Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2012 May;75(5):1092-7.
doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2011.12.009. Epub 2012 Jan 31.

Injectable drug-eluting elastomeric polymer: a novel submucosal injection material

Richard T Tran  1 , Michael Palmer, Shou-Jiang Tang, Thomas L Abell, Jian Yang
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Injectable drug-eluting elastomeric polymer: a novel submucosal injection material

Richard T Tran et al. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012 May.

Abstract

Background: Biodegradable hydrogels can deliver therapeutic payloads with great potentials in EMR and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) to yield improvements in efficacy and foster mucosal regeneration.

Objective: To assess the efficacy of an injectable drug-eluting elastomeric polymer (iDEEP) as a submucosal injection material.

Design: Comparative study of 3 different solutions by using material characterization tests and ex vivo and in vivo porcine models.

Setting: Academic hospital.

Interventions: Thirty gastric submucosal cushions were achieved with saline solution (0.9%), sodium hyaluronate (0.4%), and iDEEP (n = 10) in ex vivo porcine stomachs. Four porcine gastric submucosal cushions were then created in vivo by using iDEEP.

Main outcome measurements: Maximum injection pressure, rebamipide release rate, submucosal elevation duration, and assessment of in vivo efficacy by en bloc resection.

Results: No significant difference in injection pressures between iDEEP (28.9 ± 0.3 psi) and sodium hyaluronate (29.5 ± 0.4 psi, P > .05) was observed. iDEEP gels displayed a controlled release of rebamipide up to 2 weeks in vitro. The elevation height of iDEEP (5.7 ± 0.5 mm) was higher than that of saline solution (2.8 ± 0.2 mm, P < .01) and sodium hyaluronate (4.2 ± 0.2 mm, P < .05). All EMR procedures were successfully performed after injection of iDEEP, and a large gel cushion was noted after the resection procedure.

Limitations: Benchtop, ex vivo, and nonsurvival pig study.

Conclusions: A novel injection solution was evaluated for endoscopic resection. These results suggest that iDEEP may provide a significant step toward the realization of an ideal EMR and endoscopic submucosal dissection injection material.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

We have no conflict of interest to disclose

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Photographic representation of the liquid to gel transformation of the iDEEP. Gel transformation only occurs after the A and B Components are combined.
Figure 2
Figure 2
A) Maximum injection pressures of the tested solutions, and B) in vitro Rebamipide release profiles from iDEEP gels.
Figure 2
Figure 2
A) Maximum injection pressures of the tested solutions, and B) in vitro Rebamipide release profiles from iDEEP gels.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Photographic images depicting the chronological changes in the submucosal elevation of A) saline (0.9%), B) sodium hyaluronate (0.4%), and C) iDEEP (30%) from top to bottom in turn 1, 5, 15, and 30 minutes after injection using porcine gastric samples ex vivo. D) Graphical representation of the chronological changes in the submucosal elevation.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Endoscopic views of A) Contained vertical submucosal elevation after injection of the iDEEP Part A and B solution, and B) Mucosal defect post-iDEEP EMR resection reveals a solidified soft biodegradable gel.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Endoscopic views of A) Contained vertical submucosal elevation after injection of the iDEEP Part A and B solution, and B) Mucosal defect post-iDEEP EMR resection reveals a solidified soft biodegradable gel.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Bures J, Kopacova M, Kvetina J, et al. Different solutions used for submucosal injection influenced early healing of gastric endoscopic mucosal resection in a preclinical study in experimental pigs. Surg Endosc. 2009;23:2094–2101. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Coda S, Lee SY, Gotoda T. Endoscopic Muscosal Resection and Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection as Treatements for Early Gastrointestinal Cancers in Western Countries. Gut and Liver. 2007;1:12–21. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Fujishiro M, Yahagi N, Kashimura K, et al. Comparison of various submucosal injection solutions for maintaining mucosal elevation during endoscopic mucosal resection. Endoscopy. 2004;36:579–583. - PubMed
    1. Kantsevoy SV, Adler DG, Conway JD, et al. Endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection. Gastrointest Endosc. 2008;68:11–18. - PubMed
    1. Yamamoto H, Yube T, Isoda N, et al. A novel method of endoscopic mucosal resection using sodium hyaluronate. Gastrointest Endosc. 1999;50:251–256. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms