| Literature DB >> 35432746 |
Edgar Castillo-Regalado1, Hugo Uchima1.
Abstract
Due to the advent of the screening programs for colorectal cancer and the era of quality assurance colonoscopy the number the polyps that can be considered difficult, including large (> 20 mm) laterally spreading tumors (LSTs), has increased in the last decade. All LSTs should be assessed carefully, looking for suspicious areas of submucosal invasion (SMI), such as nodules or depressed areas, describing the morphology according to the Paris classification, the pit pattern, and vascular pattern. The simplest, most appropriate and safest endoscopic treatment with curative intent should be selected. For LST-granular homogeneous type, piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection should be the first option due to its biological low risk of SMI. LST-nongranular pseudodepressed type has an increased risk of SMI, and en bloc resection should be mandatory. Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection is useful in situations where submucosal injection alters the operative field, e.g., for the resection of scar lesions, with no lifting, adjacent tattoo, incomplete resection attempts, lesions into a colonic diverticulum, in ileocecal valve and lesions with intra-appendicular involvement. Endoscopic full thickness resection is very useful for the treatment of difficult to resect lesions of less than 20 up to 25 mm. Among the indications, we highlight the treatment of polyps with suspected malignancy because the acquired tissue allows an exact histologic risk stratification to assign patients individually to the best treatment and avoid surgery for low-risk lesions. Endoscopic submucosal dissection is the only endoscopic procedure that allows completes en bloc resection regardless of the size of the lesion. It should therefore be indicated in the treatment of lesions with risk of SMI. ©The Author(s) 2022. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.Entities:
Keywords: Colorectal polyps; Endoscopic full thickness resection; Endoscopic mucosal resection; Endoscopic submucosal dissection; Laterally spreading tumors; Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection
Year: 2022 PMID: 35432746 PMCID: PMC8984535 DOI: 10.4253/wjge.v14.i3.113
Source DB: PubMed Journal: World J Gastrointest Endosc
Figure 1Characteristics that make a polyp difficult.
Figure 2Risk of submucosal invasion.
Considerations for endoscopic treatment in laterally spreading tumors
|
|
|
|
|
| LST-G homogeneous type | Very low risk for deep SMI, independent of size of the lesion | LST-NG pseudodepressed type | En bloc resection |
| LST-G mixed nodular type with no signs of SMI | Consider en bloc resection first. If not, careful inspection of surface/pit pattern and vascular pattern specially in the larger nodules (≥ 10 mm), resect the nodular area apart ( | LST-G mixed nodular or NG flat with risk of SMI | En bloc resection ( |
| LST-NG flat with no demarcated area and no signs of SMI | Consider en bloc resection first. If not, careful inspection of surface/pit pattern and vascular pattern ( |
EMR: Endoscopic mucosal resection; G: Granular type; JNET: Japan Narrow Band Imaging Expert Team; LST: Laterally spreading tumor; NG: Non-granular type; SMI: Submucosal invasion.
Steps for endoscopic mucosal resection of laterally spreading tumors
|
| |
| (1) Endoscopic evaluation | Using Paris classification, pit pattern and vascular pattern to characterize the lesions and define the risk of deep SMI |
| (2) Strategy | Decide en bloc |
| (3) EMR technique | |
| Injection | Needle tangential to the plane. Inject whilst “stabbing” the mucosa helps accurately find the SM plane. Use a dynamic injection technique |
| Resection | Put the area to resect ideally between 5-6 o’clock (with colonoscope); accommodate the snare over the lesion and push “down,” aspirate to decrease tension and maximize tissue capture; close the snare tightly; check for mobility and degree of closure of the snare handle (usually < 1 cm distance between thumb and fingers), be sure there is no muscle trapped, otherwise release the tissue (in case of doubt, open and close the snare to “drop out” possible muscular entrapment); press the pedal to resect |
| Wash and check mucosal defect | Check the mucosal defect produced to rule out signs of muscle layer damage or perforation |
| Hemostasis | If there is mild intraprocedural bleeding, try first snare tip soft coagulation. If necessary, coagulating forceps or clips can be helpful |
| Systematic inject and resect | Continue resection injecting when necessary to maintain submucosal cushion. Resect 2-3 mm of normal mucosa to ensure margins. Try not to leave islands or bridges between resections |
| (4) UEMR technique | |
| Water filling | Aspirate all the gas and fill the lumen of the working space with water or saline (turning off insufflation may help) to create a gravity-free environment |
| Resection | Put the area to resect ideally between 5-6 o’clock (with colonoscope); accommodate the snare over the lesion “torque and crimp” and push “down” to get the floating lesion inside the snare; aspirate and irrigate more water to help the capture of the tissue; close the snare tightly and separate the tissue from the wall. Press the pedal to resect. Underwater, higher outputs might be needed for resection/coagulation due to the heat sink effect |
| Wash and check mucosal defect | Check the mucosal defect produced to rule out signs of muscle layer damage or perforation. As no dye is used to stain the submucosa, the operator should become familiarized with the aspect of the “transparent” fibers |
| Hemostasis | In cases of jet bleeding gas insufflation might be needed to find the bleeding point |
| Systematic gas aspiration water irrigation and resection | Continue resection aspirating gas or irrigating water when necessary. Resect 2-3 mm of normal mucosa to ensure margins. Try not to leave islands or bridges between resections |
| (5) Final inspection | Check the scar to rule out residual neoplastic tissue or signs of deep injury. In cases of piecemeal resection, thermal ablation with the tip of the snare (Soft COAG 80 W) to coagulate the mucosal borders of the scar reduces risk of recurrence |
| (6) Specimen retrieval and assessment | Consider using a net for retrieval. Big nodules should be sent separately if it was piecemeal resection |
EMR: Endoscopic mucosal resection; SM; Submucosal; SMI: Submucosal invasion; UEMR: Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection
Figure 3During muscularis propria contraction, infolding of the 0-IIa + IIc lesion occurs. Citation: Uchima H, Colán-Hernández J, Binmoeller KF. Peristaltic contractions help snaring during underwater endoscopic mucosal resection of colonic non-granular pseudodepressed laterally spreading tumor. Dig Endosc 2021; 33: e74–6. Copyright ©The Author(s) 2021. Published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd[33].
Sydney Classification of deep mural injury
|
| |
| Type 0 | Normal defect. Blue mat appearance of obliquely oriented intersecting submucosal connective tissue fibers (with a blue dye such as indigo carmine or methylene blue) |
| Type 1 | MP visible but no mechanical injury (“Whale” sign) |
| Type 2 | Focal loss of the submucosal plane raising concern for MP injury or rendering the MP defect uninterpretable |
| Type 3 | MP injured, specimen target sign or defect mirror target sign identified |
| Type 4 | Actual hole within a white cautery ring, no observed contamination |
| Type 5 | Actual hole within a white cautery ring, observed contamination |
MP: Muscular propria.
Spanish Score for risk of bleeding after endoscopic mucosal resection
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Yes | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 0 |
| No | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Risk of bleeding after EMR | ||||||
| Low risk 0.6% (0.2%-1.8%) | 0-3 points | |||||
| Medium risk 5.5% (3.8%-7.9%) | 4-7 points | |||||
| Elevated risk 40% (21.8%-61.1%) | 8-10 points | |||||
ASA: American Society of Anesthesiologists classification of physical health; EMR: Endoscopic mucosal resection.
Sydney endoscopic mucosal resection recurrence tool
|
|
|
| LST size ≥ 40 mm | 2 |
| IPB requiring endoscopic control | 1 |
| High-grade dysplasia | 1 |
| Total | 4 |
| Cumulative incidence of EDR% (standard error) | |
| SERT = 0 | 9.8% (2.2); 6 mo FU |
| 11.6% (2.5); 18 mo FU | |
| SERT = 1-4 | 23.0% (2.5); 6 mo FU |
| 36.3% (3.2); 18 mo FU | |
EDR: Endoscopically determined recurrence; FU: Follow-up; IBP: Intraprocedural bleeding; LST: Laterally spreading tumor; SERT: Sydney endoscopic mucosal resection recurrence tool.