DOES LESION SITE AFFECTS OUTCOMES OF ENDOSCOPIC SUBMUCOSAL DISSECTION FOR COLON NEOPLASIA?

AIM: to assess results of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for colon neoplasms due to lesion site.

PATIENTS AND METHODS: One-hundred thirteen patients (66 females, aged 65,7±11,0 years) with colon neoplasms which underwent ESD for one year (January 2017 – January 2018) were included in the study. All patients were divided in two groups depending on lesion site. The first group included patients with lesions in caecum, ascending colon and proximal third of tranverse colon, the second group – other colon parts and intraperitoneal part of the rectum. All patients underwent preoperative tests including colonoscopy, gastroscopy and transabdominal ultrasound. ESD included lesion marking, injection, circular incision and dissection. The results obtained were analyzed statistically using Graph Pad 7 for Mac. RESULTS: the 1st group included 61 (54.0%) patients and the 2nd – 52 (46.0%). Laterally spreading tumors (LST) were detected more often in the 1st group (56 patients of the 1st group vs 38 – in the 2nd, p=0.03). The lesion size in the 1st group was 31±13 (7-80) mm and 29±11 (8-76) in the 2nd one (p=0.3). Conversion from ESD to resection occurred in 9 (8.0%) patients, in 5 patients of the 1st group and in 4 – the 2nd one (p=1.0). The only reason for conversion was unfavorable lesion lifting (≤2 mm).

Most of the lesions were removed en bloc, specimen fragmentation after ESD occurred in 10 (9.6%) patients: in 5 (9.0%) in the 1st group and in 5 (10.4%) in the 2nd (р=1.0). Intraoperative complications during ESD in the 1st group occurred in 2 (3.5%) cases and in 2 (4.1%) – in the 2nd (р=1.0). Postoperative complications were detected in 2 (1.9%) patients. Histopathology showed adenocarcinoma in 9 (8.0%) patients. Two (1.7%) patients produced local recurrence. CONCLUSION: ESD is a safe method removal of colon ademonas. The intra- and postoperative complications rate is 3.5% and 1.9% for the 1st and the 2nd group. Local recurrences occurred in 2,04%. Unfavorable lesion lifting (≤2 mm) in right colon is a risk factor for specimen fragmentation or conversion.

1. Chernyshov SV, Maynovskaya OA, Rybakov EG. The results of 202 cases of transanal endomicrosurgery specialized center. Koloproktologia. 2015; no. 1 (51), pp. 91-91а. (in Russ.)

2. Shelygin YuA, Chernyshov SV, Peresada IV. The first experience of transanal endoscopic operations. Koloproktologia. 2012; no. 2 (40), pp. 34-40. (in Russ.)

3. Choi CW, Kang DH, Kim HW, Endoscopic submucosa ldissection as a treatment for gastric adenomatous polyps: predictive factors for early gastric cancer. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2012;47(10):1218-1225.

4. Isomoto H, Nishiyama H, Yamaguchi N. Clinicopathological factors associated with clinical outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal epithelial neoplasms. Endoscopy. 2009;41(8):679-683. 5. Fujishiro M, Yahagi N, Kakushima N. Outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal epithelial neoplasms in 200 consecutive cases. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2007;5:678-683.

5. Kanao H, Tanaka S, Oka S. Clinical significance of type V(I) pit pattern sub-classification in determining the depth of invasion of colorectal neoplasms. Gastroenterol. 2008;14:211-217.

6. Kikuchi R, Takano M, Takagi K. Management of early invasive colorectal cancer. Risk of recurrence and clinical guidelines. Dis Colon Rectum. 1995;38:1286-95.

7. Kudo S. Endoscopic mucosal resection of flat and depressed types of early colorectal cancer. Endoscopy. 1993;25(7):455-461.

8. Lambert R. Superficial neoplastic lesions in the digestive tract. Endoscopy. 2005;37:570-578.

9. Dinis-Ribeiro PM, Ponchon T. Endoscopic submucosal dissection: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE). Guidelineimentel-Nunes Endoscopy. 2015; 47:829-854.

10. Rönnow C.F., Elebro J., Toth E. Endoscopic submucosal dissection of malignant non-pedunculated colorectal lesions. Endosc Int Open. 2018 Aug; 6(8):961-968.

11. Saito Y, Fukuzawa M, Matsuda T. Clinical outcome of endoscopic submucosal dissection versus endoscopic mucosal resection of large colorectal tumors as determined by curative resection. Surg. Endosc. 2010;24:343-35 2.

12. Saito Y, Otake Y, Sakamoto T. Indications for and technical aspects of colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection. Gut Liver. 2013; Vol. 7. N3:263-269.

13. Kudo S, Tamegai Y, Yamano H. Endoscopic mucosal resection of the colon: The Japanese technique. Gastrointest Endosc Clin. 2001;11:519-35.

14. Sano Y, Hirata D, Saito Y. Japan NBI Expert Team classification: Narrow-band imaging magnifying endoscopic classification of colorectal tumors. Dig Endosc. 2018;30(4):543-545.

15. Tanaka H, Shiro Oka S, Tanaka S. Dual Red Imaging Maintains Clear Visibility During Colorectal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection. Dig Dis Sci. 2019 Jan;64(1):224-231.

16. The Paris endoscopic classification of superficial neoplastic lesions: esophagus, stomach, and colon: November 30 to December 1. 2002. Gastrointest Endosc. 2003;58(6):S3:43.

17. Yamamoto H, Kawata H, Sunada K. Successful en-bloc resection of large superficial tumors in the stomach and colon using sodium hyaluronate and small-caliber-tip transparent hood. Endoscopy. 2003;35:690-694.

18. Yoda Y, Ikematsu H, Matsuda T. A large-scale multicenter study of long-term outcomes after endoscopic resection for submucosal invasive colorectal cancer. Endoscopy. 2013;45:718-724.