Endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection vs conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection for large colorectal neoplasms: a single-centre retrospective study.

Abstract

Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is still not widely used due to its technical difficulty and the risk of complications. Several techniques, such as traction techniques, pocket techniques and others, have been proposed to facilitate it. One modified pocket technique especially suitable for large lesions is endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD). The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ESTD and compare ESTD to the conventional ESD (CESD) for treating large colorectal lesions. The charts of consecutive patients referred to the Arcispedale Santa Maria Nuova (Reggio Emilia, Italy) for colorectal ESD between January 2014 and February 2021 for colorectal neoplasms > 40mm were retrospectively analysed. The primary outcome of the study was the en bloc resection rate. Secondary outcomes were complete and curative resection rates, procedure speed, the adverse events rate and the recurrence rate. There were 59 patients (M:F ratio 29:30, median age 70years [range 50-93years]). Of 59 colorectal lesions > 40mm, 25 were removed by ESTD and 34 by CESD. The en bloc resection rate was 100% in both groups and the complete resection rate was similar (ESTD 92% vs CESD 97.1%, p = 0.569), while the curative resection rate was higher in the CESD group, but not significantly (94.1% vs 76%, p = 0.061). Procedure speed was significantly faster with ESTD (22 vs 17 mm2/min, p = 0.045), and the overall incidence of adverse events was low (6.8%). Eight patients were referred to surgery due to non-curative resection. During follow-up, no recurrence was observed in either treatment group. ESTD achieves a very high en bloc resection rate and is faster than CESD.