Outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) during live endoscopy events (LEE) – a 13-year follow-up

 

 Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background and study aims There are no data showing the outcome of ESD during live endoscopy events (LEE). ESD performed during the Augsburg Endo-Update LEE were compared with matched routine procedures with the aim of demonstrating non-inferiority of LEE ESD.

Patients and methods ESD performed during the Endo-Update between 2006 and 2018 were reviewed. The controls were routine procedures matched according to age, location and lesion size. Resection, recurrence, survival and complication rates, procedure time and propofol sedation were assessed. Clinically relevant margins were assumed for resection and complication rates, procedure time and propofol sedation quantity.

Results Thirty-eight ESD were performed in the given time period, and were compared with 38 matched routine ESD. En bloc and curative resection rates in the LEE group and in the control group were 100 % and 87 % as well as 84 % and 71 % respectively, while procedure times were 135 and 125 minutes, respectively. Non-inferiority was demonstrated for resection rates and procedure time. The complication rate was lower in the LEE group as compared with the control group (5 % vs 13 %) while propofol sedation was similar in both groups (863 mg vs 872 mg). Recurrence and 5-year survival rates for both groups were 4 % vs 0 % and 70 % vs 65% respectively.

Conclusions The resection rate and procedure time of ESD during LEE was non-inferior to those of routine ESD procedures. Comparison of the complication rates, however, was inconclusive owing to the low patient number and complication risk in both groups.

^* These authors contributed equally.

• References

• 1 Schmit A, Lazaraki G, Hittelet A. et al. Complications of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography during live endoscopy workshop demonstrations. Endoscopy 2005; 37: 695-699
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 2 Liao Z, Li ZS, Leung JW. et al. How safe and successful are live demonstrations of therapeutic ERCP? A large multicenter study. Am J Gastroenterol 2009; 104: 47-52
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 3 Ridititid W, Rerknimitr R, Treeprasertsuk S. et al. Outcome of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography during live endoscopy demonstrations. Surg Endosc 2012; 26: 1931-1938
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 4 Dinis-Ribeiro M, Hassan C, Meining A. et al. Live endoscopy events (LEEs): European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Position Statement - Update 2014. Endoscopy 2015; 47: 80-86
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 Tanaka S, Kashida H, Saito Y. et al. JGES guidelines for colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection/endoscopic mucosal resection. Dig Endosc 2015; 27: 417-434
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 6 Bosman FT, Carneiro F, Hruban RH. et al. WHO Classification of Tumours of the Digestive System. World Health Organization Classification of Tumours. Tumors of the stomach. Lyon, France.: IARC; 2010: 45-80
  Google Scholar
• 7 Cotton PB, Eisen GM, Aabakken L. et al. A lexicon for endoscopic adverse events: report of an ASGE workshop. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 71: 446-454
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 8 Probst A, Golger D, Anthuber M. et al. Endoscopic submucosal dissection in large sessile lesions of the rectosigmoid: learning curve in a European center. Endoscopy 2012; 44: 660-667
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 9 Ebigbo A, Probst A. et al. Step-Up Training for colorectal and gastric ESD and the challenge of ESD training in the proximal colon: Results from a German Center. Endosc Int Open 2018; 6: E524-E530
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 10 Fuccio L, Hassan C, Ponchon T. et al. Clinical outcomes after endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal neoplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2017; 86: 74-86
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 11 Gupta S, Miskovic D, Bhandari P. et al. A novel method for determining the difficulty of colonoscopic polypectomy. Frontline Gastroenterol 2013; 4: 244-248
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar