Evaluations on laser ablation of ex vivo porcine stomach tissue for development of Ho:YAG-assisted endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD)

Abstract Background Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for gastrointestinal neoplasms can be technically difficult for trainee endoscopists. Presently, there is no consensus for trainees to select the endo-knife type in ESD. Therefore, we conducted a comparison study of treatment outcomes between scissors-type and needle-type knives in ESD performed by trainees in an ex vivo porcine model. Methods This study was conducted on trainee endoscopists who participated in ESD hands-on seminars held in August 2018 and September 2019. A total of 22 trainees from 13 institutions were divided into two groups according to their endoscopic experience. Under expert supervision, each trainee performed two ESDs in porcine models, namely, scissor-type knife (ESD-S) and needle-type knife (ESD-N). The efficacy and safety, including the procedure time and rates of self-completion, en bloc resection, and complications, were compared between ESD-S and ESD-N. In subgroup analysis, we also investigated the predictors associated with the difficulty of ESD for trainees using multivariate logistic regression analysis. Results Eight trainees had an experience of over 1000 endoscopies (senior trainee: S-Trainee), whereas the others had an experience of less than 1000 endoscopies (junior trainee: J-Trainee). Among the S-Trainees, no significant differences were observed in any treatment outcome between ESD-S and ESD-N. Among the J-Trainees, the total procedure and mucosal incision times were significantly shorter in ESD-S than in ESD-N [total procedure time: 16.5 min (range 10.0–31.0) vs. 22.3 min (range 10.0–38.0), P = 0.018; circumferential incision time: 10.0 min (range 6–16) vs. 17.0 min (range 5.0–31.5); P = 0.019]. Regarding complications, muscular injury occurred in two patients during ESD-N performed by J-Trainees; however, no muscular injury occurred during ESD-S. In subgroup analysis, ESD-N was an independent predictive factor of difficult ESD (odds ratio 5.28, 95% confidence interval 1.25–22.30; P = 0.024). Conclusions This study revealed that trainees, particularly those who have experienced less than 1000 endoscopies, should opt for the scissor-type knife to perform ESD.

Download Full-text

A novel endoscopic hand-suturing technique for defect closure after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: a pilot study

Endoscopy ◽

10.1055/a-1120-8533 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 52 (09) ◽

pp. 780-785

Author(s):

Seiichiro Abe ◽

Yutaka Saito ◽

Yusaku Tanaka ◽

Mai Ego ◽

Fumito Yanagisawa ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection ◽

Ex Vivo ◽

Barbed Suture ◽

Procedure Time ◽

Closure Rate ◽

Needle Holder ◽

Lower Rectum ◽

Submucosal Dissection ◽

Mucosal Defect ◽

Colorectal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection

Abstract Background This study aimed to demonstrate the feasibility of endoscopic hand-suturing (EHS) and attainability of sustained closure after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). Methods EHS was defined as uninterrupted endoscopic suturing of the mucosal defect after colorectal ESD using an absorbable barbed suture and a through-the-scope needle holder. Following individual EHS training using an ex vivo porcine colonic model, two experienced endoscopists performed EHS. Repeat colonoscopy was performed on the third or fourth day after ESD to examine the EHS site. The primary end point was the complete EHS closure rate, and secondary end points were sustained closure and post-ESD bleeding rates. Results 11 lesions were included. Median size of the mucosal defect was 38 mm (range 25 – 55 mm) and the lesion characteristics were as follows: lower rectum/upper rectum/ascending colon/cecum = 3/3/2/3, and 0-IIa/0-Is + IIa/others = 5/4/2. EHS was not attempted in two patients owing to difficulty in colonoscope reinsertion after ESD and intraoperative perforation, respectively. EHS was performed for nine lesions, and the complete EHS closure rate was 73 %. Median procedure time for suturing was 56 minutes (range 30 – 120 minutes) and median number of stitches was 8 (range 6 – 12). Sustained closure and post-ESD bleeding rates were 64 % and 9 %, respectively. Conclusions EHS achieved complete and sustained closure in the colorectum. However, EHS is not currently clinically applicable given the long procedure time. Further modifications of the technique and devices are desirable.

Download Full-text