Background and study aims: Complete endoscopic resection and accurate histological evaluation for T1 colorectal cancer (CRC) is critical to determine subsequent treatment. Endoscopic Full-Thickness Resection (eFTR) is a new treatment option for T1 CRC <2cm. We aim to report clinical outcomes and short-term results. Patients and methods: Consecutive eFTR procedures for T1 CRC, prospectively recorded in our national registry between November 2015 and April 2020, were retrospectively analysed. Primary outcomes were technical success and R0 resection. Secondary outcomes were histological risk-assessment, curative resections, adverse events and short-term outcomes. Results: We included 330 procedures: 132 primary resections and 198 secondary scar resections after incomplete T1 CRC resection. Overall technical success, R0 resection and curative resection rates were 87.0% (95% CI [82.7 – 90.3%]), 85.6% (95% CI [81.2 – 89.2%]) and 60.3% (95% CI [54.7 – 65.7%]). Curative resection rate for primary resected T1 CRC was 23.7% (95% CI [15.9 – 33.6%]) and 60.8% (95% CI [50.4 – 70.4%]) after excluding deep submucosal invasion as risk-factor. Risk-stratification was possible in 99.3%. Severe adverse event rates was 2.2%. Additional oncologic surgery was performed in 49/320 (15.3%), with residual cancer in 11/49 (22.4%). Endoscopic follow-up was available in 200/242 (82.6%), with a median of 4 months and residual cancer in 1 (0.5%) following an incomplete resection. Conclusions: eFTR is a relatively safe and effective method to resect small T1 CRC, both as primary and secondary treatment. eFTR can expand endoscopic treatment options for T1 CRC and could help to reduce surgical overtreatment. Future studies should focus on long-term outcomes.

No abstract

Background and study aims  Endoscopic full-thickness resection (eFTR) allows en-bloc and transmural resection of colorectal lesions for which other advanced endoscopic techniques are unsuitable. We present our experience with a novel “clip first, cut later” eFTR-device and evaluate its indications, efficacy and safety. Patients and methods  From July 2015 through October 2017, 51 eFTR-procedures were performed in 48 patients. Technical success and R0-resection rates were prospectively recorded and retrospectively analyzed. Results  Indications for eFTR were non-lifting adenoma (n = 19), primary resection of malignant lesion (n = 2), resection of scar tissue after incomplete endoscopic resection of low-risk T1 colorectal carcinoma (n = 26), adenoma involving a diverticulum (n = 2) and neuroendocrine tumor (n = 2). Two lesions were treated by combining endoscopic mucosal resection and eFTR. Technical success was achieved in 45 of 51 procedures (88 %). Histopathology confirmed full-thickness resection in 43 of 50 specimens (86 %) and radical resection (R0) in 40 procedures (80 %). eFTR-specimens, obtained for indeterminate previous T1 colorectal carcinoma resection, were free of residual carcinoma in 25 of 26 cases (96 %). In six patients (13 %) a total of eight adverse events occurred within 30 days after eFTR. One perforation occurred, which was corrected endoscopically. No emergency surgery was necessary. Conclusion  In this study eFTR appears to be safe and effective for the resection of colorectal lesions. Technical success, R0-resection and major adverse events rate were reasonable and comparable with eFTR data reported elsewhere. Mean specimen diameter (23 mm) limits its use to relatively small lesions. A clinical algorithm for eFTR case selection is proposed. eFTR ensured local radical excision where other endoscopic techniques did not suffice and reduced the need for surgery in selected cases.

No abstract

No abstract