‐EMR) are techniques for en bloc excision of large sessile colonic lesions. Our aims were to compare the efficacy, safety and learning curve of colonic hybrid knife (HK) ESD versus CSI‐EMR for en bloc excision of 50 mm diameter hemi‐circumferential artificial lesions in a porcine model. Patients and Methods: Two separate 50 mm diameter areas of normal recto‐sigmoid mucosa were marked out in each of ten pigs. One was excised with HK‐ESD using succinylated gelatin (SG) submucosal injection. The other was isolated with CSI with the Insulated Tip Knife 2 followed by SG submucosal injection then EMR with a large snare. Euthanasia and colectomy was performed at 72 h followed by blinded histopathology assessment. Results: En bloc excision rates were: HK‐ESD 100% versus CSI‐EMR 20% (P = 0.008). The mean number of resections per lesion was HK‐ESD 1 versus CSI‐EMR 3 (P = 0.001). The mean dimensions of the largest specimen per technique were HK‐ESD 63 × 54 mm versus CSI‐EMR 49 × 41 mm (P = 0.005). Procedure duration mean was HK‐ESD 54 min versus CSI‐EMR 22 min (P < 0.001). When procedure duration was adjusted for the size of the resected en bloc specimen, a statistically significant and accelerated learning effect was noted for HK‐ESD (r = ?0.83, P = 0.003). There were no perforations and no significant bleeding. Conclusions: HK‐ESD with SG submucosal injection is superior to CSI‐EMR for en bloc excision of 50 mm diameter lesions in a porcine model. The technique is rapidly learnt. This novel approach may lower the barrier to colonic ESD for Western endoscopists.     

Advantage of endoscopic submucosal dissection compared with EMR for early gastric cancer

BACKGROUND: In EMR of early gastric cancer (EGC), en bloc resection reduces the risk of residual cancer. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) now allows en bloc resection of large EGCs. OBJECTIVE: To retrospectively determine whether ESD is more advantageous than EMR for EGCs. DESIGN: EMR (825 lesions, 711 patients) or ESD (195 lesions, 185 patients) was performed. The en bloc resection rate, histologically complete resection rate, operation time, complications, and local recurrence rate were studied in relation to ulceration. SETTING: Hiroshima University Hospital. PATIENTS: Subjects comprised 896 patients in whom 1020 EGCs were resected endoscopically from 1990 to 2004. RESULTS: In cases without ulceration, en bloc and histologically complete resection rates were significantly higher with ESD than with EMR, regardless of tumor size. The frequency of ulceration did not differ significantly between groups. Average operation time was significantly longer for ESD than for EMR, regardless of tumor size. Also, regardless of ulceration, the incidence of intraoperative bleeding was significantly higher with ESD (22.6%) than with EMR (7.6%). Delayed bleeding did not differ. In cases with ulceration, the incidence of perforation was significantly higher with ESD (53.8%) than with EMR (2.9%). Local recurrences were treated by incomplete EMR (en bloc, 2.9%; piecemeal, 4.4%). No patient experienced recurrence after ESD. CONCLUSIONS: ESD increased en bloc and histologically complete resection rates and may reduce the local recurrence rate. Increased operation time and complication risks with ESD in comparison with EMR remain problematic. Special measures are necessary for ESD of ulcerated lesions to reduce the rates of perforation and incomplete resection.     

Endoscopic resection for early gastric cancer: current status in Korea

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) was introduced in the 1990s, and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in 2003. Currently, ESD is becoming the main procedure for the resection of early gastric cancer (EGC), and provides safer and curative outcomes. Endoscopic resection (ER) showed excellent long-term survival in Korea. The number of ESD has doubled over 5 years. ESD might be better than EMR in terms of en bloc resection, complete resection and long-term outcome. Novel techniques including endoscopic full-thickness resection with lymph node dissection will be positioned for some EGC.     

ENDOSCOPIC SUBMUCOSAL DISSECTION FOR RECURRENT GASTRIC TUMORS

Endoscopic resection has been accepted as the standard treatment for intramucosal gastric tumors of differentiated type. However, the indication was limited to small tumors to achieve en bloc resection and prevent local recurrence in cases of conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) such as the strip biopsy and the cap technique. To avoid multi‐fragmental resection, we have developed endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) as a new endoscopic resection technique. ESD is a remarkable technique, because we make it possible to remove the lesions en bloc regardless of size, shape, coexisting ulcer, and location. However, it is difficult or impossible to resect recurrent tumors en bloc in conventional EMR owing to hard fibrosis, and some patients need laparotomy. Using ESD, we can dissect the submucosal layer as we directly look at the submucosa, and remove the lesion safely and reliably even in cases of hard fibrosis. The key to treatment of recurrent tumors in ESD are as follows: (i) using enough submucosal injection solution (we use a mixture of Glyceol and 1% 1900 kDa hyaluronic acid preparation); (ii) incising the mucosa without fibrosis; (iii) understanding characteristics of various cutting devices, and changing other devices in difficult situations. In these ways we can remove the majority of the recurrent tumors en bloc. Hence, we consider that ESD is a very effective treatment which achieves excellent en bloc and complete resection rates and enables patients with intramucosal gastric tumors to a recurrent‐free survival even in recurrent tumors.     

Matched case-control study comparing endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection for colorectal tumors

Background and Aim: For large colorectal tumors, the en bloc resection rate achieved by endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is insufficient, and this leads to a high rate of local recurrence. As endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been reported to achieve a higher rate of en bloc resection and a lower rate of local recurrence in the short‐term, it is expected to overcome the limitations of EMR. We conducted a matched case‐control study between ESD and EMR to clarify the effectiveness of ESD for colorectal tumors. Methods: Between April 2005 and February 2009, a total of 28 colorectal tumors in 28 patients were resected by ESD and were followed up by colonoscopy at least once. As a control group, 56 EMR cases from our prospectively completed database were matched. En bloc resection, complication and recurrence rates were compared between the two groups. Results: The mean sizes of the lesions were 27.1 mm in the ESD group and 25.0 mm in the EMR group. The en bloc resection rate was significantly higher in the ESD group (92.9% vs 37.5% with ESD vs EMR), and the rate of perforation was also significantly higher (10.7% vs 0%). All cases of perforation were managed conservatively. No recurrence was observed in the ESD group, whereas local recurrences were detected in 12 EMR cases (21.4%). Eleven of the 12 recurrences (91.7%) were managed endoscopically, and one required surgical resection. Conclusions: Endoscopic submucosal dissection is a promising technique for the treatment of colorectal tumors, giving an excellent outcome in comparison with EMR.     

Endoscopic submucosal dissection of esophageal squamous cell neoplasms.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has recently been developed for en bloc resection of stomach neoplasms, which results in high tumor eradication rates as well as a modality for the precise histologic assessment of the entire lesion. Application of the technique is desirable for esophageal squamous cell neoplasms (SCNs), but there have been no reports on the use of this procedure in the esophagus. METHODS: An ESD with methods similar to those used for resections of early gastric cancer was performed on 58 consecutive esophageal SCNs with preoperative diagnoses of intraepithelial neoplasm or intramucosal invasive carcinoma occurring in 43 enrolled patients. The therapeutic efficacy, complications, and follow-up results were assessed. RESULTS: The rate of en bloc resection was 100% (58/58), and en bloc resection with tumor-free lateral/basal margins (R0 resection) was 78% (45/58). There was no evidence of significant bleeding. Perforation occurred in 4 (6.9%) patients during the ESD, who were managed by conservative medical treatments after endoscopic closure of the perforation. Removal of 9 (16%) lesions resulted in esophageal stricture requiring balloon dilation after ESD. Of 40 lesions occurring in 31 patients fulfilling the criteria of node-negative tumors (mean follow-up, 17 months), 1 lesion resected by en bloc resection with nonevaluable tumor-free lateral margins (Rx [lateral] resection) recurred locally 6 months after ESD, which was treated successfully by a second ESD procedure. CONCLUSIONS: The ESD is applicable to the esophagus with promising results, but notification of risk is essential.     

Endoscopic submucosal dissection vs endoscopic mucosal resection for early gastric cancer: A meta-analysis

AIM: To compare endoscopic submucosal dissection(ESD) and endoscopic mucosal resection(EMR) for early gastric cancer(EGC).METHODS: Computerized bibliographic search was performed on PubMed/Medline, Embase, Google Schol-ar and Cochrane library databases. Quality of each included study was assessed according to current Co-chrane guidelines. Primary endpoints were en bloc re-section rate and histologically complete resection rate. Secondary endpoints were length of procedure, post-treatment bleeding, post-procedural perforation and re-currence rate. Comparisons between the two treatment groups across all the included studies were performed by using Mantel-Haenszel test for fixed-effects mod-els(in case of low heterogeneity) or DerSimonian and Laird test for random-effects models(in case of high heterogeneity).RESULTS: Ten retrospective studies(8 full text and 2 abstracts) were included in the meta-analysis. Overall data on 4328 lesions, 1916 in the ESD and 2412 in the EMR group were pooled and analyzed. The mean operation time was longer for ESD than for EMR(stan-dardized mean difference 1.73, 95%CI: 0.52-2.95, P =0.005) and the "en bloc " and histological complete re-section rates were significantly higher in the ESD group [OR = 9.69(95%CI: 7.74-12.13), P 0.001 and OR = 5.66,(95%CI: 2.92-10.96), P 0.001, respectively]. As a consequence of its greater radicality, ESD provided lower recurrence rate [OR = 0.09,(95%CI: 0.05-0.17), P 0.001]. Among complications, perforation rate was significantly higher after ESD [OR = 4.67,(95%CI, 2.77-7.87), P 0.001] whereas the bleeding incidences did not differ between the two techniques [OR = 1.49(0.6-3.71), P = 0.39].CONCLUSION: In the endoscopic therapy of EGC, ESD showed a superior efficacy but higher complication rate with respect to EMR.     

Endoscopic submucosal dissection vs endoscopic mucosal resection for superficial esophageal cancer

AIM:To investigate the effectiveness of endoscopic submucosal dissection(ESD)and endoscopic mucosal resection(EMR)in treating superficial esophageal cancer(SEC).METHODS:Studies investigating the safety and efficacy of ESD and EMR for SEC were searched from the databases of Pubmed,Web of Science,EMBASE and the Cochrane Library.Primary end points included the en bloc resection rate and the curative resection rate.Secondary end points included operative time,rates of perforation,postoperative esophageal stricture,bleeding and local recurrence.The random-effect model and the fixed-effect model were used for statistical analysis.RESULTS:Eight studies were identified and included in the meta-analysis.As shown by the pooled analysis,ESD had significantly higher en bloc and curative resection rates than EMR.Local recurrence rate in the ESD group was remarkably lower than that in the EMR group.However,operative time and perforation rate for ESD were significantly higher than those for EMR.As for the rate of postoperative esophageal stricture and procedure-related bleeding,no significant difference was found between the two techniques.CONCLUSION:ESD seems superior to EMR in the treatment of SEC as evidenced by significantly higher en bloc and curative resection rates and by obviously lower local recurrence rate.     

Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: present status and future perspective,including its differentiation from endoscopic mucosal resection

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) allows en bloc resection of a lesion, irrespective of the size of the lesion. ESD has been established as a standard method for the endoscopic ablation of malignant tumors in the upper gastrointestinal (GI) tract in Japan. Although the use of ESD for colorectal lesions has been studied via clinical research, ESD is not yet established as a standard therapeutic method for colorectal lesions because colorectal carcinoma has unique pathological, organ specific characteristics that differ radically from those of the esophagus and stomach, and scope handling and control is more difficult in the colorectum than in the upper GI tract. Depending on the efficacy of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and the clinicopathological characteristics of the colorectal tumor, the proposed indications for colorectal ESD are as follows: (1) lesions difficult to remove en bloc with a snare EMR, such as nongranular laterally spreading tumors (particularly the pseudo depressed type), lesions showing a type VI: pit pattern, and large lesions of the protruded type suspected to be carcinoma; (2) lesions with fibrosis due to biopsy or peristasis; (3) sporadic localized lesions in chronic inflammation such as ulcerative colitis; and (4) local residual carcinoma after EMR. Colorectal ESD is currently in the development stage, and a standard protocol will be available in the near future. We hope that colorectal tumors will be efficiently treated by a treatment method appropriately selected from among EMR, ESD, and surgical resection after precise preoperative diagnosis based on techniques such as magnifying colonoscopy.     

Endoscopic submucosal dissection for residual/locally recurrent lesions after endoscopic therapy for colorectal tumors

Background and Study Aim: Residual or locally recurrent lesions may occur after endoscopic therapy for epithelial colorectal tumors. Additional endoscopic mucosal resection is difficult for large lesions. Endoscopic submucosal dissection may be useful for such lesions, but may be more technically difficult for residual/locally recurrent lesions than for primary lesions. This study evaluated the efficacy of endoscopic submucosal dissection for residual/locally recurrent lesions in comparison with primary lesions. Method: This retrospective case‐control investigated 34 residual/locally recurrent lesions and 384 primary lesions treated using endoscopic submucosal dissection. Tumor size, resected specimen size, procedure duration, en bloc resection rate, curative resection rate, histology, associated complications, and recurrence rate were compared between groups. Results: Procedure duration tended to be longer (85 ± 53 min vs 73 ± 55 min) and tumors were significantly smaller (20 ± 13 mm vs 33 ± 20 mm; P < 0.001) in the residual/locally recurrent group, compared with primary lesions. Both groups showed similar percentages of en bloc (100% vs 97.4%) and curative resection (88.4% vs. 83.6%). Perforation rate was significantly higher in the residual/locally recurrent group (14.7% vs 4.4%, P < 0.05). However, emergency surgery was only needed in 1 of 5 cases in the residual/locally recurrent group, with the remaining 4 cases conservatively managed using endoclips. Conclusions: Endoscopic submucosal dissection for residual/locally recurrent lesions was curative and efficacy. This procedure could help to avoid surgical resection and frequent follow‐up examinations in many patients.     

Local recurrence of large squamous-cell carcinoma of the esophagus after endoscopic resection

BACKGROUND: A new technique, endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), which uses specially developed endoscopic knives, was recently developed for en bloc resection of large lesions. Despite increasing indications for endoscopic resection (ER), there are limited data available regarding the outcome of ER for lesions 20 mm or more in diameter. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the risk factors for local recurrence. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: A cancer-referral center. PATIENTS: Seventy patients, who presented between September 1994 and April 2006, with a total of 78 lesions that measured 20 mm or more in diameter. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENT: Local recurrence rate after ER was assessed. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 32 months (range 12-121 months), there were 12 local recurrences (15.4%). There was no significant association between local recurrence and multiple iodine-voiding lesions, tumor size, or tumor location. The number of resections and the resection method, however, were significantly associated with local recurrence. There was no recurrence of lesions treated by en bloc resection. Lesions resected in 5 or more pieces had a significantly higher recurrence rate than lesions resected in 2 to 4 pieces. Lesions treated by EMR had a significantly higher recurrence rate than lesions treated by ESD. LIMITATIONS: Single-center retrospective analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Esophageal squamous-cell carcinoma that measured 20 mm or more in diameter should be resected en bloc by ESD. Lesions treated by resection in 5 or more pieces have a higher risk for local recurrence.     

Clinical impact of endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial adenocarcinoma located at the esophagogastric junction

BACKGROUND: Surgery is the standard treatment for neoplasms located at the esophagogastric junction (EGJ), and, recently, EMR, photodynamic therapy (PDT), or both have also been used for early stage neoplasms located at the EGJ. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a newly developed technique in the field of endoscopic treatments for GI neoplasms because of its high rate of en bloc resection. OBJECTIVE: We used ESD for superficial adenocarcinoma located at the EGJ and evaluated its clinical impact. PATIENTS: Twenty-five lesions of superficial adenocarcinomas located at the EGJ from 24 patients were treated with ESD between June 2001 and January 2006. An adenocarcinoma located at the EGJ was defined as a "junctional carcinoma (type II)" according to Siewert's classification. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENT: Complications, en bloc resection rate, curative resection rate, local recurrence, and distant metastasis were evaluated. RESULTS: No complications except stenosis occurred. The en bloc resection rate was 100%. Seventeen lesions (72.0%) were judged as "curative resection" and showed no local or distant recurrence during a median follow-up period of 30.1 months. Seven lesions were diagnosed as "noncurative resection." Two patients underwent additional surgical resections. In 1 of 2 of the surgical resections, however, we could not identify a residual cancer. In 1 patient, who refused additional surgical resection, lung metastases were found after 3 years. LIMITATIONS: The limitation of the study was its retrospective design. CONCLUSIONS: After long-term follow-up, although surgery for a noncurative resection remains a standard treatment, ESD can be adequately adopted as an effective treatment for superficial adenocarcinomas at the EGJ.     

Clinical outcomes of EMR for gastric tumors: historical pilot evaluation between endoscopic submucosal dissection and conventional mucosal resection

BACKGROUND: EMR is currently a standard treatment for mucosal gastric tumors. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been developed for en bloc resection. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the clinical outcomes of ESD compared with conventional EMR. DESIGN: Not applicable. SETTING: A historical control study was performed between EMR and ESD. PATIENTS: EMR of 245 gastric tumors was performed in 229 patients. Lesions were divided into two groups. Conventional EMR was performed in group A from February 1999 to June 2001, and ESD was performed in group B from July 2001 to March 2004. Group B was divided into subgroups: subgroup B-1 underwent ESD from July 2001 to March 2003 and subgroup B-2 from April 2003 to March 2004. INTERVENTIONS: All lesions were resected with conventional EMR or with ESD. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: En bloc resection rate, rate in completeness of resection, required time, remnant ratio, and complications were evaluated. RESULTS: With regard to lesions >10 mm in size, the en bloc resection rate and the rate in completeness of resection of group B was significantly higher than that of group A (p < 0.01). Although the required time was longer in group B than A (p < 0.01), it was shorter in subgroup B-2 compared with B-1 (p < 0.05) with lesions < or =10 mm in size. The remnant ratio and perforation rate were not different between groups. LIMITATIONS: Not applicable. CONCLUSIONS: The en bloc resection rate was better with ESD than with conventional EMR. The required time was longer in ESD, but this disadvantage might be improved with experience.     

Clinical outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection for laterally spreading tumors larger than 20 mm

Background and Aims: Colorectal laterally spreading tumors (LST) > 20 mm are usually treated by endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) or endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). Endoscopic piecemeal mucosal resection (EPMR) is sometimes required. The aim of our study was to compare the outcomes of ESD and EMR, including EPMR, for such LST. Methods: A total of 269 consecutive patients with a colorectal LST > 20 mm were treated endoscopically at our hospital from April 2006 to December 2009. We retrospectively evaluated the complications and local recurrence rates associated with ESD, hybrid ESD (ESD with EMR), EMR, and EPMR. Results: ESD and EMR were performed successfully for 89 and 178 LST, respectively: 61 by ESD; 28 by hybrid ESD; 70 by EMR; and 108 by EPMR. Between‐group differences in perforation rates were not significant. Local recurrence rates in cases with curative resection were as follows: 0% (0/56) in ESD; 0% (0/27) in hybrid ESD; 1.4% (1/69) in EMR; and 12.1% (13/107) in EPMR; that is, significantly higher in EPMR. No metastasis was seen at follow up. The recurrence rate for EPMR yielding ≥ three pieces was significantly high (P < 0.001). All 14 local recurrent lesions were adenomas that were cured endoscopically. Conclusions: As for safety, ESD/hybrid ESD is equivalent to EMR/EPMR. ESD/hybrid ESD is a feasible technique for en bloc resection and showed no local recurrence. Although local recurrences associated with EMR/EPMR were seen, which were conducted based on our indication criteria, all local recurrences could obtain complete cure by additional endoscopic treatment.     

Key factors for successful en bloc endoscopic submucosal dissection of early stage gastric cancer using an insulation-tipped diathermic knife

BACKGROUND/AIMS: En bloc endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is presently considered to be the treatment of choice for endoscopically resectable early stage gastric cancer (EGC). Although a new EMR technique using an insulation-tipped diathermic knife (endoscopic submucosal dissection using an IT knife: IT knife-ESD) is reportedly suitable for en bloc resection, a failure in en bloc resection (piecemeal resection) can occur. We retrospectively analyzed factors affecting the success rate of en bloc resection by IT knife-ESD. METHODOLOGY: A total of 71 gastric lesions were treated by IT knife-ESD. En bloc/piecemeal resection rates were investigated. Twelve potential factors associated with clinicopathological characteristics or procedures were analyzed univariately and multivariately. RESULTS: IT knife-ESD was successfully performed in all 71 lesions. En bloc resection was achieved in 63 lesions (91%), while eight lesions (9%) were removed as two or more fragments (piecemeal resection). The multivariate analysis identified only one independent factor affecting the success rate of en bloc resection: the second-half period of procedure application. The en bloc resection rate was not associated with the tumor location/site, tumor size, specimen size, and ulceration within the tumor. CONCLUSIONS: Much experience with IT knife-ESD may resolve the tumor-related technical difficulties. It is true for this advanced procedure that endoscopist experience is highly likely to be a critical factor for treatment success. We consider that IT knife-ESD for EGC is feasible and safe when performed by experienced endoscopists.     

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in 2011, a Western perspective

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) has become the standard of care for removal of large flat and sessile neoplastic lesions of the GI tract. Recently, endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) was introduced in Japan as an alternative technique, which allows en bloc resection of large lesions. The applications of EMR and ESD are expanding and many Western endoscopists are adopting these techniques. Paris classification and Kudo pit pattern classification allows prediction of the depth of invasion of early neoplastic lesions and thus, avoids resection of lesions invading the deep submucosa which have higher rates of lymphatic spread. ESD of early stomach cancer is the standard of care in Japan. Recent published reports from Western countries showed comparable results for ESD of early gastric cancers to those done in Japan. Recently, EMR combined with ablation has been used frequently in Western countries for treatment of high-grade dysplasia in early adenocarcinoma of the esophagus. Although ESD of early neoplastic lesions of the esophagus is technically difficult, few promising reports were published proving the feasibility of this technique in the West. ESD has been shown to achieve higher en bloc resection and lower rates of tumour recurrence in removal of lateral spreading colonic polyps. A hybrid technique of circumferential submucosal incision followed by en bloc EMR has been used for removal of large colonic lesions in some Western endoscopy centres. In Western countries, training for ESD is challenging given the lack of training in the relatively easier early gastric cancer lesions. Animal model training combined with observing experts in ESD could be an alternative for Western endoscopists. Inspite of obstacles, ESD applications are continuing to grow in Western countries.     

Secondary endoscopic submucosal dissection for locally recurrent or incompletely resected gastric neoplasms

AIM To investigate the feasibility and safety of secondary endoscopic submucosal dissection(ESD) for residual or locally recurrent gastric tumors. METHODS Between 2010 and 2017, 1623 consecutive patients underwent ESD for gastric neoplasms at a single tertiary referral center. Among these, 28 patients underwent secondary ESD for a residual or locally recurrent tumor. Our analysis compared clinicopathologic factors between primary ESD and secondary ESD groups. RESULTS The en bloc resection and curative rate of resection of secondary ESD were 92.9% and 89.3%, respectively. The average procedure time of secondary ESD was significantly longer than primary ESD(78.2 min vs 55.1 min, P = 0.004), and the adverse events rate was not significantly different but trended slightly higher in the secondary ESD group compared to the primary ESD group(10.7% vs 3.8%, P = 0.095). Patients who received secondary ESD had favorable outcomes without severe adverse events. During a mean follow-up period, no local recurrence occurred in patients who received secondary ESD. CONCLUSION Secondary ESD of residual or locally recurrent gastric tumors appears to be a feasible and curative treatment though it requires greater technical efficiency and longer procedure time.     

Endoscopic mucosal resection with a ligation device or endoscopic submucosal dissection for rectal carcinoid tumors: An analysis of 24 consecutive cases

Aims: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has several advantages over conventional endoscopic mucosal resection, including a higher en bloc resection rate and more accurate pathological estimation. However, ESD is a complex procedure that requires advanced endoscopic skills. The aim of our study is to evaluate the efficacy of endoscopic mucosal resection with a ligation device (EMR‐L) compared to ESD for rectal carcinoid tumors. Methods: Between September 2003 and April 2011, 24 rectal carcinoid tumors in 24 patients treated by ESD or EMR‐L were retrospectively analyzed. The indications for endoscopic treatment were node‐negative rectal carcinoid tumors. We compared the therapeutic outcomes of the ESD group (n = 13) and the EMR‐L group (n = 11). Results: Both groups had similar mean tumor sizes (ESD: 5.5 ± 2.1 mm; EMR‐L: 4.4 ± 2.2 mm). The rates of en bloc and complete resection were, respectively, 100% and 92.3% for ESD, and 100% and 100% for EMR‐L. Perforations did not occur in either group. Postoperative bleeding occurred in one EMR‐L case, and it was endoscopically managed. However, there were no differences in therapeutic outcomes between the two groups. The mean procedure time was longer in the ESD group (28.8 ± 16.2 min) than in the EMR‐L group (17.4 ± 4.4 min), without a significant difference. The mean hospitalization period was significantly shorter in the EMR‐L group (1.8 ± 3.1 day) than in the ESD group (6.2 ± 2.1 day), and eight EMR‐L cases were treated in an outpatient setting. Conclusions: EMR‐L is a simple and effective procedure that compares favorably to ESD for small rectal carcinoid tumors.     

Resection area of 15 mm as dividing line for choosing strip biopsy or endoscopic submucosal dissection for mucosal gastric neoplasm

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is effective treatment for mucosal gastric neoplasm. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), a novel EMR method, has been reported to enable en bloc resection more frequently than conventional EMR methods such as strip biopsy (SB). However, ESD requires more time than SB. A small lesion can be resected en bloc and effectively treated with SB. GOAL: To evaluate using a 15 mm resection area as the dividing line between SB and ESD prospectively. STUDY: SB was applied for resection area less than 15 mm (SB group) and ESD for 15 mm or larger resection (ESD group). We compared characteristics of lesions and outcomes of EMR between the 2 groups. RESULTS: Ninety lesions were prospectively assigned to SB group (36 lesions) and ESD group (54 lesions). The average neoplasm size was 9.0+/-3.9 mm in the SB group and 19.1+/-11.3 mm in the ESD group (P<0.01). The average resection time was 11.7+/-5.8 minutes in the SB group and 128.9+/-102.8 minutes in the ESD group (P<0.01). The complete resection rate was 91.6% in the SB group and 83.3% in the ESD group (P=0.25). The complication rate was not significantly different between SB group and ESD group (11.1% vs. 16.7%, P=0.12). During follow-up (median 23+/-5 mo), 1 patient in each group, who had piecemeal resection at original EMR had recurrent neoplasm. CONCLUSIONS: Gastric mucosal neoplasms which require only small (<15 mm) resection can be treated with SB, as effectively as with ESD.     

RISK MANAGEMENT OF THERAPEUTIC COLONOSCOPY (HOT BIOPSY,POLYPECTOMY, ENDOSCOPIC MUCOSAL RESECTION AND ENDOSCOPIC SUBMUCOSAL DISSECTION)

The concept of an adenoma–carcinoma sequence has been widely accepted in the colon and rectum, contrary to that in gastric cancer. Consequently, most target lesions for endoscopic resection using these newly developed techniques are histologically assessed as adenoma or intramucosal carcinoma in adenoma. Based on results in conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), almost all remnant or recurrent tumors can be successfully managed by salvage EMR, and all materials resected by salvage EMR also showed adenoma or intramucosal cancer. These results suggest that en bloc resection is not always clinically necessary to obtain complete cure for all colorectal neoplasia. However, larger lesions tend to be resected in a piecemeal fashion; it is difficult to confirm whether EMR has been completed or not. For precise histopathological assessment of the resected specimen, endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for en bloc resection is desirable, although further experience is needed to establish its safety and efficacy. The present review contains a summary of the risk management of therapeutic colonoscopy including ESD for large colorectal mucosal neoplasia, debated at the Endoscopic Forum Japan 2006, Hakone, and discussion of the problems and future prospects of these procedures.