UNDERWATER ENDOSCOPIC MUCOSAL RESECTION FOR SMALL RECTAL NEUROENDOCRINE TUMORS

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: A common site of neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) is the rectum. The technique most often used is endoscopic mucosal resection with saline injection. However, deep margins are often difficult to obtain because submucosal invasion is common. Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) is a technique in which the bowel lumen is filled with water rather than air, precluding the need for submucosal lifting. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of UEMR for removing small rectal neuroendocrine tumors (rNETs). METHODS: Retrospective study with patients who underwent UEMR in two centers. UEMR was performed using a standard colonoscope. No submucosal injection was performed. Board-certified pathologists conducted histopathologic assessment. RESULTS: UEMR for small rNET was performed on 11 patients (nine female) with a mean age of 55.8 years and 11 lesions (mean size 7 mm, range 3-12 mm). There were 9 (81%) patients with G1 rNET and two patients with G2, and all tumors invaded the submucosa with only one restricted to the mucosa. None case showed vascular or perineural invasion. All lesions were removed en bloc. Nine (81%) resections had free margins. Two patients had deep margin involvement; one had negative biopsies via endoscopic surveillance, and the other was lost to follow-up. No perforations or delayed bleeding occurred. CONCLUSION: UEMR appeared to be an effective and safe alternative for treatment of small rNETs without adverse events and with high en bloc and R0 resection rates. Further prospective studies are needed to compare available endoscopic interventions and to elucidate the most appropriate endoscopic technique for resection of rNETs.

Download Full-text

Anchoring the snare tip is a feasible endoscopic mucosal resection method for small rectal neuroendocrine tumors

Scientific Reports ◽

10.1038/s41598-021-92462-y ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Jeongseok Kim ◽

Jisup Kim ◽

Eun Hye Oh ◽

Nam Seok Ham ◽

Sung Wook Hwang ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Endoscopic Mucosal Resection ◽

Neuroendocrine Tumors ◽

Similar Efficacy ◽

En Bloc Resection ◽

Lesion Size ◽

Bloc Resection ◽

En Bloc ◽

Delayed Bleeding ◽

Mucosal Resection ◽

The Mean

AbstractSmall rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) can be treated using cap-assisted endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR-C), which requires additional effort to apply a dedicated cap and snare. We aimed to evaluate the feasibility of a simpler modified endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) technique, so-called anchored snare-tip EMR (ASEMR), for the treatment of small rectal NETs, comparing it with EMR-C. We retrospectively evaluated 45 ASEMR and 41 EMR-C procedures attempted on small suspected or established rectal NETs between July 2015 and May 2020. The mean (SD) lesion size was 5.4 (2.2) mm and 5.2 (1.7) mm in the ASEMR and EMR-C groups, respectively (p = 0.558). The en bloc resection rates of suspected or established rectal NETs were 95.6% (43/45) and 100%, respectively (p = 0.271). The rates of histologic complete resection of rectal NETs were 94.1% (32/34) and 88.2% (30/34), respectively (p = 0.673). The mean procedure time was significantly shorter in the ASEMR group than in the EMR-C group (3.12 [1.97] vs. 4.13 [1.59] min, p = 0.024). Delayed bleeding occurred in 6.7% (3/45) and 2.4% (1/41) of patients, respectively (p = 0.618). In conclusion, ASEMR was less time-consuming than EMR-C, and showed similar efficacy and safety profiles. ASEMR is a feasible treatment option for small rectal NETs.

Download Full-text

Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection: a new endoscopic method for resection of rectal neuroendocrine tumor grade 1 (carcinoid) ≤ 10 mm in diameter

Endoscopy International Open ◽

10.1055/s-0043-123467 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 06 (01) ◽

pp. E111-E114 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

Takeshi Yamashina ◽

Takehiko Tumura ◽

Takanori Maruo ◽

Takayuki Matsumae ◽

Hiroyuki Yoshida ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Endoscopic Mucosal Resection ◽

Tumor Grade ◽

En Bloc Resection ◽

Multicenter Trial ◽

R0 Resection ◽

En Bloc ◽

Delayed Bleeding ◽

Endoscopic Techniques ◽

Mucosal Resection ◽

Endoscopic Method

Abstract Background and study aims Rectal neuroendocrine tumors grade 1 (NET G1; carcinoid) ≤ 10 mm in diameter often extend into the submucosa, making their complete histological resection difficult using endoscopic techniques. Endoscopic submucosal resection with a ligation device (ESMR-L) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) are commonly used to overcome these difficulties. We also previously reported that underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) could facilitate resection of rectal NET G1. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of UEMR for removing rectal NET G1 ≤ 10 mm in diameter. 6 consecutive patients with rectal NET G1 ≤ 10 mm in diameter underwent UEMR at our hospital. The rate of en bloc resection was 100 %, and the rate of R0 resection was 83 %. The median procedure time was 8 min (range 5 – 12 min). No perforations or delayed bleeding occurred in this study. In conclusion, UEMR allows the safe and reliable resection of rectal NET G1 ≤ 10 mm in diameter with comparable results to ESMR-L or ESD, including high en bloc and R0 resection rates with no increase in significant adverse events. A multicenter trial is required to confirm the validity of the present results.

Download Full-text

Endoscopic submucosal dissection with double clip and rubber band traction for residual or locally recurrent colonic lesions after previous endoscopic mucosal resection

Endoscopy ◽

10.1055/a-1104-5210 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 52 (05) ◽

pp. 383-388 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Julien Faller ◽

Jérémie Jacques ◽

Borathchakra Oung ◽

Romain Legros ◽

Jérôme Rivory ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection ◽

Endoscopic Mucosal Resection ◽

Rubber Band ◽

R0 Resection ◽

En Bloc ◽

Delayed Bleeding ◽

Mucosal Resection ◽

Submucosal Dissection ◽

Additional Surgery ◽

Locally Recurrent

Abstract Background Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) of residual or locally recurrent (RLR) colonic lesions after previous endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is an attractive but challenging technique. The present study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of ESD with double clip and rubber band traction (DCT-ESD) of RLR colonic lesions. Methods We retrospectively analyzed all consecutive DCT-ESD procedures for RLR colonic lesions (rectum excluded) performed in two French centers. The frequency of en bloc and R0 resections, procedure speed, additional surgery, and complications were evaluated. R0 resection was also used to investigate the learning curve. Results Among the 53 resections, 49 (92.5 %) were performed en bloc and 42 (79.2 %) achieved R0. The median procedure speed was 21 mm2/min. There were four (7.5 %) intraoperative perforations and one delayed bleeding; these were successfully treated endoscopically. There was no salvage surgery for complications. The R0 rate increased from 16/26 (61.5 %) for the first 26 procedures to 26/27 (96.3 %, P = 0.002) for the last 27 procedures. Conclusions DCT-ESD appears to be a safe and effective treatment for RLR colonic lesions after EMR.

Download Full-text

Clinical Practice of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Early Colorectal Neoplasms by a Colonoscopist with Limited Gastric Experience

Gastroenterology Research and Practice ◽

10.1155/2013/262171 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 2013 ◽

pp. 1-5 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Wen-Hsin Hsu ◽

Meng-Shun Sun ◽

Hoi-Wan Lo ◽

Ching-Yang Tsai ◽

Yu-Jou Tsai

Keyword(s):

Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection ◽

Colorectal Neoplasms ◽

R0 Resection ◽

En Bloc ◽

Delayed Bleeding ◽

Submucosal Dissection ◽

Limited Experience ◽

Mean Size ◽

Delayed Perforation ◽

The Mean

Objectives. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for early colorectal neoplasms is regarded as a difficult technique and should commence after receiving the experiences of ESD in the stomach. The implementation of colorectal ESD in countries where early gastric cancer is uncommon might therefore be difficult. The aim is to delineate the feasibility and the learning curve of colorectal ESD performed by a colonoscopist with limited experience of gastric ESD.Methods. The first fifty cases of colorectal ESD, which were performed by a single colonoscopist between July 2010 and April 2013, were enrolled.Results. The mean of age was 64 (±9.204) years with mean size of neoplasm at 33 (±12.63) mm. The mean of procedure time was 70.5 (±48.9) min. The rates ofen blocresection, R0 resection, and curative resection were 86%, 86%, and 82%, respectively. Three patients had immediate perforation, but no patient developed delayed perforation or delayed bleeding.Conclusion. Our result disclosed that it is feasible for colorectal ESD to be performed by a colonoscopist with little experience of gastric ESD through satisfactory training and adequate case selection.

Download Full-text

The efficacy and safety of underwater endoscopic mucosal resection for ≥10-mm colorectal polyps: systematic review and meta-analysis

Endoscopy ◽

10.1055/a-1234-8918 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

De-feng Li ◽

Ming-Guang Lai ◽

Mei-feng Yang ◽

Zhi-yuan Zou ◽

Jing Xu ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Endoscopic Mucosal Resection ◽

En Bloc Resection ◽

Bloc Resection ◽

Colorectal Polyps ◽

Complete Resection ◽

R0 Resection ◽

Efficacy And Safety ◽

Resection Rate ◽

En Bloc ◽

Mucosal Resection

Abstract Background Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) is a promising strategy for nonpedunculated colorectal polyp removal. However, the efficacy and safety of the technique for the treatment of ≥ 10-mm colorectal polyps remain unclear. We aimed to comprehensively assess the efficacy and safety of UEMR for polyps sized 10–19 mm and ≥ 20 mm. Methods PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched for relevant articles from January 2012 to November 2019. Primary outcomes were the rates of adverse events and residual polyps. Secondary outcomes were the complete resection, en bloc resection, and R0 resection rates. Results 18 articles including 1142 polyps from 1093 patients met our inclusion criteria. The overall adverse event and residual polyp rates were slightly lower for UEMR when removing colorectal polyps of 10–19 mm vs. ≥ 20 mm (3.5 % vs. 4.3 % and 1.2 % vs. 2.6 %, respectively). The UEMR-related complete resection rate was slightly higher for colorectal polyps of 10–19 mm vs. ≥ 20 mm (97.9 % vs. 92.0 %). However, the en bloc and R0 resection rates were dramatically higher for UEMR removal of polyps of 10–19 mm vs. ≥ 20 mm (83.4 % vs. 36.1 % and 73.0 % vs. 40.0 %, respectively). In addition, univariate meta-regression revealed that polyp size was an independent predictor for complete resection rate (P = 0.03) and en bloc resection (P = 0.01). Conclusions UEMR was an effective and safe technique for the removal of ≥ 10-mm nonpedunculated colorectal polyps. However, UEMR exhibited low en bloc and R0 resection rates for the treatment of ≥ 20-mm polyps.

Download Full-text

Safety of Endoscopic Mucosal Resection Using a Bipolar Snare for Superficial Nonampullary Duodenal Epithelial Tumors and the Predictive Factors of Piecemeal Resection

Digestion ◽

10.1159/000510601 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 1-9

Author(s):

Masafumi Yamamura ◽

Yasuaki Nagami ◽

Taishi Sakai ◽

Hirotsugu Maruyama ◽

Masaki Ominami ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Adverse Events ◽

Endoscopic Mucosal Resection ◽

R0 Resection ◽

En Bloc ◽

Noninvasive Treatment ◽

Submucosal Injection ◽

Mucosal Resection ◽

Epithelial Tumors ◽

Bipolar Snare ◽

Piecemeal Resection

Introduction: Endoscopic mucosal resection for small superficial nonampullary duodenal epithelial tumors is a noninvasive treatment; however, perforations can occur. Bipolar snares can reduce the risk of perforation due to small tissue damage. Currently, only few studies have reported endoscopic mucosal resection for small superficial nonampullary duodenal epithelial tumors using a bipolar snare and the effect of preoperative findings. Objective: To investigate (1) resectability and adverse events of endoscopic mucosal resection using a bipolar snare for small superficial nonampullary duodenal epithelial tumors and (2) the predictions of piecemeal resection. Methods: Between 2007 and 2017, 89 patients with 107 lesions underwent endoscopic mucosal resection using a bipolar snare. Among them, 88 lesions of 77 patients were evaluated. The primary outcome was the incidence of en bloc resection and R0 resection and adverse events. Risk factors associated with piecemeal resection, including preoperative lesion findings, were also examined. Results: The incidence rates of en bloc and R0 resections were 85.2 and 48.9%, respectively. Neither intraoperative or delayed perforations nor procedure-related mortality was noted. The nonlifting sign after submucosal injection was associated with an increase in piecemeal resection (odds ratio: 20.3, 95% confidence interval: 2.53–162; p = 0.005). Conclusion: Endoscopic resection for small superficial nonampullary duodenal epithelial tumors can cause perforation; however, endoscopic mucosal resection using a bipolar snare can be a safe treatment option as it does not cause perforations. The nonlifting sign after submucosal injection is a predictive factor for piecemeal resection.

Download Full-text

Endoscopic resection using an over-the-scope clip for duodenal neuroendocrine tumors

Endoscopy International Open ◽

10.1055/a-1374-6141 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 09 (05) ◽

pp. E659-E666

Author(s):

Tomoaki Tashima ◽

Shomei Ryozawa ◽

Yuki Tanisaka ◽

Akashi Fujita ◽

Kazuya Miyaguchi ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Neuroendocrine Tumors ◽

Endoscopic Resection ◽

Resected Specimen ◽

R0 Resection ◽

En Bloc ◽

Delayed Bleeding ◽

Over The Scope Clip ◽

Duodenal Neuroendocrine Tumors ◽

Experienced Endoscopist

Abstract Background and study aims Endoscopic resection of duodenal neuroendocrine tumors (DNETs) remains controversial, and its indications are still unclear. This study aimed to evaluate short-term outcomes of a newly developed endoscopic muscularis resection (EMR) method that utilizes an over-the-scope clip (OTSC), termed EMRO, for treating DNETs. Patients and methods In total, 13 consecutive patients with 14 small (≤ 10 mm) DNETs who underwent EMRO from September 2017 to March 2020 were retrospectively enrolled. EMRO was performed by a single experienced endoscopist. Patients’ characteristics and treatment outcomes were assessed. Results The En bloc and R0 resection rates were 100 % (14/14) and 92.9 % (13/14), respectively. The median pathological resected specimen size was 10 mm, with a median pathological resected tumor size of 6 mm. During the EMRO procedure, there was no occurrence of misplacement of the OTSC to the target lesion. With respect to the pathological resection depth, nine cases (64.3 %) and five cases (35.7 %) were categorized as deep submucosal resection and muscularis resection, respectively, whereas no case was categorized as full-thickness resection. There were no intraoperative or delayed perforations. However, delayed bleeding occurred in two cases. At a median follow-up of 12 months (range 7–36) after EMRO, there was no incidence of local recurrence. At the first follow-up endoscopy performed at 6 months after EMRO, the OTSC was retained in place in two of 14 DNETs (14.3 %). Conclusions EMRO can be performed safely, by an experienced endoscopist, for small (≤ 10 mm) DNETs.

Download Full-text

Underwater versus conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for colorectal lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Endoscopy International Open ◽

10.1055/a-1287-9621 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 08 (12) ◽

pp. E1884-E1894

Author(s):

Rajat Garg ◽

Amandeep Singh ◽

Babu P. Mohan ◽

Gautam Mankaney ◽

Miguel Regueiro ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Endoscopic Mucosal Resection ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

En Bloc Resection ◽

Bloc Resection ◽

Colorectal Polyps ◽

Incomplete Resection ◽

En Bloc ◽

Delayed Bleeding ◽

Mucosal Resection

Abstract Background and study aims Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) for colorectal polyps has been reported to have good outcomes in recent studies. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the effectiveness and safety of UEMR to conventional EMR (CEMR). Methods A comprehensive search of multiple databases (through May 2020) was performed to identify studies that reported outcome of UEMR and CEMR for colorectal lesions. Outcomes assessed included incomplete resection, rate of recurrence, en bloc resection, adverse events (AEs) for UEMR and CEMR. Results A total of 1,651 patients with 1,704 polyps were included from nine studies. There was a significantly lower rate of incomplete resection (odds ratio [OR]: 0.19 (95 % confidence interval (CI), 0.05–0.78, P = 0.02) and polyp recurrence (OR: 0.41, 95 % CI, 0.24–0.72, P = 0.002) after UEMR. Compared to CEMR, rates overall complications (relative risk [RR]: 0.66 (95 % CI, 0.48–0.90) (P = 0.008), and intra-procedural bleeding (RR: 0.59, 95 % CI, 0.41–0.84, P = 0.004) were significantly lower with UEMR. The recurrence rate was also lower for large non-pedunculated polyps ≥ 10 mm (OR 0.24, 95 % CI, 0.10–0.57, P = 0.001) and ≥ 20 mm (OR 0.14, 95 % CI, 0.02–0.72, P = 0.01). The rates of en bloc resection, delayed bleeding, perforation and post-polypectomy syndrome were similar in both groups (P > 0.05). Conclusions In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we found that UEMR is more effective and safer than CEMR with lower rates of recurrence and AEs. UEMR use should be encouraged over CEMR.

Download Full-text