Efficacy of traction‐assisted colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection using a clip‐and‐thread technique: A prospective randomized study. Issue 4 (11th March 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Yamasaki, Yasushi; Takeuchi, Yoji; Uedo, Noriya; Kanesaka, Takashi; Kato, Minoru; Hamada, Kenta; Tonai, Yusuke; Matsuura, Noriko; Akasaka, Tomofumi; Hanaoka, Noboru; Higashino, Koji; Ishihara, Ryu; Okada, Hiroyuki; Iishi, Hiroyasu
• Is Part Of: Digestive endoscopy. Volume 30:Issue 4(2018)
• Page Start: 467
• Page End: 476
• Publication Date: 2018-03-11
• Subjects: clip and thread -- colorectal neoplasm -- endoscopic submucosal dissection -- procedure time -- traction; Digestive organs -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Digestive organs -- Diseases -- Diagnosis -- Periodicals; Endoscopy -- Periodicals; Digestive System Diseases -- diagnosis -- Periodicals; Digestive System Diseases -- therapy -- Periodicals; Endoscopy -- Periodicals; 616.3
• DOI: 10.1111/den.13036
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0915-5635

Abstract

Abstract : Background and Aim: Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) remains challenging because of technical difficulties, long procedure time, and high risk of adverse events. To facilitate colorectal ESD, we developed traction‐assisted colorectal ESD using a clip and thread (TAC‐ESD) and conducted a randomized controlled trial to evaluate its efficacy. Methods: Patients with superficial colorectal neoplasms (SCN) ≥20 mm were enrolled and randomly assigned to the conventional‐ESD group or to the TAC‐ESD group. SCN ≤50 mm were treated by two intermediates, and SCN >50 mm were treated by two experts. Primary endpoint was procedure time. Secondary endpoints were TAC‐ESD success rate (sustained application of the clip and thread until the end of the procedure), self‐completion rate by the intermediates, and adverse events. Results: Altogether, 42 SCN were analyzed in each ESD group (conventional and TAC). Procedure time (median [range]) for the TAC‐ESD group was significantly shorter than that for the conventional‐ESD group (40 [11–86] min vs 70 [30–180] min, respectively; P < 0.0001). Success rate of TAC‐ESD was 95% (40/42). The intermediates' self‐completion rate was significantly higher for the TAC‐ESD group than for the conventional‐ESD group (100% [39/39] vs 90% [36/40], respectively; P = 0.04). Adverse events included one intraoperative perforation in the conventional‐ESD group and one delayed perforation in the TAC‐ESD group. Conclusion: Traction‐assisted colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection reduced the procedure time and increased the self‐completion rate by the intermediates (UMIN000018612).