Hybrid Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection Research Articles

Hybrid Versus Conventional Colorectal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial (Short-Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection).

Hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection (H-ESD), which utilizes ESD knife along with snare-based resection, has been developed to overcome the technical complexity of conventional ESD (C-ESD). The aim of this study was to compare the therapeutic outcomes of H-ESD vs C-ESD for nonpedunculated colorectal lesions ≥20 mm in size. We conducted a multicenter randomized controlled trial to compare H-ESD and C-ESD (Short-ESD trial). Patients with colorectal lesions between 20 and 50 mm in size were randomly assigned (1:1) to H-ESD or C-ESD. Primary outcome was procedure time/speed. Secondary outcomes were en bloc and complete (R0) resection rates and adverse event rates. A total of 89 patients (median age 63 years; 49.3% women) with the median polyp size of 30 mm underwent H-ESD (n = 40) and C-ESD (n = 49). The mean procedure time of H-ESD was significantly shorter than that of C-ESD (41.1 ± 16.3 vs 54.3 ± 28.2 minutes; P = 0.007). The en bloc and R0 resection rates trended lower in the H-ESD vs C-ESD groups (77.5% vs 87.8%; P = 0.26% and 72.5% vs 79.6%; P = 0.46) without reaching statistical significance. Adverse event rate was similar between H-ESD and C-ESD (10% vs 8.2%; P = 1.00). Both H-ESD and C-ESD were safe and effective for resection of large colorectal lesions. H-ESD was associated with a shorter procedure time. H-ESD may represent a viable alternative to C-ESD, with the main advantage being easy applicability of a snare-based technique for colorectal lesions. Future studies are needed to further define the most suitable lesions for H-ESD, as to optimize efficiency and safety without compromising resection outcomes. ClinicaTrials.gov NCT NCT05347446.

Predictors of En Bloc, R0 Resection, and Postprocedural Complications After Advanced Endoscopic Resections for Colorectal Neoplasms: Results of 1213 Procedures.

Advanced endoscopic resection techniques are used to treat colorectal neoplasms that are not amenable to conventional colonoscopic resection. Literature regarding the predictors of the outcomes of advanced endoscopic resections, especially from a colorectal surgical unit, is limited. To determine the predictors of short-term and long-term outcomes after advanced endoscopic resections. Retrospective case series. Tertiary care center. Patients who underwent advanced endoscopic resections for colorectal neoplasms from November 2011 to August 2022. Endoscopic mucosal resection, endoscopic submucosal dissection, hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection, and combined endoscopic laparoscopic surgery. Predictors of en bloc and R0 resection, bleeding, and perforation were determined using univariable and multivariable logistic regression models. Cox regression models were used to determine the predictors of tumor recurrence. A total of 1213 colorectal lesions from 1047 patients were resected (median age 66 [interquartile range, 58-72] years, 484 women [46.2%], median BMI 28.6 [interquartile range, 24.8-32.6]). Most neoplasms were in the proximal colon (898; 74%). The median lesion size was 30 (interquartile range, 20-40; range, 0-120) mm. Nine hundred eleven lesions (75.1%) underwent previous interventions. The most common Paris and Kudo classifications were 0 to IIa flat elevation (444; 36.6%) and IIIs (301; 24.8%), respectively. En bloc and R0 resection rates were 56.6% and 54.3%, respectively. Smaller lesions, rectal location, and procedure type (endoscopic submucosal dissection) were associated with significantly higher en bloc and R0 resection rates. Bleeding and perforation rates were 5% and 6.6%, respectively. Increased age was a predictor for bleeding (OR 1.06; 95% CI, 1.03-1.09; p < 0.0001). Lesion size was a predictor for perforation (OR 1.02; 95% CI, 1.00-1.03; p = 0.03). The tumor recurrence rate was 6.6%. En bloc (HR 1.41; 95% CI, 1.05-1.93; p = 0.02) and R0 resection (HR 1.49; 95% CI, 1.11-2.06; p = 0.008) were associated with decreased recurrence risk. Single-center, retrospective study. Outcomes of advanced endoscopic resections can be predicted by patient-related and lesion-related characteristics. See Video Abstract . ANTECEDENTES:Las técnicas avanzadas de resección endoscópica se utilizan para el tratamiento de neoplasias colorrectales que no son susceptibles de resección colonoscópica convencional. La literatura sobre los predictores de los resultados de las resecciones endoscópicas avanzadas, especialmente en una unidad de cirugía colorrectal, es limitada.OBJETIVO:Determinar los predictores de resultados a corto y largo plazo después de resecciones endoscópicas avanzadas.DISEÑO:Serie de casos retrospectivos.LUGAR:Centro de tercer nivel de atención.PACIENTES:Pacientes sometidos a resecciones endoscópicas avanzadas por neoplasias colorrectales desde noviembre de 2011 hasta agosto de 2022.INTERVENCIÓNES:Resección endoscópica de la mucosa, disección endoscópica submucosa (ESD), ESD híbrida, cirugía laparoscópica endoscópica combinada.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Los predictores de resección en bloque y R0, sangrado y perforación se determinaron mediante modelos de regresión logística univariables y multivariables. Se utilizaron modelos de regresión de Cox para determinar los predictores de recurrencia del tumor.RESULTADOS:Se resecaron 1.213 lesiones colorrectales en 1.047 pacientes [edad media 66 (58-72) años, 484 (46,2%) mujeres, índice de masa corporal medio 28,6 (24,8-32,6) kg/m 2 ]. La mayoría de las neoplasias se encontraban en el colon proximal (898, 74%). El tamaño medio de la lesión fue de 30mm (RIC: 20-40, rango: 0-120). 911 (75,1%) lesiones tenían intervenciones previas. Las clasificaciones de París y Kudo más comunes fueron 0-IIa elevación plana (444, 36,6%) y III (301, 24,8%), respectivamente. Las tasas de resección en bloque y R0 fueron del 56,6% y 54,3%, respectivamente. Las lesiones más pequeñas, la ubicación rectal y el tipo de procedimiento (ESD) se asociaron con tasas de resección en bloque y R0 significativamente más altas. Las tasas de sangrado y perforación fueron del 5% y 6,6%, respectivamente. La edad avanzada [1,06 (1,03-1,09), p < 0,0001] fue un predictor de sangrado. El tamaño de la lesión [1,02 (1,00-1,03), p = 0,03] fue un predictor de perforación. La tasa de recurrencia del tumor fue del 6,6%. En bloque [HR 1,41 (IC 95% 1,05-1,93), p = 0,02] y la resección R0 [HR 1,49 (IC 95% 1,11-2,06), p = 0,008] se asociaron con un menor riesgo de recurrencia.LIMITACIONES:Estudio unicéntrico, retrospectivo.CONCLUSIONES:Los resultados de las resecciones endoscópicas avanzadas pueden predecirse según las características del paciente y de la lesión. (Traducción-Dr. Xavier Delgadillo ).

Safe and effective hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection with ALL IN ONE snare in porcine gastric model (with video)

This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficiency of hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection (H-ESD) using a newly developed ALL IN ONE (AIO) snare. This was a matched control study in a porcine model. Five paired simulated stomach lesions 2–2.5 cm in size were removed by H-ESD using an AIO snare or conventional ESD (C-ESD) using an endoscopic knife. The outcomes of the two procedures were compared, including en-bloc resection rates, procedure times, intraprocedural bleeding volumes, muscular injuries, perforations, thicknesses of the submucosal layer in resected specimens, and stomach defects. All simulated lesions were resected en-bloc. Specimens resected by H-ESD and C-ESD were similar in size (7.68 ± 2.92 vs. 8.42 ± 2.42 cm2; P = 0.676). H-ESD required a significantly shorter procedure time (13.39 ± 3.78 vs. 25.99 ± 4.52 min; P = 0.031) and submucosal dissection time (3.99 ± 1.73 vs. 13.1 ± 4.58 min; P = 0.003) versus C-ESD; H-ESD also yielded a faster dissection speed (241.37 ± 156.84 vs. 68.56 ± 28.53 mm2/min; P = 0.042) and caused fewer intraprocedural bleeding events (0.40 ± 0.55 vs. 3.40 ± 1.95 times/per lesion; P = 0.016) than C-ESD. The thicknesses of the submucosal layer of the resected specimen (1190.98 ± 134.07 vs. 1055.90 ± 151.76 μm; P = 0.174) and the residual submucosal layer of the stomach defect (1607.94 ± 1026.74 vs. 985.98 ± 445.58 μm; P = 0.249) were similar with both procedures. The AIO snare is a safe and effective device for H-ESD and improves the treatment outcomes of gastric lesions by shortening the procedure time.

Interventional inflammatory bowel disease: current and future practice.

Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) are associated with several well described neoplastic and structural complications. Increasing disease prevalence, healthcare barriers, and medication refractory phenotypes contribute to ongoing complications despite significant strides in medical management. Enhancements in endoscopic technology and techniques have allowed a minimally invasive approach for what has historically required surgery. In this article, we review the current and future landscape of endoscopic IBD intervention. Endoscopic resection is the first line for managing conventional and complex colitis-associated dysplasia. Evidence supporting endoscopic submucosal dissection is mounting, yet there is a paucity of studies evaluating modified endoscopic mucosal resection techniques or hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection. We also have more clarity in how best to approach fibrostenotic disease, as we learn how to position endoscopic stricturotomy and stenting, relative to balloon dilation. Finally, applications in managing penetrating and postsurgical complications have been described, but still require further study. While important knowledge gaps still exist, the application of endoscopic therapies in IBD is more refined, especially within the management of colitis-associated dysplasia and strictures. The indications for endoscopy in perianal disease and other penetrating manifestations of Crohn's disease presents exciting opportunities for growth.

Characteristics of factors contributing to follow-up for suspected delayed bleeding after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection

Background and AimsDelayed bleeding (DB) is a major adverse event associated with colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) that sometimes causes difficulties in making decisions regarding endoscopic hemostasis. This study identified the factors that contribute to follow-up without endoscopic hemostasis when DB is suspected after colorectal ESD. MethodsIn total, 583 patients (603 tumors) who underwent ESD or hybrid ESD for colorectal tumors at Chiba University Hospital between June 2009 and January 2022 were retrospectively registered. Of these, 141 cases (141 tumors) with DB; with hematochezia or hemoglobin decrease ≥2 g/dL after colorectal ESD were analyzed. The DB group was divided into the Hemostasis group (H group; endoscopic hemostasis performed) and no-Hemostasis group (no-H group; no endoscopy performed, or endoscopy performed but no hemostasis performed after hematochezia or hemoglobin decrease). Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to assess the factors contributing to follow-up. ResultsThirty-one patients with 31 tumors were categorized into the H group, while 110 patients with 110 tumors were in the no-H group. Multivariate regression analysis revealed that date from ESD to first hematochezia ≤Day 3 (odds ratio [OR] 4.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.44–14.33; p = 0.010) and bleeding duration ≤1 day (OR 3.35, 95% CI 1.35–8.34; p = 0.009) contributed to follow-up. ConclusionsIn cases of DB after colorectal ESD, a bleeding duration ≤1 day or date from ESD to first hematochezia ≤Day 3 may contribute to follow-up observation without endoscopic hemostasis.

Planned Hybrid Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection as Alternative for Colorectal Neoplasms: A Propensity Score-Matched Study.

Hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection (H-ESD), a modified ESD with a snare, has become increasingly utilized to overcome the limitations of conventional ESD (C-ESD). This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of Planned H-ESD and C-ESD for colorectal lesions. Propensity score matching was performed to control for confounding variables in this retrospective study. Outcomes included en bloc resection and complete resection (R0) rates, procedure time, adverse event rates, and local recurrence rate. 1286 lesions were enrolled in the study. After matching, 263 lesions were assigned to each group. The Planned H-ESD group has lower en bloc rate but similar R0 resection rate compared to the C-ESD group (90.9% vs 98.1%, P = 0.001; 77.2% vs 77.9%, P = 0.917). The median procedure time was shorter in the Planned H-ESD group (27.0 min vs 35.0 min, P = 0.001). There were no significant differences in adverse events rates or local recurrence rate. Subgroup analysis based on lesion size revealed that a significantly lower en bloc resection rate in the Planned H-ESD group compared to the C-ESD group for lesions ≥ 40mm (71.0% vs 94.3%, P = 0.027), but there was no significant difference for lesions < 40mm. The Planned H-ESD has a lower en bloc resection rate but a similar R0 resection rate, adverse event rates, local recurrence rate, and shorter procedure duration. Compared to C-ESD, Planned H-ESD presents advantages for managing colorectal neoplasms below 40mm.

Hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection as a salvage option for difficult colorectal conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection.

When total submucosal dissection is difficult to achieve during conventional colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (C-ESD), the lesion can be resected by final snaring through salvage hybrid ESD (SH-ESD). This study aimed to examine the outcomes of SH-ESD and identify its indications that could achieve en bloc resection. We recruited 1039 consecutive patients with colorectal lesions that underwent ESD at Hiroshima University Hospital between January 2015 and December 2020. C-ESD was attempted thoroughly in 924 lesions (C-ESD group, including 9 lesions in which ESD was discontinued), and SH-ESD was performed owing to some difficulties in 115 lesions (SH-ESD group). Risk factors for incomplete resection by SH-ESD and ESD discontinuation were evaluated using multivariate analysis. The outcomes were compared between cases with remaining undissected submucosa of < 20mm in diameter in the SH-ESD and C-ESD groups, using propensity score matching. Multivariate analysis revealed that a procedure time > 80min and remaining undissected submucosa ≥ 20mm in diameter were significant risk factors for incomplete resection after SH-ESD and ESD discontinuation. By propensity score matching analysis, procedure time was significantly shorter in the SH-ESD group with remaining undissected submucosa < 20mm in diameter than in the C-ESD group (71min vs. 90min, p = 0.0053), although no significant difference was found in the en bloc resection rate (94% vs. 87%, p = 0.0914). SH-ESD can be an alternative surgical method when conventional ESD is difficult to continue in cases in which the remaining undissected submucosa is < 20mm in diameter.

Endoscopic resection of a large ampullary tumor using a hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection and mucosal resection technique.

Endoscopic resection of a large ampullary tumor using a hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection and mucosal resection technique.

Significance of rescue hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection in difficult colorectal cases.

Hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), in which an incision is made around a lesion and snaring is performed after submucosal dissection, has some advantages in colorectal surgery, including shorter procedure time and preventing perforation. However, its value for rescue resection in difficult colorectal ESD cases remains unclear. This study evaluated the utility of rescue hybrid ESD (RH-ESD). We divided 364 colorectal ESD procedures into the conventional ESD group (C-ESD, n=260), scheduled hybrid ESD group (SH-ESD, n=69), and RH-ESD group (n=35) and compared their clinical outcomes. Resection time was significantly shorter in the following order: RH-ESD (149 [90-197] minutes) >C-ESD (90 [60-140] minutes) >SH-ESD (52 [29-80] minutes). The en bloc resection rate increased significantly in the following order: RH-ESD (48.6%), SH-ESD (78.3%), and C-ESD (97.7%). An analysis of factors related to piecemeal resection of RH-ESD revealed that the submucosal dissection rate was significantly lower in the piecemeal resection group (25% [20%-30%]) than in the en bloc resection group (40% [20%-60%]). RH-ESD was ineffective in terms of curative resection because of the low en bloc resection rate, but was useful for avoiding surgery.

Hybrid Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection and Endoscopic Full-Thickness Resection for Complete Resection of a T2 Colorectal Adenocarcinoma in a Non-Surgical Candidate.

Hybrid Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection and Endoscopic Full-Thickness Resection for Complete Resection of a T2 Colorectal Adenocarcinoma in a Non-Surgical Candidate.

Multicenter prospective evaluation of an overtube endoluminal interventional platform for colorectal polypectomy

Background and study aims Endoscopic removal of complex colorectal polyps (≥ 2 cm) can be technically challenging. A dual balloon endoluminal overtube platform (DBEP) was developed to facilitate colonoscopic polypectomy. The study purpose was to evaluate clinical outcomes with the DBEP for complex polypectomy. Patients and methods This was an observational, prospective, multicenter Institutional Review Board-approved study. Between January 2018 and December 2020, safety and performance data were collected intra-procedurally and at 1 month post-procedure in patients undergoing intervention with the DBEP at three US centers. The primary endpoint was device safety and technical success of the procedure. Secondary endpoints included navigation time, total procedure time, and user feedback assessment post-procedure. Results A total of 162 patients underwent colonoscopy with the DBEP. Of these, 144 (89 %) underwent 156 interventions successfully with DBEP (44.5 % endoscopic mucosal resection, 53.2 % hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD)/ESD, 1.3 % other). In 13 patients (8 %), device challenges contributed to unsuccessful intervention. One mild device-related adverse event (AE) occurred. Procedural AE rate was 8.3 %. Median lesion size was 2.6 cm [range 0.5-12]. The investigators felt that navigating the device was easy/somewhat easy in 78.5 % of successful cases. Median total procedure time was 69 minutes [range, 19-213], median navigation time to lesion was 8 minutes [range, 1-80], And median polypectomy time was 33.5 minutes [range, 2-143]. Conclusions Endoscopic colon polyp resection with the DBEP was safe with a high technical success rate. The DBEP has the potential to provide enhanced scope stability and visualization, traction, and a conduit for scope exchange. Further prospective randomized studies are warranted.

A155 OUTCOMES FOLLOWING ENDOSCOPIC RESECTION OF DUODENAL NEUROENDOCRINE TUMOURS FROM A TERTIARY-CARE ACADEMIC CENTRE

Abstract Background Duodenal neuroendocrine tumours (D-NET) are rare cancers derived from neuroendocrine cells of the duodenum. A steady increase in the incidence of these tumours has been observed. Current treatment and surveillance strategies are guided by various tumour characteristics including size, grade, and depth of invasion. There exists conflicting evidence, however, on the rates of recurrence after positive resection margins following endoscopic resection. Thus, it remains uncertain whether complete endoscopic resection (R0) of these indolent tumours is clinically significant and whether follow-up endoscopic or surgical intervention is justified. Purpose Our aim is to characterize endoscopic management and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing endoscopic resection of D-NETs. Method We conducted a retrospective, single-centre cohort study at The Centre for Advanced Therapeutic Endoscopy and Endoscopic Oncology at St. Michael’s Hospital, Toronto, Ontario. Consecutive patients over the age of 18 who underwent endoscopic resection of histologically proven D-NETs between 2011 and 2020 were included. Data on patient, endoscopic, and tumour characteristics were collected through electronic chart review. Descriptive statistics were conducted for data analysis. Result(s) A total of 155 foregut neuroendocrine tumours (NET) were endoscopically resected amongst 96 patients during the study period. 47 of these were histologically identified as D-NETs. Mean tumour size was 9.88 ± 6.86 mm. Conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) was performed most frequently (55%, n=26/47), followed by cap-assisted EMR (30%, n=14/47). Hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD)/EMR was performed in one case. A total of two intra-procedural perforations occurred, both of which were successfully closed endoscopically. One patient with a peri-ampullary D-NET experienced significant intra-procedural bleeding requiring Hemospray® and subsequent endotracheal intubation resulting in a brief hospitalization. 57% of all resected D-NETs were followed at surveillance endoscopy 1 (SE1) at a median interval of 199 days (range, 84 to 830). Positive resection margins (R1) were found in 26 cases (55%), of which 16 were assessed at SE1 while nine were lost to follow-up. One patient with R1 margins was electively treated with APC at SE1. Tumour recurrence at SE1 occurred in only two patients. Image Conclusion(s) D-NET recurrence is found in less than 5% of patients at surveillance endoscopy following endoscopic resection in spite of a high R1 resection rate. Given this indolent nature of these tumours, our study suggests that patients with positive resection margins can be followed conservatively with surveillance endoscopy. Further investigation is warranted to determine the optimal duration and surveillance strategy for these patients. Please acknowledge all funding agencies by checking the applicable boxes below CAG Disclosure of Interest None Declared

Effective, safe and efficient porcine model of Forrest Ib bleeding gastric and colonic ulcers.

Developing effective gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding animal models is necessary to advance endoscopic hemostasis methods and train endoscopists on their use. Our aim, therefore, was to develop an effective and safe porcine GI bleeding model in the stomach and colon of large and small-sized oozing-type ulcers. Gastric and colonic bleeding ulcers were created using either a hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) technique or a cap-assisted endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR-C) technique in 14 pigs. Prior to ulcer creation, animals were treated with either oral apixaban or intravenous (IV) unfractionated heparin anticoagulation in combination with clopidogrel and aspirin. The primary outcome was the technical success of inducing oozing-type Forrest Ib bleeding ulcers. Secondary outcomes included ulcer diameter, number, creation time and the number of complications associated with each technique. Using hybrid ESD and IV heparin anticoagulation, bleeding was observed in 21/23 (91.3%) gastric ulcers and 6/7 (85.7%) colonic ulcers created. The mean diameter and ulcer creation time were 2.3 ± 0.3cm and 5.3 ± 0.5min, respectively, for gastric ulcers and 2.2 ± 0.4cm and 4.06 ± 0.6min, respectively, for colonic ulcers. Using EMR-C and IV heparin anticoagulation, bleeding was observed in 14/15 (93.3%) gastric ulcers and 6/6 (100%) colonic ulcers created. The mean diameter and ulcer creation time were 0.8 ± 0.2cm and 2.1 ± 0.5min, respectively, for gastric ulcers and 0.7 ± 0.2cm and 1.7 ± 0.3min, respectively, for colonic ulcers. None of the ulcers created in animals anticoagulated with apixaban developed bleeding. None of the 14 pigs developed any complications. We have demonstrated the effectiveness and safety of a porcine GI bleeding model utilizing IV heparin anticoagulation and either hybrid ESD or EMR-C techniques to create oozing-type bleeding ulcers in the stomach and colon with customizable size.

Acceptability of Hybrid Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection Using Multifunctional Snare for Small-sized Gastric Neoplasms: A Prospective Observational Study

The most suitable procedure for resecting small-sized gastric neoplasms remains unclear. Endoscopic mucosal resection leads to non-curative resection owing to slippage of the snare, and technically difficult endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is instrumentally uneconomical. A novel, cost-effective, multifunctional snare called SOUTEN is available as a hybrid ESD (h-ESD) device developed for facilitating ESD. This study aimed to assess the acceptability of h-ESD using the SOUTEN for resecting small-sized gastric neoplasms. This was a prospective observational study conducted at our single institution between March 2019 and March 2021. Fifty-seven consecutive patients who underwent h-ESD using SOUTEN for small-sized gastric neoplasms ≤15 mm involving adenoma and tubular-type mucosal carcinoma without ulceration were enrolled. The primary outcome was curative resection rate for h-ESD. Secondary outcomes were the rates of conversion to ESD, rate of total (h-ESD + ESD) curative resection, procedure time, rates of intra-and post- operative complications, and presence of additional knives excluding hemostatic forceps. The curative resection rate of h-ESD was 89.5% (51/57). The total (h-ESD + ESD) curative resection rate was 94.7% (54/57). The mean procedure time was 21.2 (±16.5) minutes. One case of delayed bleeding occurred. Additional knives were applied in two cases. The cost-efficient h-ESD using SOUTEN can be an acceptable procedure for resecting small- sized gastric neoplasms.

Efficacy of endoscopic treatment oncolorectal laterally spreading tumor and risk factors of delayed bleeding after operation

Objective: To evaluate the endoscopic treatment efficacy of colorectal laterally spreading tumor (LST) and analyze the risk factors for delayed post-polypectomy bleeding (DPPB). Methods: Between January 2015 and December 2020, patients underwent colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) or hybrid ESD were recruited from the Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University. Complete resection rate, perforation rate, bleeding rate, operation time and lesion adhesion were compared between the ESD and hybrid ESD groups. Patients were divided into bleeding and non-bleeding groups based on the presence of DPPB. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to analyze the risk factors of DPPB. Results: A total of 665 patients with colorectal LST were enrolled, including 376 males and 289 females, with an average age of (57.4±0.4) years. There were 471 cases underwent ESD and 194 cases underwent hybridized ESD. There were no significant differences in gender, age, history of smoking and drinking, and prevalence of hypertension between the two groups (all P>0.05). Likewise, the rate of lesion adhesion (4.2% vs 7.7%, P=0.067), lesion complete resection (96.8% vs 93.8%, P=0.418), perforation (0.6% vs 1.0%, P=0.594), delayed bleeding (2.8% vs 2.1%, P=0.605) were not statistically significant between the two groups. Seventeen patients (2.6%) developed DPPB after endoscopic treatment. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the lesion was in the rectum (OR=3.594, 95%CI: 1.237-10.443, P=0.019) and the diameter of the lesion>2 cm (OR=3.776, 95%CI: 1.411-10.106, P=0.008) were risk factors for DPPB. Conclusions: Both ESD and hybrid ESD are successful treatments for colorectal LST. Colorectal LST lesion site and lesion size>2 cm are risk factors of DPPB.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection in colorectal neoplasia performed with a waterjet system-assisted knife: higher en-bloc resection rate than conventional technique.

Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is burdened by its associated high risk of adverse events and long procedure time. Recently, a waterjet-assisted knife was introduced to simplify and speed up the procedure. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of waterjet-assisted ESD (WESD) compared to that of the conventional ESD (CESD) technique. The charts of 254 consecutive patients who underwent colorectal ESD between January 2014 and February 2021 for colorectal neoplasms were analyzed. The primary outcome was the en-bloc resection rate. Secondary outcomes were complete and curative resection rates, the need to switch to a hybrid ESD, procedure speed, the adverse event rates, and the recurrence rates. Approximately 174 neoplasias were considered, of which, 123 were removed by WESD and 51 by CESD. The en-bloc resection rate was higher in the WESD group (94.3% vs. 84.3%). Complete resection rates and curative resection rates were similar. The need to switch to a hybrid ESD was greater during CESD (39.2% vs. 13.8%). Procedure speed and adverse event rates were similar. During follow-up, one recurrence occurred after a WESD. WESD allows a high rate of en-bloc resections and less frequently requires a rescue switch to the hybrid ESD compared to CESD.

Hybrid and Conventional Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Early Gastric Neoplasms: A Multi-Center Randomized Controlled Trial

Hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection (H-ESD), which incorporates endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) with endoscopic mucosal resection, has been developed to make ESD technically easier. This study aimed to determine if H-ESD is superior to conventional ESD (C-ESD) for small early gastric neoplasms (EGNs). We conducted a multi-center, prospective, open-label, randomized controlled trial to compare the treatment outcomes of H-ESD and C-ESD (Hybrid-G Trial). Patients with differentiated type intramucosal EGN ≤20 mm in diameter and without ulceration were randomly assigned (1:1) to groups that underwent H-ESD or C-ESD. A single multi-functional snare, SOUTEN (ST1850-20, Kaneka, Medix, Tokyo, Japan), was used for H-ESD. The primary outcome was procedure time. Secondary outcomes included mucosal incision time, time and speed of submucosal dissection, curability, and endoscopic procedural adverse events. A total of 39 and 40 patients underwent H-ESD and C-ESD, respectively. The procedure time of H-ESD was significantly shorter than that of C-ESD (33.16 min vs 62.46 min; H-ESD/C-ESD ratio: 0.53; 95% confidence interval, 0.41-0.69; P < .0001). There was no significant difference in mucosal incision time between the 2 groups; the time and speed of submucosal dissection of H-ESD were significantly shorter than those of C-ESD. No difference was observed between the 2 groups in other outcomes. H-ESD has significantly shorter procedure time than C-ESD, with high and comparable curability and safety for both H-ESD and C-ESD. H-ESD can be a good option for the endoscopic treatment of small EGNs. (UMIN Clinical Trials Registry, Numbers: UMIN000041244).

S3657 Primary Gastric Adenocarcinoma With Clear Cell Differentiation Presenting With Melena: A Rare Cancer Treated With Hybrid Endoscopic Mucosal Resection and Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection

Introduction: Primary gastric clear cell carcinoma (GCCC) is an exceedingly rare type of adenocarcinoma. It can often be misdiagnosed as metastatic clear cell cancer with primary lesions in other body organs. We hereby present an interesting case of primary GCCC, successfully removed with hybrid endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). Case Description/Methods: A 91-year-old male had ongoing anemia and melena due to intermittent oozing from a gastric body nodule. Previous EGD showed an oozing, nodular lesion in the gastric body (Figure 1A). On EUS, it was a benign, mucosal-based, friable lesion. Pathology revealed gastric intestinal metaplasia. His past history included hyperlipidemia, hypertension, skin cancer, transient ischemic attack, prior colon polyps, and sigmoid resection for diverticulosis. Home medications included cardizem, iron and vitamin C supplements, allopurinol, aspirin, and PPI. He denied recent weight loss, nausea, vomiting, early satiety, chest pain, dyspnea, fever, or dysphagia. He then came to our hospital for endoscopic removal of the gastric lesion. EGD showed a 3-cm sessile polyp on the posterior wall of the gastric body, located along the lesser curvature (Figure 1B, C). The polyp was completely removed by the hybrid EMR and ESD technique. Pathology revealed invasive adenocarcinoma of the intestinal type with clear cell features, arising in a background of extensive intestinal metaplasia (Figure 1; D, E, F). He developed post-procedure urinary retention and underwent temporary Foley's catheter placement, which was removed shortly after. No fever or GI bleeding was noted. After diagnosis, his oncologist recommended concurrent chemoradiotherapy. His most recent PET scan was unremarkable. No melena was reported at the follow-up after 3 months. Discussion: We herein presented a rare and interesting case of primary GCCC. In these patients, it is imperative for endoscopists to differentiate between primary GCCC and metastatic lesions to deliberate upon best therapeutic choice. Pathology with immunohistochemistry is the cornerstone of accurate diagnosis for primary GCCC. Given the extremely rare occurrence, no standard treatment guidelines exist for GCCC. Therefore, the therapeutic approach varies on a case-by-case basis, which largely depends on its localization. For instance, the 3-cm lesion in our patient was located along the lesser curvature and was successfully removed by hybrid EMR and ESD. Therefore, it did not necessitate total gastrectomy.Figure 1.: A: Previous EGD showing an actively oozing, nodular lesion in the gastric body. B and C: EGD showing a 3-cm sessile polyp on the posterior wall of the gastric body, located along the lesser curvature. D, E, and F: Pathologic examination of the polypectomy specimen showing invasive adenocarcinoma of the intestinal type with clear cell features, arising in a background of extensive intestinal metaplasia.

Possibility of ultrathin endoscopy in radial incision and cutting for esophageal strictures.

Video 1The radial incision and cutting procedure using ultrathin endoscopy.

Underwater endoscopic submucosal dissection and hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection as rescue therapy in difficult colorectal cases.

Background and study aims Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is still not widely used due to its technical difficulty and the risk of complications. Rescue therapies such as hybrid ESD (H-ESD) have been proposed for very difficult cases, as has underwater ESD (U-ESD). This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of H-ESD and U-ESD in difficult cases. Patients and methods The hospital charts of consecutive patients referred for colorectal ESD between January 2014 and February 2021 because they were considered difficult cases were retrospectively analyzed. The primary outcome of the study was en bloc resection rate; secondary outcomes were the rate of complete resection, procedure speed, and incidence of adverse events (AEs). Results Fifty-nine colorectal neoplasms were considered, 22 of which were removed by U-ESD and 37 by H-ESD. The en bloc resection rate in the U-ESD group was 100 %, while it was 59.5 % in the H-ESD group. Dissection speed was 17.7mm 2 /min in the U-ESD group and 8.3 mm 2 /min in the H-ESD group. The AE rate was low in the U-ESD group and moderately high during H-ESD (5 % and 21.6 %, respectively; and perforation rate 0 % and 10.8 %, respectively). Larger lesions were treated with U-ESD, while more fibrotic ones were treated with H-ESD. Conclusions U-ESD and H-ESD are both effective and safe techniques in difficult colorectal situations. U-ESD is particularly effective and fast for large lesions when it is not possible to obtain comfortable knife position, while H-ESD is more suitable for very fibrotic lesions.