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.     

Warning for unprincipled colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: Accurate diagnosis and reasonable treatment strategy

Piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is generally indicated for laterally spreading tumors (LST) >2 cm in diameter. However, the segmentation of adenomatous parts does not affect the histopathological diagnosis and completeness of cure. Thus, possible indications for piecemeal EMR are both adenomatous homogenous‐type granular‐type LST (LST‐G) and LST‐G as carcinoma in adenoma without segmentalizing the carcinomatous part. Diagnosis of the pit pattern using magnifying endoscopy is essential for determining the correct treatment and setting segmentation borders. In contrast, endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is indicated for lesions requiring endoscopic en bloc excision, as it is difficult to use the snare technique for en bloc excisions such as in non‐granular‐type LST (LST‐NG), especially for the pseudodepressed type, tumors with a type V_I pit pattern, shallow invasive submucosal carcinoma, largedepressed tumors and large elevated lesions, which are often malignant (e.g. nodular mixed‐type LST‐G). Other lesions, such as intramucosal tumor accompanied by submucosal fibrosis, induced by biopsy or peristalsis of the lesion; sporadic localized tumors that occur due to chronic inflammation, including ulcerative colitis; and local residual early carcinoma after endoscopic treatment, are also indications for ESD. In clinical practice, an efficient endoscopic treatment with segregation of ESD from piecemeal EMR should be carried out after a comprehensive evaluation of the completeness of cure, safety, clinical simplicity, and cost–benefit, based on an accurate preoperative diagnosis.     

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.     

CURRENT TECHNIQUES AND DEVICES FOR SAFE AND CONVENIENT ENDOSCOPIC SUBMUCOSAL DISSECTION (ESD) AND KOREAN EXPERIENCE OF ESD

Conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) technique has limitations in its capacity of achieving en bloc resection and, for lesions greater than 20 mm, removal in a piecemeal resection is often required. This leads to uncertainty as to whether or not the lesion has been completely removed and to an increase in local recurrence. To overcome this limitation, a new technique using specifically designed cutting devices, termed endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been developed. The present article discuss the current indication, new diagnostic, cutting and hemostatic devices and long‐term outcomes of EMR and ESD in early gastric cancer in Korea.     

Endoscopic submucosal dissection of early gastric cancer

The purpose of this review was to examine a remarkable technical advance regarding the indications for and the technique of endoscopic resection of early gastric cancer. Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of early gastric cancer with no risk of lymph node metastasis has been a standard technique in Japan, probably owing to the high incidence of gastric cancer in Japan and the fact that more than half of Japanese gastric cancer cases are diagnosed at an early stage. Very recently, several EMR techniques have become increasingly accepted and regularly used in Western countries. Although these minimally invasive techniques are safe, convenient, and efficacious, they are unsuitable for large lesions in particular. Difficulty in correctly assessing the depth of tumor invasion and an increase in local recurrence when standard EMR procedures are used have been reported in cases of large lesions, because such lesions are often resected piecemeal owing to the technical limitations of standard EMR. A new development in therapeutic endoscopy, called endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), allows the direct dissection of the submucosa, and large lesions can be resected en bloc. ESD is not limited by resection size and is expected to replace surgical resection. However, it is still associated with a higher incidence of complications than standard EMR procedures and requires a high level of endoscopic skill. The endoscopic indications, techniques, and management of complications of ESD for early gastric cancer for properly carrying out established therapeutic endoscopy are described.     

Endoscopic submucosal dissection allows curative resection of locally recurrent early gastric cancer after prior endoscopic mucosal resection

BACKGROUND: Repeat endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) to cure locally recurrent early gastric cancer (EGC) is difficult to perform because the initial EMR causes submucosal fibrosis; however, ESD allows submucosal dissection through the fibrosis and provides an en bloc specimen. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to determine the safety and efficacy of ESD and compare the results to historical controls. DESIGN: This was a retrospective, case-control study. PATIENTS: We used our prospectively entered database (1993-2003) to identify 64 patients who had locally recurrent EGC after EMR. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: We defined the resections as curative when the lateral and vertical margins were free of cancer and repeat endoscopy showed no recurrent disease. RESULTS: Among 46 patients who underwent ESD, 41 (89.1%) en bloc resections were achieved compared to none in 18 conventional procedures (P < .0001). The specimen of 1 lesion (2.4%) out of 41 en bloc resections was histologically nonevaluable, compared with 10 lesions (43.4%) in 23 piecemeal resections (P < .0001). Three residual tumors (27.3%) were found in the 11 nonevaluable specimens. Three perforations occurred during ESD; all were successfully treated endoscopically with endoclips. LIMITATIONS: The limitation of the study was retrospective design. CONCLUSIONS: ESD provides high en bloc resection rate for locally recurrent EGC after previous EMR. In turn, en bloc resections allow precise histological staging to be assessed and prevent residual disease and recurrence.     

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 for gastric cancer

Opinion statement Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a novel endoscopic treatment that enables a clinician to resect an early-stage gastric cancer in en bloc fashion. ESD is indicated for those cancers in which there is a high probability of en bloc resection and low probability of lymph node metastasis. The latter may be the limiting factor at institutions skilled at ESD. Several ESD techniques are available with similar outcomes. Thus, selection depends on operator preference and expertise. Gastrectomy with lymphadenectomy should be applied initially to those early gastric cancers with high probability of positive lymph nodes or as an additional treatment after ESD. Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) should be reserved for small, nonulcerated, intramucosal, differentiated cancers. Disadvantages of ESD in comparison with EMR are longer operation times and higher incidences of intraoperative bleeding and perforation, but the indication for ESD includes larger and ulcerative lesions not amenable to EMR.     

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.     

Treatment strategy for laterally spreading tumors in Japan: Before and after the introduction of endoscopic submucosal dissection

Background and Aims:  Laterally spreading tumors (LST) in the colorectum are considered good candidates for endoscopic resection (ER). Because LST-non-granular (NG) tumors show multifocal invasion into the submucosal layer, en bloc resection is necessary for adequate histopathological evaluation. Therefore, surgical resection has been recommended when a lesion is suspected to be an invasive cancer and too large to resect en bloc. The aim of the present study was to evaluate whether the introduction of colorectal ESD, which was developed for en bloc resection of early gastric cancers, could improve the en bloc resection rate of large LST-NG-type tumors and reduce the surgical resection rate.
Methods:  Between January 1999 and December 2005, a total of 166 LST-NG-type tumors measuring ≥ 20 mm in 161 patients were included in this study. The en bloc resection rate and the surgical resection rate were historically compared between two periods, before and after the introduction of ESD.
Results:  The en bloc resection rate for ER lesions was significantly higher in the latter period (35.0% [14/40] vs 76.5% [75/98]; P  < 0.001), and the rate of surgery for adenomas and intramucosal or sm minute cancers was significantly lower in the latter period (20.0% [10/50] vs 1.1% [1/89]; P  < 0.001).
Conclusions:  The introduction of colonic ESD was able to change our treatment strategy for LST, improving the en bloc resection rate and reducing the surgical resection rate.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Rectal laterally spreading tumors successfully treated in two steps by endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection

Background  

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is an advanced technique of therapeutic endoscopy alternative to endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for superficial gastrointestinal neoplasms >2 cm. ESD allows for the direct dissection of the submucosa and large lesions can be resected en bloc. ESD is not limited by resection size, increases histologically complete resection rates and may reduce the local recurrence.     

Endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancer

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) has been accepted as a treatment of early gastric cancer (EGC). The number of EMR procedures for EGC has been increasing because a patient's quality of life after EMR is superior to that after surgical gastrectomy. In Japan, most EMR have been performed using the strip biopsy method; however, in some cases we experienced local recurrences when multiple fragments had been resected by this method. Single-fragment resection is preferable for correct histological diagnosis and a patient's prognosis. Recently, dramatic changes have occurred in the operational technique and design of the accessory apparatus. In 1996, we developed a special endoscopic knife, called the insulation-tipped electrosurgical knife (IT knife), which consists of a conventional diathermic needle knife with a ceramic ball at the top to minimize the risk of perforation. This knife can cut submucosa safely and remove a lesion completely. We named this method endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). Using this procedure, 96% of the tumors (471/488) were completely resected in one piece. During the follow-up period, there were no recurrent cases. One-piece resection by ESD using the IT knife improves the quality of life and prognosis for patients with early gastric cancer.     

Endoscopic submucosal dissection with internal traction for early gastric cancer (with video)

BACKGROUND: EMR techniques have high success rates for treating small lesions of the upper-GI tract; however, tumors larger than 15 mm are frequently removed by piecemeal resection, which is associated with an increased rate of disease recurrence and difficulty in histologically evaluating the specimen. OBJECTIVE: To describe a simple technique of using internal traction to facilitate endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) procedures in the excision of large, early gastric cancers. DESIGN: Case series. SETTING: A tertiary medical center in Taiwan. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eight patients with early gastric cancers larger than 20 mm underwent ESD. INTERVENTIONS: A standard hemoclip modified with surgical suture was used to provide traction to improve visualization of the dissection plane during ESD. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Proportion with complete en bloc resection. RESULTS: En bloc resection of the lesion was achieved in 8 patients. One patient underwent additional surgery because an adequate safe margin was not obtained by ESD. LIMITATIONS: One endoscopist performed all procedures, and only 8 patients were studied in an uncontrolled manner. CONCLUSIONS: The internal traction method appears to facilitate en bloc ESD of early gastric cancers larger than 20 mm.     

PRESENT STATUS and PERSPECTIVES OF SUBMUCOSAL DISSECTING METHOD OF ENDOSCOPIC MUCOSAL RESECTION IN THE COLORECTUM IN JAPAN

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is one of the endoscopic procedures for treatment of intramucosal cancer of the gastrointestinal tract. This method enables complete resection of a lesion, however, the size of lesions which can be resected en bloc has a limit. For lesions which can not be resected en bloc, endoscopic piecemeal mucosal resection (EPMR) are employed. However, it is often difficult to determine cancer invasion at holizontal and vertical cut end on pathological examination of resected specimens. Therefore, for the purpose of en bloc resection submucosal dissecting method of endoscopic mucosal resection (SDEMR) that is a method by which mucosa is dissected using some special devices after circumferential mucosal incision around the lesion was proposed. It enables us to resect large lesions which cannot be removed en bloc by EMR. Therefore, it is possible that this procedure is able to prevent residual cancer. Furthermore, sufficient pathological examination of resected specimens is possible, and it helps to determine a therapeutic plan after resection. It is now widely accepted as one of the endoscopic procedures for treatment of early gastric cancer, however, there have been few reports on its experience in the colorectum. Then, in order to consider the perspectives of SDEMR in the colorectum, the present status of it in Japan in August 2003 was analyzed and reviewed in this paper.     

重视并开展内镜黏膜下剥离术的规范化操作

内镜切除术治疗胃肠道早期肿瘤正日益被接受并开展应用,包括传统的内镜黏膜切除术（EMR）和近年开展的内镜黏膜下剥离术（ESD）。EMR对于15mm以上的病灶较难做到一次切除,而整块切除标本对病理学评估至关重要,ESD正是应这一要求开展起来的新技术。对局限于黏膜层的病变,ESD并不受其大小的限制,对部分早期胃肠道肿瘤,其可取代传统的手术治疗,但ESD需要相当高的内镜操作技术,术前需要多种方法对病灶进行谨慎、全面的评估,包括范围、浸润深度等,术中、术后还可能出现出血、穿孔等严重的并发症,其发生率远高于EMR。ESD的指征、操作技巧、病理评估等方面还需要不断完善。由于ESD在早期胃肠道肿瘤的治疗上具有很多优点,值得有条件医院的内镜医师予以重视并开展这一技术。     

Endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancer: Current and original devices

Compared with endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is easier to perform and requires less time for treatment. However, EMR has been replaced by ESD, because achieving en bloc resection of specimens > 20 mm in diameter is difficult with EMR. The technique of ESD was introduced to resect large specimens of early gastric cancer in a single piece. ESD can provide precise histological diagnosis and can also reduce the rate of recurrence, but has a high level of technical difficulty, and is consequently associated with a high rate of complications, a need for advanced endoscopic techniques, and a lengthy procedure time. To overcome disadvantages in both EMR and ESD, various advances have been made in submucosal injections, knives, other accessories, and in electrocoagulation systems.     

NOVEL TECHNIQUE OF ENDOSCOPIC SUBMUCOSAL DISSECTION USING AN EXTERNAL GRASPING FORCEPS FOR SUPERFICIAL GASTRIC NEOPLASIA

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for early stage gastric cancer (EGC) has improved the success rate of en bloc resection but results in perforation more often than does endoscopic mucosal resection. We report a novel technique of ESD using an external grasping forceps. A total of 265 lesions with EGC or gastric adenoma were enrolled in this study. Sixteen lesions were located in the upper third portion of the stomach, 114 in the middle third portion, and 135 in the lower third portion. After submucosal injection followed by circumcision of the lesions with a flex knife, the external grasping forceps was introduced with the help of a second grasping forceps and anchored at the margin of the lesion. Oral traction applied with this forceps could elevate the lesion and make the submucosal layer wider and more visible, thereby facilitating dissection of the submucosal layer under direct vision. The mean lesion size was 15.0 mm (range: 5–50 mm). All but 11 lesions (95.8%) could be resected en bloc with free margins. Mean procedure time was 45 min (range: 20–180 min). It was difficult to carry out this procedure when the lesions were located in the cardia, lesser curvature, or posterior wall of the upper third of the gastric body. Bleeding after ESD occurred in 10 patients (3.8%) and perforation occurred in one patient (0.4%). The endoscopic submucosal dissection using an external grasping forceps for superficial gastric neoplasia is efficacious and safe.