Palisade technique as an effective endoscopic submucosal dissection tool for large colorectal tumors

Abstract Background and study aims Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has become the standard treatment for colorectal ESD, but large colorectal tumors remain difficult to remove. We developed a new method, called the palisade technique, by modifying the multiple tunneling technique. In this method, a palisade of submucosal tissue is left beneath the tumor to anchor a dissected specimen, maintaining effective submucosal traction. Patients and methods The study included 11 patients with large colorectal tumors that were over half the circumference of the colorectal lumen which were treated using the palisade technique from August 2017 to October 2019. Overall resection outcomes were assessed. Results All 11 lesions were removed en bloc. The R0 resection rate was 45.6 % because of marginal burning of the specimen, but no local recurrence was found after a median observation period of 31 months. The median submucosal dissection time (SDT) and submucosal dissection speed (SDS) were 170 minutes and 23.1 mm2/min, respectively. One case of post-ESD hemorrhage was successfully managed endoscopically, and two cases of post-colorectal ESD coagulation syndrome were managed conservatively. Conclusion The palisade technique can be an effective and safe technique for treating large colorectal tumors that extend over half the luminal circumference.

Download Full-text

Endoscopic submucosal dissection in management of colorectal tumors near or involving a diverticulum: a retrospective case series

Endoscopy International Open ◽

10.1055/a-0848-8048 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 07 (05) ◽

pp. E664-E671 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Victoria Jimenez-Garcia ◽

Masayoshi Yamada ◽

Hiroaki Ikematsu ◽

Hiroyuki Takamaru ◽

Seiichiro Abe ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection ◽

Case Series ◽

Clinicopathological Characteristics ◽

R0 Resection ◽

Incomplete Resection ◽

Colorectal Tumors ◽

Resection Rate ◽

Retrospective Case ◽

En Bloc ◽

Submucosal Dissection

Abstract Background and study aims Surgery is the standard treatment for colon tumors associated with diverticulum. Use of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) to treat such tumors is controversial. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and feasibility of ESD in treating superficial colorectal tumors situated near or involving diverticulum. Patients and methods Consecutive patients from two referral centers who had colorectal tumors near or involving diverticulum treated by ESD were retrospectively studied. Clinicopathological characteristics and clinical outcomes were analyzed. Results Of the 12 patients studied, six had tumors near diverticulum and six had tumors involving diverticulum. The overall en-bloc R0 resection rate, median tumor size and procedure time were 67 %, 26.5 mm (range, 15 – 80 mm) and 110 minutes (range, 50 – 220 minutes), respectively. For tumors near diverticulum group, the en-bloc R0 resection rate was 100 % and no adverse events (AEs) or residual/recurrent tumors were observed. In contrast, for intradiverticular tumors group, the en-bloc R0 resection rate was low at 33 %, and one AE (perforation) was observed. The diverticula were ≥ 6 mm in diameter in the patients with incomplete resection. However, all but one diverticulum was unrecognized before ESD. Two residual tumors were detected at the 12-month surveillance and one required surgery. Conclusions This case series indicates that ESD is safe and feasible for treating colorectal tumors near a diverticulum and might be feasible for tumors involving a diverticulum smaller than 6 mm. Selection for smaller diverticulum size may contribute to higher en-bloc R0 resection rates.

Download Full-text

ENDOSCOPIC SUBMUCOSAL DISSECTION WITH CIRCUMFERENTIAL INCISION VERSUS TUNNELING METHOD FOR TREATMENT OF SUPERFICIAL ESOPHAGEAL CANCER

Arquivos de Gastroenterologia ◽

10.1590/s0004-2803.202100000-35 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Tarso Magno Leite RIBEIRO ◽

Vitor N ARANTES ◽

Jonas Augusto RAMOS ◽

Peter V DRAGANOV ◽

Dennis YANG ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Esophageal Cancer ◽

Local Recurrence ◽

Adverse Events ◽

Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection ◽

Curative Resection ◽

R0 Resection ◽

Resection Rate ◽

Superficial Esophageal Cancer ◽

En Bloc ◽

Submucosal Dissection

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) of esophageal superficial neoplasm is associated with a high en bloc R0 resection rate and low recurrence. OBJECTIVE: We aim to compare the performance and clinical outcomes of ESD via ESD after circumferential incision (ESD-C) versus submucosal tunneling (ESD-T). METHODS: Single-center retrospective analysis of all consecutive patients who underwent ESD for superficial esophageal cancer, between 2009 and 2018. ESD-T was defined as the technique of making the mucosal incisions followed by submucosal tunneling in the oral to anal direction. ESD-C consisted of completing a circumferential incision followed by ESD. Main study outcomes included en bloc and R0 resection rates. Secondary outcomes included procedural characteristics, curative resection rate, local recurrence and adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 65 procedures (23 ESD-T and 42 ESD-C) were performed for ESCC (40; 61.5%) and BE-neoplasia (25; 38.5%). There were no statistically significant differences between patients who underwent ESD-T versus ESD-C in en bloc (91.3% vs 100%, P=0.12), R0 (65.2% vs 78.6%, P=0.24), curative resection rates (65.2% vs 73.8%, P=0.47) and mean procedure time (118.7 min with vs 102.4 min, P=0.35). Adverse events for ESD-T and ESD-C were as follows: bleeding (0 versus 2.4%; P=0.53), perforation (4.3% vs 0; P=0.61), esophageal stricture (8.7% versus 9.5%; P=0.31). Local recurrence was encountered in 8.7% after ESD-T and 2.4% after ESD-C (P=0.28) at a mean follow-up of 8 and 2.75 years, respectively (P=0.001). CONCLUSION: ESD-T and ESD-C appear to be equally effective with similar safety profiles for the management of superficial esophageal neoplasms.

Download Full-text

Acceptability of endoscopic submucosal dissection for sessile serrated lesions: comparison with non-sessile serrated lesions

Endoscopy International Open ◽

10.1055/a-1268-7353 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 08 (12) ◽

pp. E1832-E1839

Author(s):

Yuichiro Kuroki ◽

Toshiyuki Endo ◽

Kenta Iwahashi ◽

Naoki Miyao ◽

Reika Suzuki ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection ◽

Postoperative Bleeding ◽

En Bloc Resection ◽

Tumor Location ◽

Proximal Colon ◽

R0 Resection ◽

Resection Rate ◽

En Bloc ◽

Submucosal Dissection ◽

Serrated Lesions

Abstract Background and study aims Sessile serrated lesions (SSL) are major precursor lesions of serrated pathway cancers, and appropriate treatment may prevent interval colorectal cancer. Studies have reported the outcomes of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for SSL; however, there are insufficient reports on endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). We examined the characteristics and outcomes of SSL and compared them to those of non-SSL in ESD. Patients and methods We reviewed 370 consecutive cases in 322 patients who underwent colorectal ESD between January 2016 and March 2020 at our hospital. There were 267 0-IIa lesions that were stratified into 41 SSL and 226 non-SSL (intramucosal cancer, adenoma) cases. We used propensity matching to adjust for the variances in the factors affecting treatment between the SSL and non-SSL groups. Results In the baseline cases, young women and proximal colon tumor location were significantly more common in the SSL group. There were no statistically significant differences between the SSL and non-SSL groups in terms of en bloc resection rate (97.6 % vs. 99.6 %; P = 0.28), R0 resection rate (92.7 % vs. 93.4 %; P = 0.74), perforation (0 % vs. 0.9 %; P > 0.99), and postoperative bleeding (2.4 % vs. 1.8 %; P = 0.56). Thirty-eight pairs were matched using propensity score, and the median dissection speed (12 vs. 7.7 cm2/h; P = 0.0095) was significantly faster in the SSL than in the non-SSL group. Conclusions ESD for SSL was safely performed, and SSL was smoother to remove than non-SSL. ESD might be an acceptable endoscopic treatment option for SSL.

Download Full-text

Colorectal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection in a Western Center: Analysis of Outcomes and Safety Profile

GE Portuguese Journal of Gastroenterology ◽

10.1159/000514797 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 1-9

Author(s):

João Santos-Antunes ◽

Margarida Marques ◽

Rui Morais ◽

Fátima Carneiro ◽

Guilherme Macedo

Keyword(s):

Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection ◽

Safety Profile ◽

En Bloc Resection ◽

R0 Resection ◽

Hybrid Technique ◽

Resection Rate ◽

En Bloc ◽

Delayed Bleeding ◽

Submucosal Dissection ◽

Gastrointestinal Lesions

Introduction: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a well-established endoscopic technique for the treatment of gastrointestinal lesions. Colorectal ESD outcomes are less reported in the Western literature, and Portuguese data are still very scarce. Our aim was to describe our experience on colorectal ESD regarding its outcomes and safety profile. Methods: We conducted a retrospective evaluation of recorded data on ESDs performed between 2015 and 2020. Only ESDs performed on epithelial neoplastic lesions were selected for further analysis. Results: Of a total of 167 colorectal ESDs, 153 were included. Technical success was achieved in 147 procedures (96%). The lesions were located in the colon (n = 24) and rectum (n = 123). The en bloc resection rate was 92% and 97%, the R0 resection rate was 83% and 82%, and the curative resection rate was 79% and 78% for the colon and the rectum, respectively. The need for a hybrid technique was the only risk factor for piecemeal or R1 resection. We report a perforation rate of 3.4% and a 4.1% rate of delayed bleeding; all the adverse events were manageable endoscopically, without the need of blood transfusions or surgery. Most of the lesions were laterally spreading tumours of the granular mixed type (70%), and 20% of the lesions were malignant (12% submucosal and 8% intramucosal cancer). Conclusion: Our series on colorectal ESD reports a very good efficacy and safety profile. This technique can be applied by endoscopists experienced in ESD.

Download Full-text

Factors limiting the endoscopic submucosal dissection in colorectal tumors

Koloproktologia ◽

10.33878/2073-7556-2021-20-2-50-56 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 20 (2) ◽

pp. 50-56

Author(s):

A. A. Likutov ◽

D. A. Mtvralashvili ◽

M. A. Nagudov ◽

O. M. Yugai ◽

Yu. E. Vaganov ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Risk Factors ◽

Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection ◽

Significant Risk ◽

Resection Margins ◽

R0 Resection ◽

Vascular Pattern ◽

Colorectal Tumors ◽

En Bloc ◽

Submucosal Dissection ◽

Median Size

Aim: to identify the risk factors for conversion of endoscopic submucosal dissection to abdominal surgery.Patients and methods: the prospective cohort study included 405 patients: 166 (40.9%) males and 239 (59.1%) females. The median age was 66 (59; 72) years old; the patients underwent endoscopic submucosal dissection of colorectal epithelial neoplasms.Results: the median size of the removed neoplasms was 3.0 (2.4; 4) cm, tumor was removed en bloc in 324/363 (89.2%) cases; and R0 resection margins were detected in 218/324 (67.3%) cases. Significant risk factors for conversion were: the tumor size ≥ 3.2 cm (OR 2.9, 95% CI 1.2–7.1, p = 0.017), lifting ≤ 3 mm (OR 41, 95% CI 15–105, p = 0.000002) and the tumor vascular pattern IIIa according Sano’s capillary pattern classification (OR 4.0, 95% CI 1.3–11.9, p = 0.013).Conclusion: endoscopic submucosal dissection is a safe way to remove colorectal neoplasms. However, the presence of conversion risk factors can influence the outcome of endoscopic treatment.

Download Full-text

Current research status of endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal neoplasms

Clinical & Investigative Medicine ◽

10.25011/cim.v35i4.17147 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 35 (4) ◽

pp. 158 ◽

Cited By ~ 8

Author(s):

Chen Huang ◽

Ren-Xiang Huang ◽

Ping Xiang ◽

Zheng-Jun Qiu

Keyword(s):

Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection ◽

Colorectal Neoplasms ◽

Local Recurrence Rate ◽

Standard Treatment ◽

En Bloc Resection ◽

Bloc Resection ◽

Review Article ◽

Resection Rate ◽

En Bloc ◽

Submucosal Dissection

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been applied to, and gradually standardized for, early gastric cancers; however, it has not yet been widely used for treatment of colorectal neoplasms. Compared with gastric ESD, the thinner colorectal wall and winding nature of the colon make colorectal ESD a much more difficult operative technique. Despite greater risks of postoperative complications, particularly perforation of the colon, more and more endoscopists are making an effort to study this new technique in terms of its capability of larger neoplastic resection, higher en bloc resection rate and lower local recurrence rate of neoplasms in comparison with other endoscopic treatments. Thus, colorectal ESD may become the standard treatment for early colorectal neoplasms in the future. This review article discusses the current research on endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal neoplasms.

Download Full-text

Pocket-creation method facilitates endoscopic submucosal dissection of colorectal laterally spreading tumors, non-granular type

Endoscopy International Open ◽

10.1055/s-0042-122778 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 05 (02) ◽

pp. E123-E129 ◽

Cited By ~ 38

Author(s):

Hirotsugu Sakamoto ◽

Yoshikazu Hayashi ◽

Yoshimasa Miura ◽

Satoshi Shinozaki ◽

Haruo Takahashi ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection ◽

En Bloc Resection ◽

Bloc Resection ◽

R0 Resection ◽

Resection Rate ◽

En Bloc ◽

Submucosal Dissection ◽

Novel Strategy ◽

Laterally Spreading Tumors ◽

Severe Fibrosis

Abstract Background and study aims The pocket-creation method (PCM) is a novel strategy for endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). The aim of this study is to determine the efficacy of the PCM for colorectal laterally spreading tumors, non-granular type (LST-NG). Patients and methods The records of 126 consecutive patients with colorectal LST-NG who underwent ESD between April 2012 and July 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were divided into PCM (n = 73) and conventional method (CM) (n = 53) groups. Results The en bloc resection rate in the PCM group was significantly higher than in the CM group (100 % [73/73] vs. 92 % [49/53], P = 0.03). The en bloc resection rate with severe fibrosis was higher in the PCM group than in the CM group (100 % [3/3] vs. 60 % [3/5]). The R0 resection rate for the two groups was not statistically significantly different (93 % [68/73] vs. 91 % [48/53], P = 0.74). The perforation rate in the PCM group was lower than in the CM group although not statistically significantly less (0 % 0/73 vs. 4 % 2/53, P = 0.18). For lesions resected en bloc, dissection speed for the PCM group was significantly faster than for the CM group (median [IQR], 19 [13 –24] vs. 14 [10 – 22] mm2/min, P = 0.03). Conclusion ESD using PCM achieves a reliable and safe resection of colorectal LST-NG.

Download Full-text

A138 ENDOSCOPIC SUBMUCOSAL DISSECTION FOR BARRETT’S NEOPLASIA IN A NORTH AMERICAN ACADEMIC CENTRE

Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology ◽

10.1093/jcag/gwab002.136 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 4 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 123-125

Author(s):

D Motomura ◽

R Bechara

Keyword(s):

Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection ◽

Subgroup Analysis ◽

Curative Resection ◽

R0 Resection ◽

Stricture Formation ◽

Resection Rate ◽

En Bloc ◽

Extensive Resection ◽

Submucosal Dissection ◽

Procedural Outcomes

Abstract Background Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is carving out an increasing role in the treatment of Barrett’s associated neoplastic lesions. Though endoscopic therapy is classically performed with endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA), ESD provides the advantage of en-bloc resections, and greater R0 resection rates, which are defined as negative deep and lateral margins on histology. Aims Our aim is to present procedural outcomes and subgroup analysis from one of the largest single centre cohorts of esophageal ESD in North America, and the first from Canada. Methods All patients undergoing esophageal ESD for Barrett’s neoplasia between Oct 2016 and June 2020 at a single tertiary care centre in Canada were included in the cohort. Demographic, procedural data and lesion characteristics are presented. Subgroup analysis was performed on patients who underwent extensive resection (≥75% of esophageal circumference) and patients who developed strictures. Statistical analysis included chi square testing on categorical variables and unpaired t-test for continuous variables. Binomial univariable logistic regression was performed to investigate factors associated with stricture formation. Results Thirty-four patients underwent esophageal ESD for Barrett’s associated neoplasia during the study period. The median lesion diameter was 5.7 cm (IQR 4.2 -7.5) and median procedure time 129 min (IQR 66–200). The en-bloc resection rate was 97%, and the R0 resection rate was 91%. Curative resection was achieved in 82% of patients. Upstaging from the pre-resection biopsy to post-ESD histology occurred in 59% of cases. Two adverse events occurred (1 delayed bleed, 1 aspiration event). There were no perforations. Procedural outcomes were similar between patients with extensive resections, but patients with ≥75% circumferential resection developed more strictures (65% vs 13%, p=0.001). Stricture formation was associated with extensive resection (OR 15.4, 95%CI[2.50 - 95.01]) and longer lesion diameter (OR 1.73, 95%CI [1.11 - 2.70]). Conclusions Our experience with ESD for Barrett’s related neoplasia shows excellent en-bloc and R0 resection rate, and provides more accurate histological specimens. Curative resection is possible in the vast majority of cases, including those with extensive resections. Further investigation into stricture prophylaxis will be useful as larger resections are attempted. Funding Agencies None

Download Full-text

Prevention and Management of Complications and Education in Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection

Journal of Clinical Medicine ◽

10.3390/jcm10112511 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 10 (11) ◽

pp. 2511

Author(s):

Yoshitsugu Misumi ◽

Kouichi Nonaka

Keyword(s):

Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection ◽

Endoscopic Mucosal Resection ◽

Endoscopic Resection ◽

En Bloc Resection ◽

Bloc Resection ◽

Resection Rate ◽

En Bloc ◽

Educational Methods ◽

Submucosal Dissection ◽

Management Of Complications

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is considered superior to endoscopic mucosal resection as an endoscopic resection because of its higher en bloc resection rate, but it is more difficult to perform. As ESD techniques have become more common, and the range of treatment by ESD has expanded, the number of possible complications has also increased, and endoscopists need to manage them. In this report, we will review the management of critical complications, such as hemorrhage, perforation, and stenosis, and we will also discuss educational methods for acquiring and improving ESD skills.

Download Full-text