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
. 2019 Jul-Sep;82(3):375-378.

Feasibility of endoscopic submucosal dissection for recurrent colorectal tumors after endoscopic mucosal resection

Affiliations
  • PMID: 31566324
Free article

Feasibility of endoscopic submucosal dissection for recurrent colorectal tumors after endoscopic mucosal resection

T Suzuki et al. Acta Gastroenterol Belg. 2019 Jul-Sep.
Free article

Abstract

Background: Colorectal recurrent lesions after endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) often contain severe fibrosis. In such lesions, repeat EMR is often difficult and endoscopic piecemeal mucosal resection (EPMR) has a high risk of repeated recurrence, while surgery is considered overtreatment. Whether ESD can be used safely and reliably to treat such difficult lesions has not been adequately verified. We analyzed the treatment outcomes of ESD for recurrent lesions after EMR.

Methods: Among 653 colorectal ESD conducted in our institution between April 2012 and August 2017, 27 consecutive patients underwent the procedure for recurrent lesions after EMR. Treatment outcomes including en bloc resection rate, R0 resection rate, and curative resection rate; complications were analyzed.

Results: Treatment outcomes of the 27 patients were as follows: en bloc resection rate 81.5%, R0 resection rate 74.1%, curative resection rate 74.1%, median procedure time 47 min (range 10‒210 min), perforation rate 0%, and delayed bleeding rate 3.7%. The corresponding rates for 626 patients who underwent colorectal ESD during the same period for lesions other than recurrence after EMR were 97.2%, 95.5%, 88.7%, 37 min (7-225 min), 0.5%, and 2.8%. There were no differences in complication rates. Treatment outcomes including en bloc resection rate were inferior in the recurrence group compared to non-recurrent group, but no local recurrence was found in all patients.

Conclusions: Colorectal ESD is feasible for recurrent colorectal lesions after EMR. The procedure is safe and achieves good treatment outcomes with no local recurrence.

Keywords: ESD; colorectal; recurrent; residual; salvage.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest

Similar articles

Cited by