Abstract
Background and study aims Few studies have directly compared endo-knives for endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in humans. We compared the performances of the Mucosectom2 and SB knife Jr.
Patients and methods Two trainee endoscopists performed ESD of 36 lesions in this prospective, randomized controlled trial. Mucosal incision with a 1.5-mm Dual knife and submucosal dissection using the Mucosectom2 were performed in 1 group. Mucosal incision with a 1.5-mm Dual knife and submucosal dissection with a SB knife Jr. were performed in the other group. The primary outcome was the ESD procedure time. Secondary outcomes were total procedure time, self-completion rates, and adverse events.
Results ESD time in Mucosectom2 patients was not significantly shorter than in SB knife Jr. patients (57 ± 32 min vs. 61 ± 44 min, respectively; P = 0.94). Total procedure time in Mucosectom2 patients was not significantly shorter than in SB knife Jr. patients (81 ± 42 min vs. 82 ± 51 min, respectively; P = 0.85). The trainee self-completion rate was slightly higher in SB knife Jr. patients than in Mucosectom2 patients, although the difference was not significant (94 % vs. 100 %, respectively; P = 0.959). Fewer hemostatic procedures using the Coagrasper were performed in Mucosectom2 patients than in SB knife Jr. patients, although the difference was not significant (0.62 vs. 0.7, respectively; P = 0.432).
Conclusions Mucosectom2 and SB knife Jr. did not significantly differ in performance for colorectal ESD to safely and reliably enhance ESD. Knife selection is not as important for learning colorectal ESD as patient- and lesion-related factors.
Efficacy of traction‐assisted colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection using a clip‐and‐thread technique: A prospective randomized study
