Efficacy of a Traction Device for Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection Using a Scissor-Type Knife: A Randomized Controlled Trial. (26th November 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Tamaru, Yuzuru; Kuwai, Toshio; Miyakawa, Akihiro; Kanazawa, Noriyoshi; Kusunoki, Ryusaku; Shimura, Haruhisa; Uchiyama, Shiori; Ishaq, Sauid; Kohno, Hiroshi
• Is Part Of: American journal of gastroenterology. Volume 117:Number 11(2022)
• Page Start: 1797
• Page End: 1804
• Publication Date: 2022-11-26
• Subjects: Stomach -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Intestines -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Gastroenterology -- Periodicals; Gastrointestinal Diseases -- Periodicals; Electronic journals; Periodicals; 616.33
• DOI: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000002019
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0002-9270

Abstract

Abstract : INTRODUCTION: Although safe, colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) using a scissor-type knife has a slow resection speed. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of a traction device to hasten the resection speed. METHODS: This multicenter randomized controlled trial was conducted at 3 Japanese institutions. Patients with a 20–50-mm superficial colorectal tumor were enrolled and randomly assigned to a conventional-ESD (C-ESD) group or a traction-assisted ESD (T-ESD) group. The primary outcome was the resection speed. RESULTS: The C-ESD and T-ESD groups comprised 49 and 48 patients, respectively. Although the mean resection speed was not significantly different in the entire cohort between the groups (23.7 vs 25.6 mm 2 /min, respectively; P = 0.43), it was significantly faster with T-ESD than with C-ESD at the cecum (32.4 vs 16.7 mm 2 /min, respectively; P = 0.02). The mean resection speed of tumors ≥30 mm tended to be faster by T-ESD than by C-ESD (34.6 vs 27.8 mm 2 /min, respectively; P = 0.054). The mean procedure time of T-ESD was significantly shorter than that of C-ESD (47.3 vs 62.3 minutes, respectively; P = 0.03). The en bloc (100% vs 100%), complete (98.0% vs 97.9%), and curative resection (93.9% vs 91.7%) rates were similar between the 2 groups. Perforation and delayed hemorrhage occurred in only 1 patient each in the T-ESD group. DISCUSSION: Although the resection rates were sufficiently high and adverse event rates were extremely low in both the groups, the use of a traction device for ESD in the proximal colon and for large lesions may increase the resection speed.