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
. 2015 Dec;3(6):E577-83.
doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1393084. Epub 2015 Oct 8.

Prospective randomized comparison of endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection and conventional submucosal dissection in the resection of superficial esophageal/gastric lesions in a living porcine model

Cécile Gomercic  1 , Geoffroy Vanbiervliet  1 , Jean-Michel Gonzalez  2 , Marie-Christine Saint-Paul  3 , Rodrigo Garcès-Duran  2 , Emmanuelle Garnier  4 , Xavier Hébuterne  5 , Stéphane Berdah  6 , Marc Barthet  2
Affiliations

Prospective randomized comparison of endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection and conventional submucosal dissection in the resection of superficial esophageal/gastric lesions in a living porcine model

Cécile Gomercic et al. Endosc Int Open. 2015 Dec.

Abstract

Background and study aims: To assess experimentally endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD) as an alternative technique of endoscopic submucosal resection.

Patients and methods: This was a prospective, randomized, comparative experimental animal study carried out over a period of 9 months at the surgical research and teaching center of Aix-Marseille University, France. Virtual esophageal and gastric lesions measuring 3 cm in diameter were resected in pigs weighing 25 to 30 kg. The primary aim was to evaluate ESTD's efficacy compared with endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). The secondary aims were to determine complication rates as well as to assess procedure time and procedure speed, histologic quality of the resected specimen, and procedure cost.

Results: Eighteen procedures (9 ESD and 9 ESTD) were performed in nine pigs. The technical success rate was 88.9 % for both techniques, with one single failure in each. The en bloc resection rate was 100 % for ESTD and 88.9 % for ESD (one failure). The complication rate (22 %) and median procedure time were similar but dissection speed was quicker with ESTD in the esophagus (P = 0.03). Median procedure cost (728 Euros for ESD and ESTD) did not differ. On histologic examination, the lateral margins were healthy in 100 % of ESTD and in 88.9 % of ESD (P = 0.49). Deep resection margins were of better quality in ESTD (median submucosal thickness: 1307.1 µm vs. 884.7 µm; P = 0.039).

Conclusions: ESTD is feasible and safe but not superior in the treatment of superficial esophageal/gastric lesions in porcine models compared with ESD. Nevertheless it provides a better quality histologic specimen.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Different steps in the endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection method (combined schematic and pictoral views). a Landmarks of the lesion. b Submucosal lifting. c Horizontal distal incision. d Vertical proximal incision. e Create of the tunnel by the vertical proximal incision. f Tunneling dissection and reach the horizontal distal incision. g Incision of the lateral edges. h Final site of resection.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Flow diagram of the randomized procedures.
Fig. 3 a
Fig. 3 a
Measure of the submucosal thickness of a conventional ESD specimen. b Measure of the submucosal thickness of an ESTD specimen with a significantly deeper submucosal space analyzed.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Ohkuwa M, Hosokawa K, Boku N. et al.New endoscopic treatment for intramucosal gastric tumors using an insulated-tip diathermic knife. Endoscopy. 2001;33:221–226. - PubMed
    1. Kakushima N, Fujishiro M, Kodashima S. et al.A learning curve for endoscopic submucosal dissection of gastric epithelial neoplasms. Endoscopy. 2006;38:991–995. - PubMed
    1. Deprez P H, Bergman J J, Meisner S. et al.Current practice with endoscopic submucosal dissection in Europe: position statement from a panel of experts. Endoscopy. 2010;42:853–858. - PubMed
    1. Berr F, Ponchon T, Neureiter D. et al.Experimental endoscopic submucosal dissection training in a porcine model: learning experience of skilled Western endoscopists. Dig Endosc. 2011;23:281–289. - PubMed
    1. Teoh A Y, Chiu P W, Wong S K. et al.Difficulties and outcomes in starting endoscopic submucosal dissection. Surg Endosc. 2010;24:1049–1054. - PubMed