Multicenter prospective in vivo study of an endocytoscope system (ECS) for superficial esophageal cancer

Background Endocytoscope systems (ECS) can visualize cellular nuclei of the mucosa of the gastrointestinal tract and are predicted to provide real-time microscopic diagnosis. However, their practical diagnostic performance remains unclear. Therefore, we conducted a multicenter prospective study to evaluate the visualization of superficial esophageal neoplasm in vivo using an ECS, and its diagnostic capability. Methods The study target was histologically confirmed squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia (HGIN). An integrated ECS was used to obtain ECS images. In each patient, three ECS images of cancerous and corresponding noncancerous regions were selected for evaluation. A pathological review board of five certified pathologists made the final diagnosis of the images. The primary endpoint was the sensitivity of ECS diagnosis by pathologists. Results ECS images of 68 patients were assessed: 42 lesions were mucosal SCC, 13 were submucosal SCC, and 13 were HGIN. The rate of assessable images was 96% (95% CI 87.6–99.1). The sensitivity of ECS diagnosis by pathologists was 88% (95% CI 77.2–94.5). Conclusions ECS can provide high-quality images of cancerous lesions and a high diagnostic accuracy by pathologists, and could be useful for real-time endoscopic histological diagnosis of SCC and HGIN. Trial registration The UMIN Clinical Trials Registry Identification Number: 000004218

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

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.

Metachronous Cancer Occurring after Endoscopic Resection of Superficial Esophageal Cancer

Esophageal cancer has a relatively high prevalence of local recurrence, which is associated with a poor prognosis. Superficial esophageal cancer has shown a metachronous recurrence rate of 2.6~35.8% with the cumulative overall 3-year and 5-year metachronous cancer incidence being 9.9~15.5% and 20.6~24.5%, respectively. In addition to recurrences in the remnant esophagus, second metachronous primary tumors have been reported to arise in 4.0~37.4% of esophageal cancer survivors. The second primary cancers arising after a diagnosis of esophageal cancer are most commonly detected in the head and neck area, followed by the lungs and stomach. The field cancerization theory explains the high prevalence of head and neck cancer among esophageal cancer patients. The reported risk factors for metachronous esophageal recurrences include scattered-type Lugol staining, circumferential endoscopic resection of the primary lesion, heavy alcohol use, smoking, inactive aldehyde dehydrogenase-2 genes, alcohol dehydrogenase-1B genes, and young age at diagnosis of the primary cancer. The risk factors for metachronous second primary tumors include heavy alcohol use, smoking, and a previous history of radiation therapy. Consequently, periodic follow-up endoscopy using narrow-band imaging is essential for the screening of metachronous esophageal cancers and second primary tumors after endoscopic resection for superficial esophageal cancer.

61 THE 5-YEAR RESULTS FOR ENDOSCOPIC TREATMENT OF SUPERFICIAL ESOPHAGEAL CANCER AT A NORWEGIAN UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL

Superficial esophageal cancer (HGD = high grade dysplasia, T1a and T1b with no evidence of spread) accounts for about 20 % of all esophageal cancers. Traditionally, radical esophagectomy, with a significant degree of comorbidity has been the mainstay of treatment. Now most international guidelines, including the ESGE (European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy) recommends endoscopic treatment as the first choice of treatment. The aim of this abstract was to present our data from 2014-2018. Methods From 2014 to 2018 (and ongoing) we have registered all patients endoscopically treated for LGD (low grade dysplasia) and superficial esophageal cancer, including some cases with T1b. The patient material, including treatment modality, histology, time of follow-up, the need for surgery and its outcome were registered. The majority of follow-ups took place at our hospital. Data was also retrieved from cases of late follow-up at other hospitals. Results 86 patients were endoscopically treated. The histology revealed LGD (24%), HGD (50%) and adenocarcinoma (21%). 15% were treated for a T1a tumor, 7% for T1b. 29% underwent endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), 29% radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and 40% had both. The endoscopic treatment resulted in complete resolution of dysplasia in 64%, downstaging in 11%, whilst progression occurred in 11%. Five patients were operated for initial T1b or progression into T1b. The operation specimen showed no residual tumor in 3/5 patients. There were no serious complications. 90-days mortality was 1%. Conclusion Endoscopic treatment is a safe and efficient treatment option for superficial esophageal cancer. Few patients needed surgery and there was few and exclusively mild complications. This treatment modality will spare many patients for esophageal surgery with its associated high level of comorbidity.