Endoscopic treatment of superficial colorectal neoplasms. Retrospective analysis of a single center technique and results.

Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection (ESD) is a technique developed in Japan for "en bloc" resection of larger superficial neoplasms of the gastrointestinal tract as an alternative to the traditional Endoscopic Mucosal Resection (EMR), with removal of the lesion in multiple fragments ("piecemeal"). ESD offers a lower recurrence rate and allows a more accurate histopathological examination. This procedure is however considered technically difficult and therefore requires an adequate learning curve, it is time consuming with more discomfort for the patient, it has a higher complication rate, it is more expensive. To overcome these disadvantages, in the Western countries a hybrid technique called Circumferential Submucosal Incision - Endoscopic Mucosal Resection (CSI-EMR) has been developed and is especially employed for colonic lesions. This article analyzes retrospectively the results obtained in a single centre by a single operator in the treatment of 23 patients (12 men and 11 women, average age 65,6 years), all suffering from superficial, larger than ≥ 20 mm colorectal neoplasms: 9 were treated with ESD for rectal lesions and 14 were treated with CSI-EMR for colonic lesions. Findings show a technical success rate of 66,6% for ESD and 78,5% for CSI-EM, and a 0% recurrence rate during follow-up, 4,3% bleeding and 13% perforation complications. The histology of the removed lesions showed 13 (56,5%) low grade dysplasia adenomas, 8 (34,7%) high grade dysplasia adenomas, one grade 1 sigmoid colon adenocarcinoma infiltrating the submucosal layer without lymphovascular invasion, with free margins (R0), treated conservatively, and one grade 1 cecum adenocarcinoma, infiltrating the submucosal layer, with lymphovascular invasion and involved excision margin, treated surgically with no residual neoplastic disease in the surgical specimen. These data are in line with the most significant ones in literature, except for the higher complication rate, which the authors ascribe to the "learning curve" and the smaller number of treated patients.