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
. 2023 Nov;56(6):778-789.
doi: 10.5946/ce.2022.268. Epub 2023 Jul 26.

Significance of rescue hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection in difficult colorectal cases

Hayato Yamaguchi  1 , Masakatsu Fukuzawa  1 , Takashi Kawai  2 , Takahiro Muramatsu  1 , Taisuke Matsumoto  1 , Kumiko Uchida  1 , Yohei Koyama  1 , Akira Madarame  1 , Takashi Morise  1 , Shin Kono  1 , Sakiko Naito  1 , Naoyoshi Nagata  2 , Mitsushige Sugimoto  2 , Takao Itoi  1
Affiliations

Significance of rescue hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection in difficult colorectal cases

Hayato Yamaguchi et al. Clin Endosc. 2023 Nov.

Abstract

Background/aims: Hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), in which an incision is made around a lesion and snaring is performed after submucosal dissection, has some advantages in colorectal surgery, including shorter procedure time and preventing perforation. However, its value for rescue resection in difficult colorectal ESD cases remains unclear. This study evaluated the utility of rescue hybrid ESD (RH-ESD).

Methods: We divided 364 colorectal ESD procedures into the conventional ESD group (C-ESD, n=260), scheduled hybrid ESD group (SH-ESD, n=69), and RH-ESD group (n=35) and compared their clinical outcomes.

Results: Resection time was significantly shorter in the following order: RH-ESD (149 [90-197] minutes) >C-ESD (90 [60-140] minutes) >SH-ESD (52 [29-80] minutes). The en bloc resection rate increased significantly in the following order: RH-ESD (48.6%), SH-ESD (78.3%), and C-ESD (97.7%). An analysis of factors related to piecemeal resection of RH-ESD revealed that the submucosal dissection rate was significantly lower in the piecemeal resection group (25% [20%-30%]) than in the en bloc resection group (40% [20%-60%]).

Conclusion: RH-ESD was ineffective in terms of curative resection because of the low en bloc resection rate, but was useful for avoiding surgery.

Keywords: Colorectal neoplasms; Endoscopic mucosal resection; Hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection; Perforation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest

The authors have no potential conflicts of interest.

Figures

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.
Diagram showing the patient selection process. ESD, endoscopic submucosal dissection; C-ESD, con­ventional ESD; SH-ESD, scheduled hybrid ESD; RH-ESD, rescue hybrid ESD.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 2.
Sample scheduled hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection procedure. (A) A 30-mm flat elevated lesion located in the cecum. (B) After the injection of a mixture of 0.4% sodium hyaluronate solution, glycerol solution, and indigo carmine into the submucosal layer, a full circumferential incision was made outside the lesion. The submucosal layer was then dissected with an endoscopic submucosal dissection knife until it was large enough to be safely resected en bloc with a snare. (C, D) After adequate submucosal dissection, a local injection was administered in the submucosal layer, and the tip of the snare was placed on the mouth side of the lesion. The snare was then slowly opened to prevent the tip from shifting, and the lesion was strangulated for final resection.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 3.
Sample rescue hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection procedure. (A) Perforation that occurred during conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection. (B) Case with perforation in which endoclips were used for closure. (C, D) Because of the length of time taken for the treatment, a local injection was administered after submucosal dissection and snaring was performed for the lesion during dissection.
None
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

    1. Cao Y, Liao C, Tan A, et al. Meta-analysis of endoscopic submucosal dissection versus endoscopic mucosal resection for tumors of the gastrointestinal tract. Endoscopy. 2009;41:751–757. - PubMed
    1. Lian J, Chen S, Zhang Y, et al. A meta-analysis of endoscopic submucosal dissection and EMR for early gastric cancer. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012;76:763–770. - PubMed
    1. Fujiya M, Tanaka K, Dokoshi T, et al. Efficacy and adverse events of EMR and endoscopic submucosal dissection for the treatment of colon neoplasms: a meta-analysis of studies comparing EMR and endoscopic submucosal dissection. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015;81:583–595. - PubMed
    1. ASGE Technology Committee. Maple JT, Abu Dayyeh BK, et al. Endoscopic submucosal dissection. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015;81:1311–1325. - PubMed
    1. Abe N, Gotoda T, Hirasawa T, et al. Multicenter study of the long-term outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancer in patients 80 years of age or older. Gastric Cancer. 2012;15:70–75. - PubMed