Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Expanding Role of Third Space Endoscopy in the Management of Esophageal Diseases

  • Esophagus (PG Iyer, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Treatment Options in Gastroenterology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Opinion statement

“Third space” endoscopy, also commonly referred as submucosal endoscopy, is founded on the principle that the deeper layers of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract can be accessed by tunneling in the submucosal space without compromising the integrity of the overlying mucosa. Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM), endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), and submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection (STER) are innovative techniques within the field of third space endoscopy in the management of esophageal disorders. POEM has become an accepted minimally invasive therapy for achalasia and related motility disorders with excellent short-term results, with early studies yielding similar efficacy to surgical myotomy and increased durability when compared to pneumatic balloon dilation (PBD). Data are needed to establish long-term outcomes with POEM, with particular interest on the incidence of gastroesophageal reflux, which appears to be higher than initially anticipated. ESD, a mature endoscopic resection technique in Asia, has recently gained traction in the West as a viable option for the management of early Barrett’s esophagus (BE) neoplasia. Compared to standard endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), ESD allows the en bloc resection of lesions irrespective of size, which may facilitate histological interpretation and reduce recurrence rates. Large prospective randomized controlled trials are needed to validate the efficacy and safety of this technique and to further define its role in the endoscopic armamentarium in early BE neoplasia. STER is an attractive technique that theoretically permits the resection of subepithelial esophageal tumors (SETs) arising from the deeper GI layers. Initial studies from highly experienced endoscopic centers support its technical feasibility and safety, although these results should be interpreted with caution due to variability arising from small numbers and heterogeneity among studies. Overall, third space endoscopy is an expanding field within endoscopic therapeutics for the treatment of esophageal diseases. While initial results have been very promising, large prospective studies, long-term data, and structured training programs with the establishment of competency parameters are needed before third space endoscopy can be advocated outside of highly specialized centers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References and Recommended Reading

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Kalloo AN, Singh VK, Jagannath SB, et al. Flexible transgastric peritoneaoscopy: a novel approach to diagnostic and therapeutic intervention in the peritoneal cavity. Gastrointest Endosc. 2004;60:114–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. ASGE; SAGES. ASGE/SAGES Working Group on natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery White Paper October 2005. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006;63:199–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Lessons HRH. learned from traditional NOTES: a historical perspective. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 2016;26:221–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Sumiyama K, Gostout CJ, Rajan E, et al. Transesophageal mediastinoscopy by submucosal endoscopy with mucosal flap safety valve technique. Gastrointest Endosc. 2007;65:679–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Sumiyama K, Gostout CJ, Rajan E, et al. Transgastric cholecystectomy: transgastric accessibility to the gallbladder improved with the SEMF method and a novel multibending therapeutic endoscope. Gastrointest Endosc. 2007;65:679.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Sumiyama K, Gostout CJ, Rajan E, et al. Submucosal endoscopy with mucosal flap safety valve. Gastrointest Endosc. 2007;65:688.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Sumiyama K, Tajiri H, Gostout CJ. Submucosal endoscopy with mucosal flap safety valve (SEMF) technique: a safe access method into the peritoneal cavity and mediastinum. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol. 2008;17:365–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Pasricha PJ, Hawari R, Ahmed I, et al. Submucosal endoscopic esophageal myotomy: a novel experimental approach for the treatment of achalasia. Endoscopy. 2007;39:761–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Inoue H, Minami H, Kobayashi Y, et al. Peroral endocopic myotomy (POEM) for esophageal achalasia. Endoscopy. 2010;42:265–71.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Yang D, Draganov PV. Introducing POEM in your institution: the blueprint for launching a new program in the endoscopy suite. Practical Gastroenterology. 2016;32:52–6.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Yang D, Pannu D, Zhang Q, et al. Evaluation of anesthesia management, feasibility and efficacy of peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for achalasia performed in the endoscopy unit. Endosc Int Open. 2015;3:E289–95.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Stavropoulos SN, Modavil RJ, Friedel D, Savides T. The International Per Oral Endoscopic Myotomy Survey (IPOEMS): a snapshot of the global POEM experience. Surg Endosc. 2013;27(9):3322–38.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Li QL, Zhou PH. Perspective on peroral endoscopic myotomy for achalasia: Zhongshan experience. Gut Liver. 2015;9:152–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Onimaru M, Inoue H, Ikeda H, et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy is a viable option for failed surgical esophagocardiomyotomy instead of redo surgical Heller myotomy: a single center prospective study. J Am Coll Surg. 2013;217:598–605.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Khumbari V, Besharati S, Abdelgelil A, et al. Intraprocedural fluoroscopy to determine the extent of the cardiomyotomy during per-oral endoscopic myotomy (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 81: 1451–1456.

  16. Grimes KL, Inoue H, Onimaru M, et al. Double-scope per oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM): a prospective randomized controlled trial. Surg Endosc. 2016;30:1344–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Li C, Gong A, Zhang J, et al. Clinical outcomes and safety of partial full-thickness myotomy versus circular muscle myotomy in peroral endoscopic myotomy for achalasia patients. Gastroenterol Res Pract. 2017;2017:2,676,513.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Rider E, Swanstrom LL, Perretta S, et al. Intraoperative assessment of esophagogastric junction distensibility during per oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for esophageal motility disorders. Surg Endosc. 2013;27:400–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Familiari P, Gigante G, Marchese M, et al. EndoFLIP system for the intraoperative evaluation of peroral endoscopic myotomy. United European Gastroenterol J. 2014;2:77–83.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Stavropoulous SN, Modayil R, Friedel D. Peroral endoscopic myotomy for the treatment of achalasia. Curr Opin Gastroenterol. 2015;31:430–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Yang D, Draganov PV. Closing the gap in POEM. Endoscopy. 2013;45:677.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Shiwaku H, Inoue H, Yamashita Y. Mucostomy closure using the endoloop/clips technique in a purse-string manner after an unsuccessful closure during peroral endoscopic myotomy. Dig Endosc. 2015;27:630–1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. • Akintoye E, Kumar N, Obaitan I, et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy: a meta-analysis. Endoscopy. 2016;48:1059–68. Recent comprehensive meta-analysis evaluating clinical outcomes of POEM for the treatment of achalasia

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Barbieri LA, Hassan C, Rosati R, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis: efficacy and safety of POEM for achalasia. United European Gastroenterol J. 2015;3:325–34.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Crespin OM, LWC L, Parmar A, et al. Safety and efficacy of POEM for treatment of achalasia: a systematic review of the literature. Surg Endosc. 2017;31:2187–201.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Inoue H, Sato H, Ikeda H, et al. Per-oral endoscopic myotomy: a series of 500 patients. J Am Coll Surg. 2015;221:256–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Patel K, Abbassi-Ghadi N, Markar S, et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy for the treatment of esophageal achalasia: a systematic review and pooled analysis. Dis Esophagus. 2016;29:807–19.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Pannu D, Yang D, Abbitt PL, et al. Prospective evaluation of CT esophagram findings after peroral endoscopic myotomy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2016;84:408–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Hungness ES, Teitelbaum EN, Santos BF, et al. Comparison of perioperative outcomes between peroral esophageal myotomy (POEM) and laparoscopic Heller myotomy. J Gastrointest Surg. 2013;17:228–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Bhayani NH, Kurian AA, Dunst CM, et al. A comparative study on comprehensive, objective outcomes of laparoscopic Heller myotomy with per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for achalasia. Ann Surg. 2014;259:1098–103.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Chan SM, Wu JC, Teoh AY, et al. Comparison of early outcomes and quality of life after laparoscopic Heller’s cardiomyotomy to peroral endoscopic myotomy for treatment of achalasia. Dig Endosc. 2016;28:27–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. • Kumbhari V, Tieu AH, Onimaru M, et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) vs laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM) for the treatment of type III achalasia in 75 patients: a multicenter comparative study. Endosc Int Open 2015;3:E195–201. Multicenter retrospectively study comparing POEM vs LHM in patients with spastic type III achalasia.

  33. Schlottmann F, Luckett DJ, Fine J, et al. Laparoscopic Heller myotomy versus peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for achalasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg 2017. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.000000000002311.

  34. Awaiz A, Yunus RM, Khan S, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of perioperative outcomes of peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) and laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM) for achalasia. Surg Laparsoc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2017;27:123–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Sanaka MR, Hayat U, Thota PN, et al. Efficacy of peroral endoscopic myotomy vs other achalasia treatments in improving esophageal function. World J Gastroenterol. 2016;22:4918–25.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Meng F, Li P, Wang Y, et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy compared with pneumatic dilation for newly diagnosed achalasia. Surg Endosc 2017;31:4665–72.

  37. •• Ponds FA, Fockens P, Nehaus H, et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) versus pneumatic dilation in therapy-naïve patients with achalasia: results of a randomized controlled trial. Gastroenterology. 2017;152:S139. Highly anticipated randomized controlled trial comparing POEM vs. pneumatic balloon dilation for the treatment of achalasia

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Bredenoord AJ, Fox M, Kahrilas PJ, et al. Chicago classification criteria of esophageal motility disorders defined in high resolution esophageal pressure topography. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2012;24:57–65.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. • Khashab MA, Messallam AA, Onimaru M, et al. International multi-center experience with peroral endoscopic myotomy for the treatment of spastic esophageal disorders refractory to medical therapy (with video). Gastrointest Endosc. 2015;81:1170–7. First multi-center study evaluating outcomes of POEM for the treatment of spastic esophageal disorders

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Khan MA, Kumbhari V, Ngamruengphong S, et al. Is POEM the answer for the management of spastic esophageal disorders? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Dig Dis Sci. 2017;62:35–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Kandulski A, Fuchs KH, Weigt J, et al. Jackhammer esophagus: high-resolution manometry and therapeutic approach using peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM). Dis Esophagus. 2016;29:695–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Bechara R, Ikeda H, Inoue H. Peroral endoscopic myotomy for Jackhammer esophagus: to cut or not to cut the lower esophageal sphincter. Endosc Int Open. 2016;4:E585–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Moonen A, Annese V, Belmans A, et al. Long-term results of the European achalasia trial: a multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing pneumatic dilation versus laparoscopic Heller myotomy. Gut. 2016;65:732–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Boeckxstaens GE, Annese V, des Varannes SB, et al. Pneumatic dilation versus laparoscopic Heller’s myotomy for idiopathic achalasia. N Engl J Med. 2011;3645:1807–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Kumbhari V, Behary J, Szczesniak M, et al. Efficacy and safety of pneumatic dilation for achalasia in the treatment of post-myotomy symptom relapse. Am J Gastroenterol. 2013;108:1076–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Pallati PK, Mittal SK. Operativeinterventions for failed Heller myotomy: a single institution experience. Am Surg. 2011;77:330–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Onimaru M, Inoue H, Ikeda H, et al. Peoral endoscopic myotomy is a viable option for failed surgical esophagocardiomyotomy instead of redo surgical Heller myotomy: a single center prospective study. J Am Coll Surg. 2013;217:598–605.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Vigneswaran Y, Yetasook AK, Zhao JC, et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM): feasible as reoperation following Heller myotomy. J Gastrointestinal Surg. 2014;18:1071–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Zhou PH, Li QL, Yao LQ, et al. Peroral endoscopic remyotomy for failed Heller myotomy: a prospective single-center study. Endoscopy. 2013;45:161–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. • Ngamruengphong S, Inoue H, Ujiki MB, et al. Efficacy and safety of peroral endoscopic myotomy for treatment of achalasia after failed Heller myotomy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2017;15:1531–37. Multicenter study demonstrating high clinical response to POEM in patients after failed LHM but lower when compared to patients without prior surgery.

  51. Van Hoeij FB, Ponds FA, Werner Y, et al. Management of recurrent symptoms after per-oral endoscopic myotomy in achalasia. Gastrointest Endosc 2018;87:95–101.

  52. Maselli R, Inoue H, Misawa M. Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) in a 3-year-old girl with severe growth retardation, achalasia, and Down syndrome. Endoscopy. 2012;44(Suppl 2 UCTN):E285–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Familiary P, Marchese M, Gigante G, et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy for the treatment of achalasia in children. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2013;57:794–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Chen WF, Li QL, Zhou PH, et al. Long-term outcomes of peroral endoscopic myotomy for achalasia in pediatric patients: a prospective, single-center study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015;81:91–100.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Tan Y, Zhu H, Li C, et al. Comparison of peroral endoscopic myotomy and endoscopic balloon dilation for primary treatment of pediatric achalasia. J Pediatr Surg. 2016;51:1613–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Almogy G, Anthone GJ, Crookes PF. Achalasia in the context of morbid obesity: a rare but important association. Obes Surg. 2003;13:896–900.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Koppman JS, Poggi L, Szomstein A, et al. Esophageal motility disorders in the morbidly obese population. Surg Endosc. 2007;21:761–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Cote-Daigneault J, Leclerc P, Joubert J, et al. High prevalence of esophageal dysmotility in asymptomatic obese patients. Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2014;28:311–4.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  59. Yang D, Draganov PV. Peroral endoscopic myotom (POEM) for achalasia after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Endoscopy. 2014;46:E11–2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Von Renteln D, Inoue H, Minami H, et al. Perorla endoscopic myotomy for the treatment of achalasia: a prospective single center study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2012;107:411–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Costagmagna G, Marchese M, Familiari P, et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for oesophageal achalasia: preliminary results in humans. Dig Liver Dis. 2012;44:827–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Kumbhari V, Familiari P, Bjerregaard NC, et al. Gastroesophageal reflux after peroral endoscopic myotomy: a multicenter case-control study. Endoscopy. 2017;49:634–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Wagh MS, Yang D, Chavalitdhamrong D, Draganov PV. Per-oral endosopic tunneling for restoration of the esophagus (POETRE). Gastrointest Endosc. 2014;80:330.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Wagh MS, Draganov PV. Per-oral endoscopic tunneling for restoration of the esophagus: a novel endoscopic submucosal dissection technique for therapy of complete esophageal obstruction. Gastrointest Endosc. 2017;85:722–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Shimizu Y, Takahashi M, Yoshida T, et al. Endoscopic resection (endoscopic mucosal resection/endoscopic submucosal dissection) for superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: current status of various techniques. Dig Endosc 2013;25 Suppl 1:13–19.

  66. Edgren G, Adami HO, Weiderpass E, et al. A global assessment of the oesophageal adenocarcinoma epidemic. Gut. 2013;62:1406–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Sikkema M, de Jonge PJ, Steyerberg EW, et al. Risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma and mortality in patients with Barrett’s esophagus: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010;8:235–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Desai TK, Krishnan K, Samala N, et al. the incidence of oesophageal adenocarcinoma in non-dysplastic Barett’s oesophagus: a meta-analysis. Gut. 2012;61:970–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Hvid-Jensen F, Pedersen L, Drewes AM, et al. Incidence of adenocarcinoma among patients with Barrett’s esophagus. N Engl J Med. 2011;365:1375–83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Seewald S, Ang TL, Gotoda T, et al. Total endoscopic resection of Barrett esophagus. Endoscopy. 2008;40:1016–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Draganov PV, Gotoda T, Chavalitdhamrong D, et al. Techniques of endoscopic submucosal dissection: application for the Western endoscopist? Gastrointest Endosc. 2013;78:677–88.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Yang D, Coman RM, Kahaleh M, et al. Endoscopic submucosal dissection for Barrett’s early neoplasia: a multicenter study in the United States. Gastrointest Endosc 2017;86:600–7.

  73. ASGE Technology Committee, Maple JT, Abu Dayyeh BK, et al. Endoscopic submucosal dissection. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015;81:1311–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Aslan F, Seren AR, Akpinar Z, et al. The usage of overtube has a favorable effect on endoscopic submucosal dissection. Surg Endosc. 2015;29:2561–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Nehaus H, Terheggen G, Rutz EM. Endoscopic submucosal dissection plus radiofrequency ablation of neoplastic Barrett’s esophagus. Endoscopy. 2012;44:1105–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Hoteya S, Matsui A, Lizuka T, et al. Comparison of the clinicopathological characteristics and results of endoscopic submucosal dissection for esophagogastric junction and non-junction cancers. Digestion. 2013;87:29–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Nagami Y, Machida H, Shiba M, et al. Clinical efficacy of endoscopic submucosal dissection for adenocarcinomas of the esophagogastric junction. Endosc Int Open. 2014;02:E15–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Kagemoto K, Oka S, Tanaka S, et al. Clinical outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial Barrett’s adenocarcinoma. Gastrointest Endosc. 2014;80:239–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Probst A, Aust D, Markl B, et al. Early esophageal cancer in Europe: endoscopic treatment by endoscopic submucosal dissection. Endoscopy. 2015;47:113–21.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Chevaux JB, Piessevaux H, Jouret-Mourin A, et al. Clinical outcome in patients treated with endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial Barrett’s neoplasia. Endoscopy. 2015;47:103–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Hobel S, Dautel P, Baumbach R, et al. Single center experience of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in early Barrett’s adenocarcinoma. Surg Endosc. 2015;29:1591–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Barret M, Cao DT, Beuvon F, et al. Endosocpic submucosal dissection for early Barrett’s neoplasia. United Eur Gastroenterol J. 2016;4:207–15.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  83. •• Terheggen G, Horn EM, Vieth M, et al. A randomised trial of endoscopic submucosal dissection versus endoscopic mucosal resection for early Barrett’s neoplasia. Gut. 2016;0:1–11. Currently the only randomized controlled trial comparing ESD vs. EMR for the treatment of BE neoplasia

    Google Scholar 

  84. Coman RM, Gotoda T, Forsmark CE, et al. Prospective evaluation of the clinical utility of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in patients with Barrett’s esophagus: a Western center experience. Endosc Int Open. 2016;4:E15–21.

    Google Scholar 

  85. • Subramaniam S, Chedgy F, Longcroft Wheaton G, et al. Complex early Barrett’s neoplasia at 3 Western centers: European Barrett’s Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection Trial (E-BEST). Gastrointest Endosc 2017; 86: 608–618 Recent large multicenter experience from Europe on ESD for the treatment of Barrett’s associated neoplasia.

  86. Yang D, Zou F, Xiong S, Forde JJ, Draganov PV. Endoscopic submucosal dissection for the management of Barrett’s early neoplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2017;85:AB409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Komeda Y, Bruno M, Koch AEMR. is not inferior to ESD for early Barrett’s and EGJ neoplasia: An extensive review on outcome, recurrence and complication rates. Endosc Int Open. 2014;2:E58–64.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  88. Chennat J, Konda VJ, Ross AS, et al. Complete Barrett’s eradication endoscopic mucosal resection: an effective treatment modality for high-grade dysplasia and intramucosal carcinoma—an American single-center experience. Am J Gastroenterol. 2009;137:815–23.

    Google Scholar 

  89. Manner H, Pech O, Heldmann Y, et al. Efficacy, safety, and long-term results of endoscopic treatment for early stage adenocarcinoma of the esophagus with low-risk sm1 invasion. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2013;11:630–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Participants in the Paris Workshop. The Paris endoscopic classification of superficial neoplastic lesions: esophagus, stomach, and colon. Gastrointest Endosc 2003;58:S3–43.

  91. Guo HM, Zhang XQ, Chen M, et al. Endoscopic submucosal dissection vs endoscopic mucosal resection for superficial esophageal cancer. World J Gastroenterol. 2014;20:5540–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  92. Wani S, Abrams J, Edmundowicz SA, et al. Endoscopic mucosal resection results in change of histologic diagnosis in Barrett’s esophagus patients with visible and flat neoplasia: a multicenter cohort study. Dig Dis Sci. 2013;58:1703–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  93. Inoue H, Ikeda H, Hosoya T, et al. Submucosal endoscopic tumor resection for subepithelial tumors in the esophagus and cardia. Endoscopy. 2012;44:225–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Gong W, Xiong Y, Zhi F, et al. Preliminary experience of endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection for upper gastrointestinal submucosal tumors. Endoscopy. 2012;44:231–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Liu BR, Song JT, Kong LJ, et al. Tunneling endoscopic muscularis dissection for subepithelial tumors originating from the muscularis propria of the esophagus and gastric cardia. Surg Endosc. 2013;27:4354–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Lu J, Zheng M, Jiao T, et al. Transcardiac tunneling technique for endoscopic submucosal dissection of gastric fundus tumors arising from the muscularis propria. Endoscopy. 2014;28:1971–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  97. Wang H, Tan Y, Zhou Y, et al. Submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection for upper gastrointestinal submucosal tumors originating from the muscularis propria layer. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015;27:776–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Li QL, Chen WF, Zhang C, et al. Clinical impact of submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection for the treatment of gastric submucosal tumors originating from the muscularis propria layer (with video). Surg Endosc. 2015;29:3640–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  99. Jain D, Desai A, Mahmood E, et al. Submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection of upper gastrointestinal tract tumors arising from muscularis propria. Ann Gastroenterol. 2017;30:262–72.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  100. Li QY, Meng Y, Xu YY, et al. Comparison of endoscopic submucosal tunneling dissection and thoracoscopic enucleation for the treatment of esophageal submucosal tumors. Gastrointest Endosc 2017;86:485–491.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, University of Florida, 1329 SW 16th Street Suite 5262, Gainesville, FL, 32608, USA

    Dennis Yang MD & Peter V. Draganov MD

Authors
  1. Dennis Yang MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Peter V. Draganov MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peter V. Draganov MD.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Dennis Yang declares that he has no conflict of interest. Peter V. Draganov declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Human and animal rights and informed consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Esophagus

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yang, D., Draganov, P.V. Expanding Role of Third Space Endoscopy in the Management of Esophageal Diseases. Curr Treat Options Gastro 16, 41–57 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11938-018-0169-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11938-018-0169-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation