A Novel Snare Traction-Assisted Method During Endoscopic Resection for Upper Gastrointestinal Submucosal Tumors. Hu Jiancong,Liu Wei,Chen Zexian,Lin Dezheng,Su Mingli,Lan Ping Journal of laparoendoscopic & advanced surgical techniques. Part A Traction-assisted endoscopic resection is an approach to provide better procedural outcomes than conventional endoscopic procedure in treating gastric or esophageal epithelial lesions. Submucosal tumors (SMTs) are challenging to resect endoscopically due to the difficulty in exposure and high incidence of full-thickness resection. In this study, we investigated the efficacy of snare traction-assisted method, served as an "extra hand," for upper gastrointestinal SMTs. From June 2019 to May 2020, we used the snare traction-assisted method to treat 11 patients with 12 upper gastrointestinal SMTs in the Sixth Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University. The duration of the procedures and the outcomes were recorded. A total of 11 patients with 12 lesions were treated by snare traction-assisted endoscopic resection. The mean procedure time was 26.8 ± 8.3 minutes. En bloc resection was achieved in all the 12 lesions. The mean length of the specimens was 11.5 ± 4.0 mm. Full-thickness resection was performed in four lesions. The patients were discharged in 5.0 days after procedures without delayed bleeding or other complication reported. Snare traction-assisted method is an effective tool for endoscopic resection of upper gastrointestinal SMTs. Further prospective studies comparing the snare traction-assisted method with the conventional procedure are necessary. 10.1089/lap.2020.0462

Double-clip traction for colonic endoscopic submucosal dissection: a multicenter study of 599 consecutive cases (with video). Bordillon Pierre,Pioche Mathieu,Wallenhorst Thimotée,Rivory Jérôme,Legros Romain,Albouys Jérémie,Lepetit Hugo,Rostain Florian,Dahan Martin,Ponchon Thierry,Sautereau Denis,Loustaud-Ratti Véronique,Geyl Sophie,Jacques Jérémie Gastrointestinal endoscopy BACKGROUND AND AIMS:Colonic endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is particularly challenging and limited to a few expert centers. We recently conducted a pilot study on improvement of colonic ESD with systematic use of a countertraction device (double-clip traction with rubber band [DCT-ESD]). METHODS:A French prospective multicenter study was conducted between March 2017 and September 2019, including all consecutive cases of naive colonic ESD. Since the first case of DCT-ESD in March 2017, all cases of colonic ESD have been performed using the DCT-ESD strategy in the 3 centers involved in the study. RESULTS:Five hundred ninety-nine lesions with a mean size of 53 mm were included in this study, resected by 5 operators in 3 centers. The en bloc, R0, and curative resection rates were 95.7%, 83.5%, and 81.1%, respectively. The adverse event rates were 4.9% for perforation and 4.2% for postprocedure bleeding. Between 2017 and 2019, the rates of R0 and curative resections increased significantly from 74.7% in 2017 to 88.4% in 2019 (P = .003) and from 72.6% in 2017 to 86.3% in 2019 (P = .004), respectively. Procedure duration and speed of resection were 62.4 minutes and 39.4 mm/minute, respectively. No differences were noted between operators. CONCLUSION:DCT-ESD is a safe and reproducible technique, with results comparable with those of the large Japanese teams with speed of resection twice as high as previously reported studies. The DCT strategy is promising, cheap, and seems to be reproducible. Physicians performing colonic ESD should be aware of this promising tool to improve their results in ESD. 10.1016/j.gie.2021.01.036

Hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection: An alternative resection modality for large laterally spreading tumors in the cecum? Wang Xiang-Yao,Chai Ning-Li,Zhai Ya-Qi,Li Long-Song,Wang Zan-Tao,Zou Jia-Le,Shi Yong-Sheng,Linghu En-Qiang BMC gastroenterology BACKGROUND:Endoscopic resection for large, laterally spreading tumors (LSTs) in the cecum is challenging. Here we report on the clinical outcomes of hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in large cecal LSTs. METHODS:We retrospectively reviewed data from patients with cecal LSTs ≥ 2 cm who underwent ESD or hybrid ESD procedures between January of 2008 and June of 2019. We compared the baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes, including procedure time, the en bloc and complete resection rates, and adverse events. RESULTS:A total of 62 patients were enrolled in the study. There were 27 patients in the ESD group and 35 patients in the hybrid ESD group, respectively. Hybrid ESD was more used for lesions with submucosal fibrosis. No other significant differences were found in patient characteristics between the two groups. The hybrid ESD group had a significantly shorter procedure time compared with the ESD group (27.60 ± 17.21 vs. 52.63 ± 44.202 min, P = 0.001). The en bloc resection rate (77.1% vs. 81.5%, P = 0.677) and complete resection rate (71.4% vs. 81.5%, P = 0.359) of hybrid ESD were relatively lower than that of the ESD group in despite of no significant difference was found. The perforation and post-procedure bleeding rate (2.9% vs. 3.7%, P = 0.684) were similar between the two groups. One patient perforated during the ESD procedure, which was surgically treated. One patient in the hybrid ESD group experienced post-procedure bleeding, which was successfully treated with endoscopic hemostasis. Post-procedural fever and abdominal pain occurred in six patients in the ESD group and five patients in the hybrid ESD group. One patient in the ESD group experienced recurrence, which was endoscopically resected. CONCLUSION:The results of this study indicate that hybrid ESD may be an alternative resection strategy for large cecal LSTs with submucosal fibrosis. 10.1186/s12876-021-01766-w