Clinical course of small gastric subepithelial lesion less than 20 mm diagnosed by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) are treated as malignant gastric subepithelial lesions (SELs), and resection is recommended. However, small gastric SELs < 20 mm with no malignant features are monitored without histopathological examination, and the frequency of malignancy is unknown. This study aimed to clarify the clinicopathological findings and clinical course of gastric SELs < 20 mm measured by endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included consecutive patients with small gastric SELs < 20 mm diagnosed using EUS at a tertiary referral center between 2009 and 2021. The clinical course after diagnosis using EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) was reviewed. RESULTS: Among 333 patients with small gastric SELs, 104 patients with 105 lesions underwent EUS-FNA. The pathological diagnosis was confirmed in 87 patients. GISTs were the most common pathology (47%). Among the 87 patients, 43 underwent therapeutic interventions, including tumor resection and chemotherapy. In groups of tumor resection, the pathological tumor size on the resected specimen was significantly larger than the size measured by EUS (19.5 mm vs 15.0 mm, P < 0.001), and 37% of resected SELs were 20 mm or over. No recurrence was observed after tumor resection during a mean follow-up period of 40 months. CONCLUSIONS: Approximately 40% of small gastric SELs were malignant tumors, such as GIST, with most of them requiring treatment. Additionally, considering that the EUS measurement is 5 mm smaller than the pathological tumor diameter, further examinations, such as systematic EUS-FNA, may be required for SEL, including those smaller than 20 mm.

Predictors of severe submucosal fibrosis during endoscopic submucosal dissection in patients with ulcerative colitis: Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: Severe submucosal fibrosis is a crucial technical difficulty encountered during endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). We aimed to identify predictors of severe submucosal fibrosis in patients with UC. METHODS: We retrospectively included 55 tumors resected using ESD from 48 consecutive patients with UC. We analyzed the clinicopathological characteristics and treatment outcomes between the F0/1 (none to mild submucosal fibrosis) group (n = 28) and F2 (severe submucosal fibrosis) group (n = 27). RESULTS: No significant difference was found between the F0/1 and F2 groups in en bloc resection rate (100% vs. 96%, P = 0.49), the R0 resection rate (100% vs. 93%, P = 0.24), and the dissection speed (0.18 vs. 0.13 cm2 /min, P = 0.07). Intraoperative perforation was more common in the F2 group (30%) than in the F0/1 group (8%; P = 0.01). Multivariable analysis showed that a longer duration of UC (≥10 years; odds ratio [OR] 6.11; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.20-31.03; P = 0.03) and scarring of background mucosa of the tumor (OR 39.61; 95% CI 3.91-400.78; P < 0.01) were independent predictors of severe submucosal fibrosis. CONCLUSION: Long UC duration and scarring background mucosa were predictors of severe submucosal fibrosis associated with perforation during ESD.

Impact of endoscopy intervals on metachronous gastric cancer after endoscopic submucosal dissection: Comparison between 1 year and half-a-year.

OBJECTIVES: Japanese guidelines recommend posttreatment endoscopy once or twice a year after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for early gastric cancer. However, the impact of endoscopy intervals on metachronous gastric cancer (MGC) remains unclear, especially the difference between 1-year and half-a-year intervals. We aimed to investigate this difference. METHODS: This study retrospectively investigated 2429 patients who underwent gastric ESD between May 2001 and June 2019 at our hospital. Patients who developed MGC were classified based on those who underwent the previous endoscopy within at least 7 months (short-interval group) and within 8-13 months (regular-interval group). Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to adjust for possible confounders. The primary outcome was the proportion of MGC beyond curative ESD criteria established in the guidelines. RESULTS: A total of 216 eligible patients developed MGC. The short- and regular-interval groups included 43 and 173 patients, respectively. Overall, no patients in the short-interval group had MGC beyond curative ESD criteria, while 27 patients in the regular-interval group did. The proportion of MGC beyond curative ESD criteria was significantly lower in the short-interval group than in the regular-interval group before (P = 0.003) and after (P = 0.028) PSM. Although not significant, the short-interval group tended to have a higher stomach preservation rate than the regular-interval group (P = 0.093). CONCLUSION: Our study indicated a possible benefit of biannual surveillance endoscopy in the early post-ESD period.

Endoscopic Resection with One-Port Placement: A Newly Developed Technique for the Safe Management of Advanced Endoscopic Resection for Gastric Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors.

INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) without laparoscopic assistance (pure EFTR) is an emerging, less invasive treatment for gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs). However, the technique has seldom been performed outside China because of concerns regarding pneumoperitoneum, maintenance of endoscopic view, and endoscopic suturing. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of endoscopic resection with one-port placement (EROPP) for gastric GISTs. METHODS: This retrospective study included 17 patients with gastric GISTs originating from the muscularis propria who underwent EROPP between 2019 and 2022. One camera port was inserted in the umbilicus before initiating the endoscopic procedure to maintain intra-abdominal pressure, which was monitored and adjusted via this port. While allowing for conversion to laparoscopic surgery if needed, EFTR was performed as follows: (1) circumferential incision of the mucosal and submucosal layers around the lesion was performed by typical endoscopic submucosal dissection; (2) an intentional perforation and subsequent seromuscular resection was made using dental floss and an endo-clip for traction; and (3) closure of the gastric full-thickness defect was performed with an over-the-scope clip (OTSC) after peroral retrieval of the specimen. We retrospectively assessed the short-term outcomes and safety. RESULTS: All procedures were completed successfully without conversion to laparoscopic surgery. The median size of the resected tumors was 23 mm (range, 8-35 mm), the median resection time was 36 min (range, 22-95 min), and closure time was 18 min (range, 10-45 min). The rates of en bloc and complete resection were 100% and 88%, respectively. In 2 cases, another port was added to aspirate the leaking fluid or check the condition of the endoscopic closure. All gastric defects were endoscopically closed, mainly using OTSCs. The recovery course for all patients was uneventful, and no adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: EROPP is a safe and minimally invasive treatment for gastric GISTs and appears to be suitable for introducing EFTR procedures.

Cervical esophageal adenocarcinoma of intestinal type in ectopic gastric mucosa.

A 45-year-old man underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy because of symptoms of laryngopharyngeal discomfort. We found a protruded reddish lesion adjacent to the ectopic gastric mucosa (EGM) in the cervical esophagus, and a biopsy revealed that it was a tubular adenocarcinoma. We diagnosed the patient with intramucosal cancer and performed endoscopic submucosal dissection. Esophageal endoscopic submucosal dissection was performed under general anesthesia using a conventional procedure. The resected tumor measured 23 × 14 mm and was adjacent to the EGM. Histologically, the tumor cells showed moderately well-differentiated adenocarcinoma confined to the muscularis mucosa with no lymphovascular infiltration. Immunohistochemically, the tumor cells were positive for intestinal markers, namely MUC2 and CD10, and negative for gastric markers, namely MUC5AC and MUC6. The patient had no post-endoscopy submucosal dissection stenosis and remained disease-free without local recurrence. EGM of the cervical esophagus develops from the columnar epithelium during embryonic development. There are few reports on endoscopic submucosal dissection for mucosal cancer. Of these, immunostaining was performed in three cases. All were positive for MUC5AC and MUC6 and negative for MUC2 and CD10. Usually, EGM shows gastric type epithelium, but occasional cases with intestinal metaplasia, which show positivity for MUC2 and CD10, have been reported. Therefore, we consider this to be an extremely rare case of esophageal adenocarcinoma arising from intestinal metaplasia within the EGM.

Endoscopic resection is feasible for high-grade dysplasia in patients with ulcerative colitis.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic resection (ER) is feasible for treating well-circumscribed dysplasia in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). However, long-term prognosis of ER for high-grade dysplasia (HGD) in patients with UC remains unclear. We aimed to evaluate the long-term prognoses of ER for HGD compared with low-grade dysplasia (LGD) and verify the feasibility of ER and follow-up with surveillance colonoscopy for HGD. METHODS: An observational, single-center retrospective study included 38 and 22 patients with LGD and HGD who were followed-up with surveillance colonoscopy after ER. We evaluated the cumulative incidence rate of metachronous HGD or colorectal cancer (CRC) and identified the characteristics of metachronous dysplasia. RESULTS: The median follow-up period was 56 months, and surveillance colonoscopies were performed 3.6 times (mean). The 5-year cumulative incidence rate of HGD/CRC was relatively high in HGD (24.6%) than in LGD (13.7%), but the difference was not significant (p = .16). In HGD cases, six metachronous dysplasia lesions (two LGD and four HGD) were detected 11.6-40.5 months after ER. However, these patients did not progress to CRC. All metachronous lesions were well-circumscribed and with no invisible dysplasia surrounding them; they were 'endoscopically resectable' lesions. Two of the four metachronous HGD lesions were treated endoscopically and two, by colectomy. No synchronous HGD or CRC was detected in the colectomy specimens. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that ER and follow-up with surveillance colonoscopy is feasible in patients with HGD when histological complete resection is achieved.

Comparison of treatment outcomes between endoscopic submucosal dissection with the needle-type knife and insulated-tip knife for superficial esophageal neoplasms.

Our study aimed to compare the treatment outcomes between endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) with an insulated-tip knife (ESD-IT) and a needle-type knife (ESD-N) for large superficial esophageal neoplasms, as no study of this kind has been previously reported. We used the dataset of a multicenter, randomized controlled trial that compared conventional ESD (C-ESD) and traction-assisted ESD (TA-ESD) for superficial esophageal neoplasms. We compared the procedural outcomes between ESD-IT and ESD-N in a post hoc analysis and conducted sub-analyses based on traction assistance and electrical knife type. We included 223 (EST-IT, n = 169; ESD-N, n = 54) patients with no significant differences in baseline characteristics. The operator handover rate due to ESD difficulties was significantly higher in ESD-N (ESD-IT = 0.6% vs. ESD-N = 13.0%, P = 0.001), while the injection volume was significantly higher in ESD-IT than in ESD-N (40.0 vs. 20.5 mL, P < 0.001). Other outcomes were comparable between both groups (procedural time: 51.0 vs. 49.5 minute, P = 0.89; complete resection: 90.5% vs. 90.7%, P > 0.99; and complication rate: 1.8% vs. 3.7%, P = 0.60 for ESD-IT and ESD-N, respectively). In the sub-analyses, the handover rate was significantly lower with TA-ESD than with C-ESD for ESD-N (3.2% vs. 26.1%, P = 0.034), and a significantly smaller injection volume was used in TA-ESD than in C-ESD for ESD-IT (31.5 vs. 47.0 mL, P < 0.01). ESD with either endoscopic device achieved favorable treatment outcomes with low complication rates. The handover rate in ESD-N and the injection volume in ESD-IT improved with the traction method.

Learning curve analysis for duodenal endoscopic submucosal dissection: A single-operator experience.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Superficial duodenal epithelial tumors are emerging targets for endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). However, it is unknown how competence is achieved in duodenal ESD. This study aimed to elucidate the learning curve for duodenal ESD. METHODS: This retrospective observational study included 100 consecutive patients who underwent duodenal ESD by a single endoscopist between March 2014 and September 2021. The primary outcome was to define the learning curve for duodenal ESD by an endoscopist with sufficient non-duodenal ESD experience. Cumulative sum (CUSUM) curve analysis was used to assess the learning curve in terms of procedural speed. Comparative analyses of phases identified using the CUSUM method were performed. RESULTS: In total, 98 patients were included in the analysis. Evaluation of the cumulative sum curve revealed four distinct phases in the graph: phase I, cases 1-25 (learning phase); phase II, cases 26-47 (proficiency phase); phase III, cases 48-72 (mastery phase); and phase IV, cases 73-98 (after introduction of general anesthesia). The median procedural speed was significantly faster in phase II than in phase I (11.1 mm2 /min vs 7.0 mm2 /min, P = .002). Clinically significant intraoperative perforation tended to decrease through phase II to phase IV (22.7%, 12.0%, and 3.8% in phases II, III, and IV, respectively). Delayed perforation occurred only in phases I and II. CONCLUSIONS: Duodenal ESD requires 25 cases to gain proficiency and 50 to achieve mastery even for an endoscopist with extensive non-duodenal ESD experience.

Magnifying endoscopy is useful for tumor border diagnosis in ulcerative colitis patients.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic resection (ER) is feasible for well-circumscribed tumors in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC); however, the specific manner for diagnosis of the tumor border is unclear. We evaluated the efficacy of magnifying endoscopy (ME) for the diagnosis of tumor borders in UC. METHODS: We analyzed endoscopically or surgically resected tumors in UC patients in whom both chromoendoscopy (CE) and ME were performed, retrospectively. We classified the tumors based on tumor border visibility and evaluated tumor's characteristics and ER outcomes. RESULTS: We examined 100 tumors from 76 UC patients (66 distinct and 34 indistinct on CE). In 22 (65%) indistinct tumors on CE, ME improved the tumor border visibility. Compared with distinct tumors on CE, nonpolypoid and large tumors were more common in indistinct tumors on CE. In indistinct tumors even on ME, flat or depressed morphologies and type V pit were more frequently than in other groups. Sixty-five distinct tumors on CE and 18 distinct tumors on ME alone were treated endoscopically, and their R0 resection rate were 91% and 95% (p > 0.99). CONCLUSIONS: ME can improve the tumor border visibility in UC, and ER is feasible for tumors whose border can be visualized on ME.

Potential roles of gastroesophageal reflux in patients with superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma without major causative risk factors.

BACKGROUND: Cigarette smoking, alcohol consumption, and Lugol-voiding lesions (LVLs) are the major causative risk factors of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC); however, reports on ESCC cases unrelated to these risk factors are very limited. Here, we investigated the clinicopathological features and etiology of such cases. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 704 consecutive superficial ESCC tumors of 512 patients who were treated with endoscopic submucosal dissection. The enrolled patients were divided into two groups-the very low-risk (VLR)-group and risk (R)-group-based on the presence of the abovementioned risks. Clinical, endoscopic, and pathological characteristics and genetic findings were assessed in both groups. RESULTS: The VLR-group consisted of 21 (4.1%) patients, who were characteristically female. Patients in the VLR-group presented gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), hiatal hernia, and non-open-type atrophic gastritis, and were negative for Helicobacter pylori. We found unique endoscopic features-frequently observed in the posterior wall of the middle thoracic esophagus-with a linear shape that closely resembled the erosion-like form of GERD. Additionally, histopathological examination showed that these tumors presented atypical nuclei limited to the basal and parabasal layer, sequential to the surrounding changes that presented pathological chronic inflammation of esophagitis. Evaluation of somatic mutations in cancer-related genes using next-generation sequencing revealed that the positive carcinogenic potential (TP53 mutation) of the tumors was relatively frequent in the VLR-group. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that ESCC without major causative factors is related to GERD, with no remarkable oncogenic difference.

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

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: 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. METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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 short procedure 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 with perforation who underwent WP-ESD showed fluid collection on postprocedural multidetector CT images. CONCLUSIONS: WP-ESD can shorten procedure time for treating fibrotic colorectal neoplasms.

Small intestinal thrombotic microangiopathy following kidney transplantation diagnosed by balloon-assisted enteroscopy.

Thrombotic microangiopathy (TMA) is a serious complication following kidney transplantation. Although intestinal TMA is a major organ injury and causes abdominal pain, diarrhea and bloody stools, the clinical and endoscopic characteristics of small intestinal TMA remain unclear. Here, we report a drug-induced small intestinal TMA, which did not meet the laboratory-defined TMA criteria but was diagnosed by balloon-assisted enteroscopy (BAE). A 32-year-old woman who underwent kidney transplantation at the age of 10 years complained of abdominal pain, diarrhea and bloody stools one month after starting everolimus (EVE) as an immunosuppressant. Although she did not meet the diagnostic criteria for TMA serologically, BAE revealed a circumferential ulcer in the jejunum, and the pathological findings of a biopsy specimen showed microvascular thrombi, compatible with intestinal TMA. Her symptoms improved upon the discontinuation of EVE, demonstrating that EVE can cause drug-induced intestinal TMA. The present case suggests that BAE should be performed when abdominal pain, diarrhea, and bloody stools occur in patients receiving immunosuppressive medication following kidney transplantation, even if there is no evidence of TMA according to the laboratory definition.

An endoscopic treatment strategy for superficial tumors in patients with ulcerative colitis.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Endoscopic resection is feasible for superficial tumors in patients with ulcerative colitis; however, endoscopic resection options have not been evaluated comprehensively. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection, and decision making regarding endoscopic resection options for patients with ulcerative colitis. METHODS: Endoscopically treated tumors from patients with ulcerative colitis were analyzed retrospectively. We evaluated en bloc and R0 resection, adverse events, local tumor recurrence, and metachronous lesion occurrence rates. RESULTS: We examined 102 tumors (mean size, 12 mm; non-polypoid, 55 tumors) from 74 patients with ulcerative colitis, of whom, 39 and 63 underwent endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection, respectively. The R0 resection rate was significantly higher for endoscopic submucosal dissection (97%) than for endoscopic mucosal resection (80%) (P = 0.0015). For 11-20-mm tumors, the R0 resection rate was significantly higher for endoscopic submucosal dissection (94%) than for endoscopic mucosal resection (55%) (P = 0.0027); the endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection R0 rates did not differ for ≤ 10-mm tumors. The non-polypoid tumor R0 resection rates were significantly higher for endoscopic submucosal dissection (100%) than for endoscopic mucosal resection (65%) (P < 0.001) and did not differ regarding the polypoid tumor R0 resection rates (75% vs 86%, P = 0.49). Four patients experienced intraoperative perforation during endoscopic submucosal dissection. No local recurrences occurred. Metachronous high-grade dysplasia occurred in three patients during surveillance. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with ulcerative colitis, endoscopic submucosal dissection is suitable for ≥ 11-mm and non-polypoid tumors, whereas endoscopic mucosal resection is acceptable for ≤ 10-mm tumors.

Mixed histology poses a greater risk for noncurative endoscopic resection in early gastric cancers regardless of the predominant histologic types.

OBJECTIVES: Clinicopathologic characteristics and treatment outcomes of mixed-histological-type (MT) early gastric cancers (EGCs) treated with endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) have not been sufficiently elucidated. We aimed to clarify them in comparison with pure-histological-type EGCs. METHODS: We used 3022 consecutive EGCs in 2281 patients treated with ESD from our prospectively maintained database. Cases were stratified into four groups according to the final diagnosis of the resected specimen are as follows: 2780 pure differentiated-type (DT), 127 DT-predominant MT (D-MT), 87 pure undifferentiated-type (UDT), and 28 UDT-predominant MT (U-MT). Clinicopathologic characteristics and treatment outcome were compared between pure DT and D-MT, and between pure UDT and U-MT separately. Risk factors for deep submucosal invasion, lymphovascular invasion, and a final diagnosis of MT were identified using multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Both D-MT (41.7 vs. 92.0%; P < 0.0001) and U-MT (35.7 vs. 75.9%; P = 0.0002) showed a significantly lower curative resection rate than their pure histologic counterparts. Multivariate analysis revealed that MT was an independent risk factor for deep submucosal (OR 6.55; 95% CI, 4.18-10.14) and lymphovascular (OR 4.74; 95% CI, 2.72-8.29) invasion. Preoperative biopsy results that did not show well-differentiated tubular adenocarcinoma (OR 28.2; 95% CI, 18.9-42.9) were an independent risk factor for a final diagnosis of MT. CONCLUSIONS: MT poses a greater risk for noncurative resection regardless of the predominant histologic types, reflecting more aggressive malignant potential. Although a biopsy examination rarely shows MT, clinicians should consider the possibility of MT when a biopsy examination does not show well-differentiated tubular adenocarcinoma.

Incidence of metachronous gastric cancer after endoscopic submucosal dissection associated with eradication status of Helicobacter pylori.

OBJECTIVE: This study compared the clinicopathological features and treatment outcomes of patients with primary early gastric cancers (EGCs) who had undergone Helicobacter pylori eradication and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) with those of patients who were H. pylori-positive and had undergone ESD. Additionally, we investigated the incidence of metachronous cancer in these patients. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 1849 EGCs in 1407 patients who underwent ESD whom 201 primary EGCs were detected after H. pylori eradication (eradication group) and 1648 primary EGCs were detected in patients infected with H. pylori (infection group). We evaluated the clinicopathological features and treatment outcomes of the first ESD. We next divided 938 patients whose follow-up periods were >1 year into three groups, an eradication group (n = 61), an infection group (n = 562), and an eradication after ESD group (n = 315). The groups' cumulative metachronous occurrence rates were determined. RESULTS: The eradication group's median tumor size was significantly smaller, and the tumors were significantly more likely to be flat/depressed than those in the infection group. The groups did not differ regarding the treatment outcomes. The cumulative incidence of metachronous cancer was significantly higher in the eradication group than in the eradication after ESD group (P = 0.0454) and in the infection group than in the eradication after ESD group (P = 0.0233). CONCLUSION: The treatment outcomes for EGC in the eradication group were favorable. The higher incidence of metachronous cancer in the eradication group suggests that careful endoscopic follow-up examinations are required.

Appropriate endoscopic treatment selection and surveillance for superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors.

OBJECTIVES: Superficial nonampullary duodenal epithelial tumors (SNADETs) have become frequently detected and referred for endoscopic resection (ER). However, optimal treatment methods and long-term outcomes after ER of SNADETs have not been fully elucidated. We aimed to clarify them by analyzing our large cohort of patients with SNADETs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We enrolled 190 consecutive tumors from 189 patients undergoing ER between January 2004 and September 2019. Cases were stratified into endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), conventional endoscopic mucosal resection, (CEMR) and underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR). Baseline characteristics and short-term outcomes were compared between the groups. Long-term outcomes were also investigated with a median follow-up of 36 months. RESULTS: ESD significantly exceeded CEMR (96.4% vs. 52.9%; p = .0026) and UEMR (96.4% vs. 50.0%; p = .0008) in complete resection rates for 11- to 20-mm lesions; the differences were not significant for lesions ≤10 mm. Local recurrence only occurred in patients with an incomplete resection. Only patients with submucosal invasion died from the primary neoplasms. The 3- and 5-year disease-free survivals were 91.3% and 83.5%. CONCLUSIONS: While tumors ≤10 mm seem to be good indications for endoscopic mucosal resection, ESD should be considered for larger tumors to better achieve complete resection. Patients with submucosal invasive carcinomas have a great risk of cancer death. Therefore, a close follow-up and an additional treatment are desirable.

Factors influencing interruption of colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Although colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has become a standardized procedure worldwide, the difficulty of the procedure is well known. However, there have been no studies assessing the causes of treatment interruption. The present study aimed to evaluate the factors involved in the interruption of colorectal ESD. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 1116 consecutive superficial colorectal neoplasms of 1012 patients who were treated with ESD between August 2008 and September 2018. The clinicopathological characteristics and treatment outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: Interrupted ESD was reported in 14 lesions (1.3%) of the total study population. Univariate analysis of clinical characteristics indicated that age, 0-I macroscopic-type tumor, and tumor location on the left side colon were risk factors for interruption. Multivariate analysis revealed that 0-I macroscopic-type tumor was the sole preoperative independent risk factor for interruption. Univariate analysis revealed that the presence of muscle-retracting sign (MRS), deep submucosal tumor invasion, and intermediate invasive growth pattern represented the etiology of interruption. Multivariate analysis indicated that MRS can be a sole key sign for the interruption. Additionally, the resectability and curability of 0-I type tumors were significantly inferior to those of predominantly lateral spreading tumors. Observations of 0-I macroscopic-type tumors, MRS, and submucosal deep invasion were significantly more frequent in interrupted cases. Conventional endoscopic images without magnification endoscopy were more associated with interruption than irregular surfaces or Vi pit patterns in cases with 0-I type tumors. CONCLUSION: ESD of 0-I type tumors is highly disruptive, and undiagnosable submucosal infiltration can reduce the curability.

Third-look endoscopy prevents delayed bleeding after endoscopic submucosal dissection under antithrombotic therapy.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative delayed bleeding (PDB) after gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is the most common adverse event in patients receiving antithrombotics even with second-look endoscopy. Moreover, with the increasing prevalence of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases in an aging population with associated lifestyle-related diseases, an increasing number of patients receive antithrombotics. Several attempts have been made to prevent PDB in aging population; however, a consensus has yet to be reached. AIM: To examine the efficacy of third-look endoscopy (TLE) for PDB prevention. METHODS: One hundred patients with early gastric neoplasms receiving antithrombotics were prospectively enrolled and subjected to ESD with TLE between February 2017 and July 2019. The primary endpoint was PDB rate, which was compared with our preset threshold. Furthermore, we divided the bleeding period into early-and late-onset PDB (E-PDB and L-PDB, respectively) and analyzed its rate. As a secondary analysis, we compared PDB rates with those of a historical control group, using propensity score matching, and calculated the PDB rates per antithrombotic agent use in each group. RESULTS: In total, 96 patients and 114 specimens were finally evaluated. The overall PDB rate was 7.9% (9/114) [90%CI: 4.7-13.1, P = 0.005], while the late-and early-onset PDB rates (L-PDB and E-PDB) were 5.3% [90%CI: 2.7-9.9, P < 0.0001] and 2.6% [90%CI: 1.1-6.4, P = 0.51], respectively. Propensity score matching generated 58 matched pairs for TLE and control groups. No differences were found in overall PDB incidence (10.3% vs 20.7%, P = 0.12), whereas L-PDB occurrence significantly differed (5.2% vs 17.2%, P = 0.04) between groups. Considering antithrombotics' use, the overall PDB rate was higher for direct oral anticoagulants and multiple antithrombotics in the control group, while L-PDB incidence was lower in the TLE group for these agents (8.7% vs 23.1% and 5.0% vs 29.4%, respectively). CONCLUSION: TLE for gastric ESD reduces overall PDB, and especially L-PDB incidence, among patients receiving antithrombotics.

Histopathological validation of magnifying endoscopy for diagnosis of mixed-histological-type early gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: The undifferentiated-type (UDT) component profoundly affects the clinical course of early gastric cancers (EGCs). However, an accurate preoperative diagnosis of the histological types is unsatisfactory. To date, few studies have investigated whether the UDT component within mixed-histological-type (MT) EGCs can be recognized preoperatively. AIM: To clarify the histopathological characteristics of the endoscopically-resected MT EGCs for investigating whether the UDT component could be recognized preoperatively. METHODS: This was a single-center retrospective study. First, we attempted to clarify the histopathological characteristics of the endoscopically-resected MT EGCs with emphasis on the UDT component. Histopathological examination investigated each lesion's UDT component: (1) Whole mucosal layer occupation of the UDT component; (2) UDT component exposure to the surface of the mucosa; and (3) existence of a clear border between the differentiated-type and UDT components. Then, preoperative endoscopic images with magnifying endoscopy with narrow-band imaging (ME-NBI) were examined to identify whether the endoscopic UDT component finding was recognizable within the area where it was present in the histopathological examination. The preoperative biopsy results and comparative relationships between endoscopic and histopathological findings were also examined. RESULTS: In the histopathological examination, the whole mucosal layer occupation of the UDT component and exposure of the UDT component to the mucosal surface were observed in 67.3% (33/49) and 79.6% (39/49) of samples, respectively. A clear distinction of the border between the differentiated-type and UDT components could not be drawn in 65.3% (32/49) of MT lesions. In the endoscopic examination, the preoperative endoscopic images showed that only 24.5% (12/49) of MT EGCs revealed the UDT component within the area where it was present histopathologically. Histopathological UDT predominance was the single significant factor associated with the presence of the endoscopic UDT component finding (61.5% vs 11.1%, P = 0.0009). Only 26.5% (13/49) of the lesions were diagnosed from the pretreatment biopsy as having a UDT component. Combined results of the pretreatment biopsy and ME-NBI showed the preoperative presence of the UDT component in 40.8% (20/49) of MT EGCs. CONCLUSION: Recognition of a UDT component within MT EGCs is difficult even when pretreatment biopsy and ME-NBI are combined. Endoscopic resection plays a significant role in both treatment and diagnosis.