No abstract

This systematic review aimed to assess the efficacy of the current approach to tissue traction during the endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) of superficial esophageal cancer, early gastric cancer, and colorectal neoplasms. We performed a systematic electronic literature search of articles published in PubMed and selected comparative studies to investigate the treatment outcomes of tractionassisted versus conventional ESD. Using the keywords, we retrieved 381 articles, including five eligible articles on the esophagus, 13 on the stomach, and 12 on the colorectum. A total of seven randomized controlled trials and 23 retrospective studies were identified. Clip line traction and submucosal tunneling were effective in reducing the procedural time during esophageal ESD. The efficacy of traction methods in gastric ESD varied in terms of the devices and strategies used depending on the lesion location and degree of submucosal fibrosis. Several prospective and retrospective studies utilized traction devices without the need to reinsert the colonoscope. When pocket creation is included, the traction devices and methods effectively shorten the procedural time during colorectal ESD. Conclusions: Although the efficacy is dependent on the organ and tumor locations, several traction techniques have been demonstrated to be efficacious in facilitating ESD by maintaining satisfactory traction during dissection. (Gut Liver,

Objectives Antithrombotic therapy is a well-known independent risk factor for bleeding after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) of early gastric cancer (EGC). A novel method of ulcer base closure using an endoloop and endoclips has been reported. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of endoscopic closure using an endoloop and endoclips in preventing post-ESD bleeding in patients undergoing gastric ESD on antithrombotic therapy. Methods This was a single center, retrospective study. Patients on antithrombotic therapy who underwent gastric ESD were divided into two groups, the closure group and the non-closure group. We analyzed procedural outcomes, post-ESD bleeding rate and factors associated with post-ESD bleeding. Results Among 400 ESDs with EGCs in 311 patients, 131 ESDs in 110 patients were in the closure group, and 269 ESDs in 217 patients were in the non-closure group (16 patients were overlapped in both groups). Post-ESD bleeding rate was 11.5% (15/131) in the closure group, and 11.9% (32/269) in the non-closure group (p = 0.89). Total sustained closure rate during second look endoscopy was 47.8% (33/69). Post-ESD bleeding rate tended to be lower in the closure group than in the nonclosure group for lesions located in the greater curvature (3.6% vs. 11.1%, p = 0.11). In addition, sustained closure rate was significantly higher in the greater curvature than in the lesser curvature (72.0% vs. 34.1%, p < 0.01). Multivariate analysis revealed resection size > 40 mm and heparin bridge were the independent risk factor for post-ESD bleeding. Conclusion Ulcer base closure using endoloop and endoclips did not prevent post-ESD bleeding in patients on antithrombotic therapy.

Background and study aims: Long-term outcomes of endoscopic band ligation (EBL) for colonic diverticular hemorrhage have not been reported to date. The aim of this study was to determine the long-term outcomes of EBL and to retrospectively compare them with those of endoscopic clipping (EC) in the treatment of colonic diverticular hemorrhage. Patients and methods: The study included patients with colonic diverticular hemorrhage who were treated with EBL or EC from January 2004 to November 2014 and followed up more than 1 year (61 patients in the EBL group and 39 patients in the EC group). Time-to-event analysis of rebleeding was performed with the Kaplan-Meier method. A follow-up colonoscopy was performed to confirm the disappearance of the banded diverticula in the EBL group. Results: Rebleeding occurred in 21 patients in the EBL group and in 26 patients in the EC group. The cumulative incidence of rebleeding at 1, 12, 24, and 36 months after first treatments was 14 %, 23 %, 26 %, and 41 % in the EBL group and 38 %, 49 %, 59 %, and 68 % in the EC group, respectively. Time-to-event analysis revealed statistically significant data (Log-rank test, P = 0.0036). Scar formation with fold convergence at the previously banded site was observed in 11 of 24 patients who underwent follow-up colonoscopy (46 %). However, late rebleeding (rebleeding more than 30 days after EBL) occurred in five of these 11 cases. Conclusions: EBL was superior to EC in the treatment of colonic diverticular hemorrhage. However, the risk of rebleeding was not avoided even after the diverticula had been resolved using EBL.

Background This study aimed to demonstrate the feasibility of endoscopic hand-suturing (EHS) and attainability of sustained closure after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). Methods EHS was defined as uninterrupted endoscopic suturing of the mucosal defect after colorectal ESD using an absorbable barbed suture and a through-the-scope needle holder. Following individual EHS training using an ex vivo porcine colonic model, two experienced endoscopists performed EHS. Repeat colonoscopy was performed on the third or fourth day after ESD to examine the EHS site. The primary end point was the complete EHS closure rate, and secondary end points were sustained closure and post-ESD bleeding rates. Results 11 lesions were included. Median size of the mucosal defect was 38 mm (range 25 – 55 mm) and the lesion characteristics were as follows: lower rectum/upper rectum/ascending colon/cecum = 3/3/2/3, and 0-IIa/0-Is + IIa/others = 5/4/2. EHS was not attempted in two patients owing to difficulty in colonoscope reinsertion after ESD and intraoperative perforation, respectively. EHS was performed for nine lesions, and the complete EHS closure rate was 73 %. Median procedure time for suturing was 56 minutes (range 30 – 120 minutes) and median number of stitches was 8 (range 6 – 12). Sustained closure and post-ESD bleeding rates were 64 % and 9 %, respectively. Conclusions EHS achieved complete and sustained closure in the colorectum. However, EHS is not currently clinically applicable given the long procedure time. Further modifications of the technique and devices are desirable.