Submucosal Dissection For Colorectal Tumors Research Articles

Establishing a nomogram for predicting the risk factors for delayed bleeding after endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal tumors

BackgroundThe aim of this study is to establish a nomogram that can predict the risk factors for delayed bleeding after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). This model can be used to assess the probability of delayed bleeding before ESD surgery, thereby avoiding wasting medical resources and improving patient satisfaction.MethodsThis was a retrospective study in which all patients underwent ESD surgery for colorectal tumors between August 2021 and February 2024. Patient demographics and surgical characteristics were collected. All patients were randomly divided into a training set and a testing set. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses of the training set revealed the independent risk factors for delayed bleeding after ESD. These independent risk factors were used to construct a nomogram model. This model was validated using internal validation methods such as the C-index, calibration curve, and decision curve analysis.ResultsThis study included 587 patients. The occurrence rate of delayed bleeding after ESD in the training set was 8.98%. Multivariate regression analysis revealed that the location of the lesion in the rectum, a large lesion, and a prolonged surgery time were independent risk factors for delayed bleeding after ESD. The C-index for this model was 0.89, and validation of this nomogram model demonstrated good consistency between the predicted and actual values.ConclusionMultivariate regression analysis revealed the independent risk factors for delayed bleeding after ESD, and a nomogram with a relatively consistent accuracy was established. The clinical application of this model can reduce the incidence of delayed bleeding and therefore improve patient healing.

Clinical outcome and long‑term prognosis after endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal tumors in patients aged 75 years or older: a retrospective observational study

PurposeTo determine the clinical outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for colorectal tumors in older patients and predictors of mortality.MethodsWe retrospectively evaluated 207 lesions in 195 consecutive older patients aged ≥ 75 years who underwent ESD for colorectal tumors between January 2007 and December 2018. Outcomes of ESD were evaluated, and the prognosis was assessed in terms of both curability and the patient’s baseline physical condition as determined by several indices. Cox regression analyses were performed to identify factors associated with reduced overall survival (OS).ResultsTreatment outcomes included a median procedure time of 55 min, en bloc resection rate of 97%, histological en bloc resection rate of 92%, postoperative bleeding rate of 2.4%, and intraoperative perforation rate of 3.4%. Postoperative bleeding and intraoperative perforation could be treated conservatively. Delayed perforation occurred in one patient and required emergency surgery. Three-year OS was 99.4% and 5-year OS was 95.8%. Overall, three patients experienced recurrence (one local, two distant metastasis), and one patient died of primary cancer. Multivariate analysis identified the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) score ≥ 3 as the only independent predictor of reduced OS (hazard ratio 4.26; 95% confidence interval 1.60–11.38; P = 0.004).ConclusionOur results suggest that colorectal ESD is safe and effective in older patients aged ≥ 75 years. There was a significant independent association of reduced OS with high CCI score, but not with curability by ESD. The CCI score should be considered when determining the indications for ESD in older patients.

Comparative Study on the Effectiveness, Safety, and Economic Costs of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Colorectal Tumors Under Conscious Sedation and General Anesthesia.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a minimally invasive surgical procedure used for en bloc removal of colorectal tumors. Although colorectal ESD is ideally conducted under conscious sedation, it is often performed under general anesthesia because of its complexity and lengthy duration. Currently, there is limited research on colorectal ESD performed under conscious sedation. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness, safety, and economic cost of colorectal ESD under conscious sedation compared to general anesthesia. Retrospective analysis of 301 patients who underwent ESD treatment for colorectal tumors at the Endoscopy Center of Peking University Cancer Hospital from January 2018 to November 2020. Patients were divided into the sedation group (group S, n=88) and the general anesthesia group (group A, n=213) based on the anesthetic method. To balance the confounding factors between the 2 groups, 75 matched pairs were obtained after using propensity score matching (PSM). Intraoperative and postoperative parameters were then compared between the matched groups. After PSM, there was no statistically significant difference between group S and group A in terms of the surgical time, en bloc resection rate, and complete resection rate. There was also no statistically significant difference in the occurrence rates of bleeding, perforation, and post-ESD electrocoagulation syndrome (PEECS) between the 2 groups. However, the length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in group S (1.23±0.89d) than in group A (5.92±3.05d) ( P <0.05). The hospitalization costs were also significantly lower in group S (16482.34±13154.32 yuan) compared with group A (34743.74±13779.40 yuan) (P < 0.05 ). Compared to general anesthesia, performing ESD for colorectal tumors under conscious sedation has equivalent effectiveness and safety while shortening the hospital stay and reducing the economic costs.

A novel nomogram for the prediction of perforation during endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal neoplasms.

High perforation risk hinders the widespread adoption of ESD for colorectal neoplasms. This study was performed to determine the risk factors of colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD)-induced perforation and develop a predictive model. A total of 1046 colorectal neoplasms in 1011 patients were retrospectively enrolled from January 2011 to December 2021, in a single tertiary center as the derivation cohort. We identified independent risk factors for perforation using univariate analysis and multi-variate logistic regression. A nomogram was developed based on the logistic regression model and prospectively applied to 266 colorectal neoplasms as the validation cohort. The performance of the predictive model was evaluated with the receiver operating characteristic curve, calibration plot, and decision curve analysis. Independent pre-operative factors for colorectal ESD-induced perforation were tumor located in the left colon [odds ratio (OR) 2.39, P = 0.040], size ≥ 40 mm (OR 3.36, P < 0.001), ≥2/3 circumference (OR 7.55, P = 0.004), located across folds (OR 6.26, P < 0.001), and laterally spreading tumor (non-granular type, OR 2.34, P = 0.029; granular type, OR 2.46, P = 0.021). The nomogram model incorporating the pre-operative factors performed well in both the derivation and validation cohorts (areas under the curve of 0.750 and 0.806, respectively). Decision curve analysis demonstrated that the clinical benefit of the nomogram was favorable. The novel nomogram, developed and prospectively validated, incorporating tumor size, location, and morphology can successfully predict perforation during ESD for colorectal neoplasms.

Conventional Versus Traction Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Colorectal Tumors: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Compared with conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection (C-ESD) for colorectal lesions, the traction method (T-ESD) allows the lesion to be stabilized with easier dissection. However, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have reported conflicting results on the clinical outcomes of T-ESD as compared with C-ESD. We conducted a meta-analysis to compile the data. Multiple databases were searched for RCTs evaluating C-ESD versus T-ESD for colorectal tumors. The end points of interest were procedure time (min), resection speed (mm²/min), R0 resection, en bloc resection, delayed bleeding, and perforation. Standard meta-analysis methods were employed using the random-effects model. Six RCTs with a total of 566 patients (C-ESD n=284, T-ESD n=282) were included. The mean age was 67±10y and 60% were men. As compared with the T-ESD technique, the C-ESD group was associated with longer procedure time (SMD 0.91, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.23, P<0.00001) and lesser resection speed (SMD -1.03, 95% CI -2.01 to -0.06, P=0.04). No significant difference was found in the 2 groups with respect to R0 resection rate (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.06, P=0.87), en bloc resection (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.01, P=0.35), delayed bleeding (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.17 to 2.59, P=0.55) and perforation (RR 2.16, 95% CI 0.75 to 6.27, P=0.16). On meta-analysis, pooled procedure time was significantly faster with T-ESD compared with C-ESD. The clinical outcomes, however, were comparable.

S309 Conventional vs Traction Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Colorectal Tumors: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

S309 Conventional vs Traction Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Colorectal Tumors: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Effectiveness and Safety of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Colorectal Neoplasm in Patients with High Charlson Comorbidity Index Score: A HASID Multicenter Study.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is an effective method for removing early colorectal lesions. However, research on the safety and efficacy of ESD in patients with various underlying conditions remains limited. This study retrospectively examined ESD outcomes in colorectal neoplasm patients from five tertiary medical centers. The Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) and age-adjusted CCI (ACCI) were analyzed, and the differences in complete resection and complication rates were analyzed. The CCI, ACCI, and complication rates tended to gradually increase proportionally, and the complication resection rate increased from CCI 2 to ACCI 4 as the starting point, followed by a decreasing trend. Of these, 140 patients (9.7%) had a CCI score of 3 or higher. The high CCI group was older (70.6% vs. 64.7%, p < 0.01) and had a higher proportion of men (70.7% vs. 58.7%, p < 0.01) than the low CCI group. The high CCI group had a higher incidence of cancer than the low CCI group (77.9% vs. 65.2%, p < 0.01). The en bloc resection rate (90.0% vs. 89.3%, p = 0.79) and complete resection rate (75.7% vs. 81.2%, p = 0.12) were not significantly different between the two groups. Colorectal ESD can be safely and effectively performed in patients with various underlying medical conditions.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal neoplasms: Risk factors for local recurrence and long-term surveillance.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is an effective procedure for the en bloc resection of colorectal neoplasms. However, risk factors for local recurrence after ESD have not been identified. This study aimed to evaluate such risk factors after ESD for colorectal neoplasms. This retrospective study included 1344 patients with 1539 consecutive colorectal lesions who underwent ESD between September 2003 and December 2019. We investigated various factors associated with local recurrence in these patients. The main outcomes were the incidence of local recurrence and its relationship with clinicopathological factors during long-term surveillance. The en bloc resection rate was 98.6%, the R0 resection rate was 97.2%, and the histologically complete resection rate was 92.7%. Local recurrence was observed in 7/1344 (0.5%) patients and the median follow-up period was 72 months (range 4-195 months). The incidence of local recurrence was significantly higher in lesions ≥40 mm in diameter (hazard ratio [HR] 15.68 [1.88-130.5]; p = 0.011), piecemeal resection (HR 48.42 [10.7-218.7]; p < 0.001), non-R0 resection (HR 41.05 [9.025-186.7]; p < 0.001), histologically incomplete resection (HR 16.23 [3.627-72.63]; p<0.001), and severe fibrosis (F2; HR 9.523 [1.14-79.3]; p = 0.037). Five risk factors for local recurrence after ESD were identified. Patients with such factors should undergo careful surveillance colonoscopy.

Underwater endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal tumors decreases the incidence of post-electrocoagulation syndrome.

Underwater endoscopic submucosal dissection (U-ESD) is a recently developed procedure that has the potential to prevent post-ESD coagulation syndrome (PECS) owing to its heat-sink effect. We aimed to clarify whether U-ESD decreases the incidence of PECS compared with conventional ESD (C-ESD). A total of 205 patients who underwent colorectal ESD (C-ESD: 125; U-ESD: 80) were analyzed. Propensity score matching analysis was performed to adjust for patient backgrounds. Ten C-ESD and two U-ESD patients with muscle damage or perforation during ESD were excluded when comparing PECS. The primary outcome was to compare the incidence of PECS between the U-ESD and C-ESD groups (54 matched pairs). Secondary outcomes were to compare procedural outcomes between the C-ESD and U-ESD groups (62 matched pairs). Among the 78 patients who underwent U-ESD, PECS occurred in only one patient (1.3%). Adjusted comparisons between the U-ESD and C-ESD groups demonstrated a significantly lower incidence of PECS in the U-ESD group (0% vs 11.1%; P=0.027). Median dissection speed was significantly faster in the U-ESD than in the C-ESD group (10.9mm2 /min vs 6.9mm2 /min; P<0.001). En bloc and complete resection rates were 100% in the U-ESD group. Although perforation and delayed bleeding occurred in one patient each (1.6%) as adverse events in the U-ESD group, there were no differences compared with the C-ESD group. Our study demonstrates that U-ESD effectively decreases the incidence of PECS and is a faster and safer method for colorectal ESD.

Clinical outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal neoplasms: A single-center experience in Southern Taiwan.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) as an advanced endoscopic procedure can be considered for the removal of colorectal lesions with high suspicion of limited submucosal invasion or cannot be optimally removed by snare-based techniques. We aimed to analyze the clinical outcomes of ESD for colorectal neoplasms in our hospital. We retrospectively enrolled 230 patients with 244 colorectal neoplasms who received ESD procedures from April 2012 to October 2020 at Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital. Clinicopathological data were collected by chart review. We also recorded ESD-related complications and clinical outcomes. The average age was 64 years old, with a mean follow-up time of 22.59 months. There was a loss of follow-up in 34 lesions. Most lesions were lateral spreading tumors of the non-granular type. The average ESD time was 51.9 minutes. Nine cases (3.7%) had procedure-related complications, including two intra-procedure perforations (0.8%) and seven delayed bleeding (2.9%) without procedure-related mortality. 241 lesions (98.8%) achieved en-bloc resection, while 207 lesions (84.8%) achieved R0 resection. Most lesions were tubulo-(villous) adenoma. Malignancy included 35 adenocarcinomas and 5 neuroendocrine tumors. No local recurrence was developed during follow-up. Multivariate analysis for long ESD time revealed significance in size ≥ 10 cm2 and endoscopist's experience < 3 years. Pre-ESD endoscopic ultrasound revealed good prediction in discrimination of mucosal (sensitivity: 0.90) and submucosal lesion (specificity: 0.67). ESD for colorectal neoplasms is an effective and safe technique. Size ≥ 10 cm2 and endoscopist's experience < 3 years were significantly associated with long procedure time. Pre-ESD EUS provided a good prediction for colorectal neoplasms in invasion depth.

Application of intralesional traction assistance with traction wire to endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal neoplasms.

Application of intralesional traction assistance with traction wire to endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal neoplasms.

Outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal neoplasms: Prospective, multicenter, cohort trial.

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is the gold standard for the treatment of noninvasive large colorectal lesions, despite challenges associated with nonlifting lesions and a high rate of local recurrence. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) offers the possibility of overcoming these EMR limitations. However, a higher risk of complications and longer procedure time prevented its dissemination. As ESD now provides more stable results because of standardized techniques compared with those used earlier, this study aimed to quantify the rates of en bloc and curative resections, as well as ESD complications, in the present situation. A multicenter, large-scale, prospective cohort trial of ESD was conducted at 20 institutions in Japan. Consecutive patients scheduled for ESD were enrolled from February 2013 to January 2015. ESD was performed for 1883 patients (1965 lesions). The mean procedure time was 80.6 min; en bloc and curative resections were achieved in 1759 (97.0%) and 1640 (90.4%) lesions, respectively, in epithelial lesions ≥20 mm. Intra- and postprocedural perforations occurred in 51 (2.6%) and 12 (0.6%) lesions, respectively, and emergency surgery for adverse events was performed in nine patients (0.5%). This trial conducted after the standardization of the ESD technique throughout Japan revealed a higher curability, shorter procedure time, and lower risk of complications than those reported previously. Considering that the target lesions of ESD are more advanced than those of EMR, ESD can be a first-line treatment for large colorectal lesions with acceptable risk and procedure time. (Clinical Trial Registration: UMIN000010136).

Effects of the combined use of a scissor-type knife and traction clip on endoscopic submucosal dissection of colorectal tumors: a propensity score-matched analysis.

Background and study aims This study evaluated the technical aspects of colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) with the Clutch Cutter (CC) (Fujifilm Co., Tokyo, Japan), a scissor-type knife, and the S-O clip (SO) as a traction clip, and compared the safety and efficacy to ESD using a needle-type knife. Patients and methods This was a single-center retrospective study. In Study 1, we evaluated 125 ESD patients: 60 using the SO and CC (SO group) and 65 using the CC (CC group). In Study 2, we evaluated 185 ESD patients: the CC group (N = 65) and 120 using the Flush knife BT-S (Flush group) (Fujifilm Co., Tokyo, Japan). In both studies, the clinicopathological features and therapeutic outcomes were compared using a propensity score-matched analysis. Results In 36 pairs of matched patients in Study 1, the rates of en bloc resection, R0 resection, perforation, and postoperative bleeding (POB) were 97.2 %, 88.9 %, 2.8 %, and 0 %, respectively, for the SO group and 100 %, 91.7 %, 0 %, and 0 % for the CC group (not significant). The mean procedure time for the SO group among less-experienced endoscopists was significantly shorter than in the CC group (42 vs. 65 minutes, P = 0.036). In 49 pairs of matched patients in Study 2, the rates of en bloc resection, R0 resection, perforation, and POB were 100 %, 95.8 %, 0 %, and 0 %, respectively, for the CC group and 98.0 %, 95.8 %, 0 %, and 2.0 % for the Flush group (not significant). The mean procedure time in the CC group among less-experienced endoscopists was significantly shorter than in the Flush group (52 vs. 67 minutes, P = 0.038). Conclusions CC and the combined use of CC and SO reduced colorectal ESD procedure time among less-experienced endoscopists.

Construction of a novel predictive nomogram for difficult procedure of endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal neoplasms

Objectives To determine the predictors of difficult colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and to develop a preoperative predictive model for difficult colorectal ESD procedures. Methods Colorectal neoplasms intended to be resected by ESD in our center between August 2013 and February 2019 were retrospectively enrolled. An ESD procedure which took more than 30 min, failed to remove the lesions en bloc or converted to surgery was defined as difficulty. Logistic regression analysis was conducted to find out the predictors of difficult ESD. A nomogram integrating independent predictors was developed and validated with respect to its discrimination, calibration and clinical application, using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, calibration plot and decision curve analysis (DCA), respectively. Results A total of 368 colorectal neoplasms in 355 patients were included. The independent predictors for difficult colorectal ESD were size ≥2 cm (odds ratio [OR] = 6.102, p < .001), positive non-lifting sign (OR = 6.569, p = .005), lesions located in left colon (OR = 2.475, p = .036) or rectum (OR = 2.183, p = .048), laterally spreading tumors (LSTs) (OR = 2.501, p = .008) and less colorectal ESD experience (≤20 cases) (OR = 2.3091, p = .028). The nomogram model incorporating the above predictors performed well in both of the training and validation sets (area under the cure [AUC] = 0.786 and 0.784, respectively). DCA demonstrated the clinical benefit of the nomogram was superior to that of each independent predictor alone. Conclusions The nomogram incorporating tumor size, location, morphology, non-lifting sign and ESD experience of operator can be conveniently used to facilitate the preoperative prediction of difficult colorectal ESD.

Long-term prognosis after endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal tumors in patients aged over 80\xa0years

BackgroundIn Japan, endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is standardized for large colorectal tumors. However, its validity in the elderly population is unclear. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ESD for colorectal tumors in elderly patients aged over 80 years.MethodsESD was performed on 178 tumors in 165 consecutive patients aged over 80 years between December 2008 and December 2018. We retrospectively evaluated the clinicopathological characteristics and clinical outcomes of ESD. We also assessed the prognosis of 160 patients followed up for more than 12 months.ResultsThe mean patient age was 83.7 ± 3.1 years. The number of patients with comorbidities was 100 (62.5%). Among all patients, 106 (64.2%) were categorized as class 1 or 2 according to the American Society of Anesthesiologists classification of physical status (ASA-PS), and 59 (35.8%) were classified as class 3. The mean procedure time was 97.7 ± 79.3 min. The rate of histological en bloc resection was 93.8% (167/178). Delayed bleeding in 11 cases (6.2%) and perforation in 7 cases (3.9%) were treated conservatively. The 5-year survival rate was 89.9%. No deaths from primary disease (mean follow-up time: 35.3 ± 27.5 months) were observed. Overall survival rates were significantly lower in the non-curative resection group that did not undergo additional surgery than in the curative resection group (P = 0.0152) and non-curative group that underwent additional surgery (P = 0.0259). Overall survival rates were higher for ASA-PS class 1 or 2 patients than class 3 patients (P = 0.0105). Metachronous tumors (> 5 mm) developed in 9.4% of patients.ConclusionsESD for colorectal tumors in patients aged over 80 years is safe. Colorectal cancer-associated deaths were prevented although comorbidities pose a high risk of poor prognosis.

Safety and efficacy of water pressure endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal tumors with submucosal fibrosis (with video)

Colorectal neoplasms with submucosal fibrosis are the most challenging targets of endoscopic resection. Water pressure endoscopic submucosal dissection (WP-ESD) is a recently introduced procedure that has several advantages over conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection (C-ESD). This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of WP-ESD for fibrotic colorectal neoplasms. This retrospective observational study investigated 133 colorectal neoplasms expected to have submucosal fibrosis that were resected by WP-ESD or C-ESD between April 2012 and April 2020. Eighty-seven lesions after endoscopic or surgical treatment, 18 with biopsy scar with fold convergence and 28 in patients with ulcerative colitis, were included. The differences in treatment outcomes, including procedure time and adverse event proportions, between the WP-ESD and C-ESD groups were analyzed. The clinical course after perforation using WP-ESD was also evaluated, including postprocedural multidetector CT findings obtained immediately after WP-ESD. Severe submucosal fibrosis was observed in 96 lesions (72.2%). The median procedure time was significantly shorter in the WP-ESD group than in the C-ESD group (43.5 minutes [interquartile range {IQR}, 32.8-73] vs 72 minutes[IQR, 45-105]; P= .0041). The multivariate analysis revealed WP-ESD as an independent factor for a shortprocedure time (odds ratio, 2.90; 95% confidence interval, 1.28-6.55). The proportions of post-ESD electrocoagulation syndrome (11.6% vs 13.1%) and perforation (20.4% vs 22.8%) were similar between the groups. Four of 11 patients withperforation who underwent WP-ESD showed fluid collection on postprocedural multidetector CT images. WP-ESD can shorten procedure time for treating fibrotic colorectal neoplasms.

Clinical course of patients after perforation associated with endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal neoplasms

Clinical course of patients after perforation associated with endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal neoplasms

Risk factors for delayed bleeding after endoscopic submucosal dissection of colorectal tumors.

To investigate the risk factors for delayed bleeding following endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for colorectal neoplasms. We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 991 consecutive patients who underwent ESD for colorectal neoplasms at our hospital from January 2007 to November 2016. Delayed post-ESD bleeding was defined as bleeding within 6h to 30 days after ESD that resulted in either of the three situations: overt hematochezia, bleeding spots confirmed by repeat colonoscopy, or the requirement of a blood transfusion. Delayed bleeding was furtherly separated into early and late delayed bleeding by the end of post-ESD day 2. We analyzed the relationship between delayed bleeding and candidate factors including patient-, lesion-, and treatment-related details. Delayed post-ESD bleeding was found in 47 patients (4.7%), of which 18 cases were late delayed bleeding. Among all patients, 14 patients required a second colonoscopy, and 2 other patients were transferred to surgery. Univariate analysis revealed that patients with hypertension (p = 0.017) and using hot biopsy forceps for wound management (p = 0.028) were significantly associated with late delayed bleeding. Both risk factors remained significant after multivariate analysis: hypertension (OR 2.829, 95% CI 1.101-7.265, p = 0.031), hot biopsy forceps (OR 2.873, 95% CI 1.013-8.147, p = 0.047). Using hot biopsy forceps was also the significant risk factor for late delayed bleeding compared with early delayed bleeding. Patient with hypertension and using hot biopsy forceps for wound management during procedure call for attention on high risk of delayed post-ESD bleeding. Therefore, additional perioperative treatment is recommended in patients with these risk factors.

The efficacy of the submucosal injection of lidocaine during endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal neoplasms: a multicenter randomized controlled study

BackgroundEndoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is currently a common procedure although it requires a long procedural time. We conducted a prospective study to determine the efficacy and safety of lidocaine injection for shortening the procedural time and relieving bowel peristalsis during ESD.MethodsA multicenter randomized controlled study was conducted in three hospitals. Ninety-one patients who underwent colorectal ESD were enrolled. Patients were randomly divided into two groups using the envelope method: the lidocaine group and saline group. The primary endpoint was the procedural time, and the secondary endpoints were the procedural time in each part of the colon and the grade of bowel peristalsis and the incidence and amounts of antispasmodic drugs use and adverse events.ResultsThe patients’ demographics were not markedly different between the two groups. The mean procedural time in the lidocaine group was not markedly different from that in the saline group. In contrast, at the proximal site, the procedural time in the lidocaine group (57 min) was significantly shorter in the saline group (80 min). The grade of bowel peristalsis in the lidocaine group (0.67) was significantly lower than in the saline group (1.17). Antispasmodic drug use was significantly rarer in the lidocaine group than in the saline group. The incidence of adverse events was not markedly different between the two groups.ConclusionsLocal lidocaine injection is a feasible option for preventing bowel peristalsis, particularly in the proximal colon, leading to a reduced procedural time for ESD and decreased antispasmodic drug use.University Hospital Medical Information Network Center (UMIN number: 000022843).

Bipolar-current needle-knife with a water jet function (Jet B-knife) shortens the procedure time of endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal tumors.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a technically difficult and time-consuming procedure for the treatment of large colorectal tumors. In Japan, the ball-tip bipolar-current needle-knife (BB-knife) has been used in ESD as a safe device that minimizes the damage to deeper tissues of colorectal neoplasms. In May 2012, a BB-knife combined with a water jet function (Jet B-knife) was newly developed. This retrospective study was aimed at examining the effectiveness and safety of the Jet B-knife. The BB-knife was used in 276 lesions (BB-knife group), while the Jet B-knife was used in 245 lesions (Jet B-knife group). We evaluated tumor characteristics and the results of the ESD procedures, including the size of the resected tumor, histological diagnosis, time required for resection, frequency of using other electrical devices, en bloc resection rate, and incidence rate of associated complications. Then, the data obtained were compared between the two groups. The histological evaluation of the resected tumors revealed that the incidence of cancer was not significantly different between the two groups. The median time required for resection was 103min (45-255) in the BB-knife group and 51min (28-210) in the Jet B-knife group. The difference was statistically significant (p < 0.05). Furthermore, the median tumor diameters were 23.1mm (18-50) and 26.2mm (20-60) in the BB-knife and Jet B-knife groups, respectively, demonstrating a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that short resection time (p < 0.001) and reduced use of hemostatic devices (p < 0.01) were independent favorable features of Jet B-knife. The en bloc resection rate and the perforation rate were not statistically significant between the two groups. Use of the Jet B-knife may contribute to the development of a time-saving, cost-effective, and safe procedure for ESD of colorectal tumors.