• Journal of Digestive Cancer Research
• /
• v.10 no.1
• /
• pp.16-21
• /
• 2022

Diagnosis of gastric subepithelial tumors (SETs) is sometimes difficult with conventional endoscopy or tissue sampling with standard biopsy, so non-invasive imaging modalities such as endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and computed tomography are used to evaluate the characteristics of SETs features (size, location, originating layer, echogenicity, shape). However imaging modalities alone is not able to distinguish among all types of SETs, so histology is the gold standard for obtaining the final diagnosis. For tissue sampling, mucosal cutting biopsy and mucosal incision-assisted biopsy and EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration or biopsy (EUS-FNA or EUS-FNB) is commonly recommended. Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) are used for resection of SETs involving the mucosal and superficial submucosal layers, could not treat adequately and safely the SETs involving the deep mucosa and muscularis propria. Submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection (STER) and endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) is used as a therapeutic option for the treatment of SETs with the development of reliable endoscopic closure techniques and tools.

• Clinical Endoscopy
• /
• v.55 no.4
• /
• pp.496-506
• /
• 2022

Recently, research on rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) has increased during the last few decades. Rectal NETs measuring <10 mm without atypical features and confined to the submucosal layer have only 1% risk of metastasis, and the long-term survival probability of patients without metastasis at the time of diagnosis is approximately 100%. Therefore, the current guidelines suggest endoscopic resection of rectal NETs of <10 mm is regarded as a safe therapeutic option. However, there are currently no clear recommendations for technique selection for endoscopic resection. The choice of treatment modality for rectal NETs should be based on the lesion size, endoscopic characteristics, grade of differentiation, depth of vertical involvement, lymphovascular invasion, and risk of metastasis. Moreover, the complete resection rate, complications, and experience at the center should be considered. Modified endoscopic mucosal resection is the most suitable resection method for rectal NETs of <10 mm, because it is an effective and safe technique that is relatively simple and less time-consuming compared with endoscopic submucosal dissection. Endoscopic submucosal dissection should be considered when the tumor size is >10 mm, suctioning is not possible due to fibrosis in the lesion, or when the snaring for modified endoscopic mucosal resection does not work well.

• Clinical Endoscopy
• /
• v.55 no.1
• /
• pp.95-100
• /
• 2022

Background/Aims: Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is the primary treatment for duodenal adenomas; however, it is associated with a high risk of perforation and bleeding, especially with larger lesions. The goal of this study was to demonstrate the feasibility and safety of endoscopic suturing (ES) for the closure of mucosal defects after duodenal EMR. Methods: Consecutive adult patients who underwent ES of large mucosal defects after EMR of large (>2 cm) duodenal adenomas were retrospectively enrolled. The OverStitch ES system was employed for closing mucosal defects after EMR. Clinical outcomes and complications, including delayed bleeding and perforation, were documented. Results: During the study period, ES of mucosal defects was performed in seven patients in eight sessions (six for prophylaxis and two for the treatment of perforation). All ES sessions were technically successful. No early or delayed post-EMR bleeding was recorded. In addition, no clinically obvious duodenal stricture or recurrence was encountered on endoscopic follow-up evaluation, and no patients required subsequent surgical intervention. Conclusions: ES for the prevention and treatment of duodenal perforation after EMR is technically feasible, safe, and effective. ES should be considered an option for preventing or treating perforations associated with EMR of large duodenal adenomas.

• Journal of Gastric Cancer
• /
• v.10 no.2
• /
• pp.49-54
• /
• 2010

Endoscopic resection is now accepted as curative treatment modalities for early gastric cancer without lymph node metastasis. However, based on large-scaled data about the risk of lymph node metastasis in early gastric cancer and as a result of the technical development of endoscopic devices, it was suggested that the criteria for endoscopic resection should be extended. According to the treatment guidelines for gastric cancer in Japan, the extended indications include the following: differentiated-type mucosal cancer without ulceration and greater than 2 cm in diameter, differentiated-type mucosal cancer with ulceration and up to 3 cm in diameter, undifferentiated-type mucosal cancer without ulceration and up to 2 cm in diameter, and, in the absence of lymphovascular invasion, a tumor not deeper than submucosal level 1 (less than $500\;{\mu}m$). In this review, we discuss the evidence of the application of expanded endoscopic indication based on analysis of biologic behavior and data of endoscopic resection.

• Clinical Endoscopy
• /
• v.56 no.4
• /
• pp.409-422
• /
• 2023

Endoscopic resection (ER) is widely utilized as a minimally invasive treatment for upper gastrointestinal tumors; however, complications could occur during and after the procedure. Post-ER mucosal defect leads to delayed perforation and bleeding; therefore, endoscopic closure methods (endoscopic hand-suturing, the endoloop and endoclip closure method, and over-the-scope clip method) and tissue shielding methods (polyglycolic acid sheets and fibrin glue) are developed to prevent these complications. During duodenal ER, complete closure of the mucosal defect significantly reduces delayed bleeding and should be performed. An extensive mucosal defect that comprises three-quarters of the circumference in the esophagus, gastric antrum, or cardia is a significant risk factor for post-ER stricture. Steroid therapy is considered the first-line option for the prevention of esophageal stricture, but its efficacy for gastric stricture remains unclear. Methods for the prevention and management of ER-related complications in the esophagus, stomach, and duodenum differ according to the organ; therefore, endoscopists should be familiar with ways of preventing and managing organ-specific complications.

• Journal of Chest Surgery
• /
• v.53 no.4
• /
• pp.172-177
• /
• 2020

Superficial esophageal neoplasms (SENs) are being diagnosed increasingly frequently due to the screening endoscopy and advances in endoscopic techniques. Endoscopic resection (ER) is a relatively noninvasive treatment method with low morbidity and mortality that provides excellent oncologic outcomes. Endoscopic submucosal dissection is associated with higher rates of en bloc, complete and curative resections and lower rates of local recurrence than endoscopic mucosal resection. The most serious complication of ER is stricture, the treatment and prevention of which are crucial to maintain the patient's quality of life. ER for SEN is feasible, effective, and safe and can be considered a first-line treatment for SENs in which it is technically feasible.

• Korean Journal of Bronchoesophagology
• /
• v.17 no.1
• /
• pp.23-28
• /
• 2011

Diagnosis of early esophageal cancer has become more frequent as a result of improved endoscopic technology, surveillance programmes, and increasing experience and awareness on the part of endoscopists. In early esophageal cancer, squamous cell carcinoma and early adenocarcinoma must be managed differently because they have different origins, pathogenesis. and clinical characteristics. The current treatment options vary widely, from extended resection with lymphadenectomy to endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) or ablation. None of these treatment options can be recommended universally. Instead, an individualized strategy should be based on the depth of tumor infiltration into the mucosa or submucosa, the presence or absence of lymph node metastases, the multicentricity of tumor growth, the length of the segment of intestinal metaplasia, and comorbidities of the patient. EMR has become increasingly important, both as a diagnostic tool for the staging of esophageal carcinomas and as a method of carrying out definitive treatment when the cancer meets certain criteria in which the risk of lymph-node metastasis is negligible. EMR may be sufficient in a subset of patients who have m1 or m2 squamous cell carcinoma and in patients who have isolated foci of high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia or mucosal cancer.

• Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention
• /
• v.15 no.4
• /
• pp.1803-1806
• /
• 2014

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) was originally developed for en bloc resection of large, flat gastrointestinal lesions. Compared with endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), ESD is considered to be more time consuming and have more complications for treatment of early esophageal carcinoma, such as bleeding, stenosis and perforation. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of ESD and EMR for such lesions. We searched databases, such as PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Science Citation Index updated to 2013 for related trials. In the meta-analysis, the main outcome measurements were the en bloc resection rate, the histologically resection rate and the local recurrence rate. We also compared the operation time and the incidences of procedure-related complications. Five trials were identified, and a total of 710 patients and 795 lesions were included. The en bloc and histologically complete resection rates were higher in the ESD group compared with the EMR group (odds ratio (OR) 27.3; 95% CI, 11.5-64.8; OR 18.4; 95% CI, 8.82-38.59). The local recurrence rate was lower in the ESD group (OR 0.13, 95 % CI 0.04-0.43). The meta-analysis also showed ESD was more time consuming, but did not increase the complication rate (P=0.76). The results implied that compared with EMR, ESD showed better en bloc and histologically resection rates, and lower local recurrence, without increasing the incidence of procedure-related complications in the treatment of early esophageal carcinoma.

• Journal of Gastric Cancer
• /
• v.11 no.3
• /
• pp.146-154
• /
• 2011

Endoscopic resection has been accepted as a curative modality for early gastric cancer (EGC). Since conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) has been introduced, many improvements in endoscopic accessories and techniques have been achieved. Recently, endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) using various electrosurgical knives has been performed for complete resection of EGC and enables complete resection of EGC, which is difficult to completely resect in the era of conventional EMR. Currently, ESD is accepted as the standard method for endoscopic resection of EGC in indicated cases. In this review, the history of endoscopic treatment for EGC, overall ESD procedures, and indications and clinical results of endoscopic treatment will be presented.

• Clinical Endoscopy
• /
• v.55 no.1
• /
• pp.15-21
• /
• 2022

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is the standard treatment method for esophageal, gastric, and colorectal cancers. However, it has not been standardized for duodenal lesions because of its high complication rates. Recently, minimally invasive and simple methods such as cold snare polypectomy and underwater endoscopic mucosal resection have been utilized more for superficial nonampullary duodenal epithelial tumors (SNADETs). Although the rate of complications associated with duodenal ESD has been gradually decreasing because of technical advancements, performing ESD for all SNADETs is unnecessary. As such, the appropriate treatment plan for SNADETs should be chosen according to the lesion type, patient condition, and endoscopist's skill.