Feasibility of endoscopic suturing to prevent adverse events and hospitalization after endoscopic submucosal dissection

 

 Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background and study aim Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) enables en bloc removal of gastrointestinal epithelial lesions but can leave a large mucosal defect, which can lead to inpatient observation and delayed bleeding or perforation. The aim of this study was to examine the safety and effectiveness of endoscopic suturing in closing ESD defects to prevent adverse events.

Patients and methods In this single-center prospective cohort study, endoscopic suturing was performed to close ESD defects in the stomach or rectum. Suturing was performed in the antegrade position starting from the edge most distal to the endoscope insertion site, moving from right to left, left to right manner before ending at the edge most proximal to the endoscope insertion site.

Results In total, 31 patients (mean age 65.6, 71 % male) received endoscopic suturing after gastric (58.1 %) or rectal (41.9 %) ESD. Mean lesion size was 27.4 ± 16.2 mm and mean suturing time was 13.4 ± 5.9 min. Complete closure was achieved in all patients. Same-day discharge occurred in 58.1 % of patients; the remainder were hospitalized with mean length of stay of 1 ± 0.6 day. There were no instances of delayed bleeding or delayed perforation (0 %, 95 % CI: 0–11.5 %). No recurrences were found on surveillance endoscopy.

Conclusions Based on this small prospective study, endoscopic suturing of post-ESD defects in the stomach and rectum appears to be feasible, safe, and potentially effective in preventing bleeding or perforation. Further larger controlled studies, however, are needed to validate these findings.

Publication History

Received: 17 March 2020

Accepted: 19 May 2020

Article published online:
31 August 2020

© 2020. Owner and Copyright ©

© Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Stuttgart · New York

• References

• 1 Maple JT, Abu Dayyeh BK, Chauhan SS. et al. Endoscopic submucosal dissection. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 81: 1311-1325
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 2 Aoki T, Nakajima T, Saito Y. et al. Assessment of the validity of the clinical pathway for colon endoscopic submucosal dissection. World journal of gastroenterology 2012; 18: 3721-3726
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 3 Ogiyama H, Tsutsui S, Murayama Y. et al. Prophylactic clip closure may reduce the risk of delayed bleeding after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection. Endosc Int Open 2018; 6: E582-e588
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 4 Nomura S, Shimura T, Katano T. et al. A multicenter, single-blind randomized controlled trial of endoscopic clipping closure for preventing post-ESD coagulation syndrome. Gastrointest Endosc 2019; DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2019.11.030.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 Harada H, Suehiro S, Murakami D. et al. Clinical impact of prophylactic clip closure of mucosal defects after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection. Endoscopy international open 2017; 5: E1165-e1171
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 6 Zhang Y, Wang X, Xiong G. et al. Complete defect closure of gastric submucosal tumors with purse-string sutures. Surg Endosc 2014; 28: 1844-1851
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 7 Goto O, Oyama T, Ono H. et al. Endoscopic hand-suturing is feasible, safe, and might contribute in reducing bleeding risk after gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection: a multicenter pilot study (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 2020; DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2019.12.046.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 8 Kantsevoy SV, Bitner M, Mitrakov AA. et al. Endoscopic suturing closure of large mucosal defects after endoscopic submucosal dissection is technically feasible, fast, and eliminates the need for hospitalization (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc 2014; 79: 503-507
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 9 Han S, Wani S, Kaltenbach T. et al. Endoscopic suturing for closure of endoscopic submucosal dissection defects. VideoGIE 2019; 4: 310-313
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 10 Kolb JM, Hammad H. The Use of the overstitch to close endoscopic resection defects. Gastrointest Endosc Clin North Am 2020; 30: 163-171
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 11 Browne RH. On the use of a pilot sample for sample size determination. Stat Med 1995; 14: 1933-1940
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 12 Park YM, Cho E, Kang HY. et al. The effectiveness and safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection compared with endoscopic mucosal resection for early gastric cancer: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Surg Endosc 2011; 25: 2666-2677
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 13 Repici A, Hassan C, De Paula Pessoa D. et al. Efficacy and safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal neoplasia: a systematic review. Endoscopy 2012; 44: 137-150
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 14 Osada T, Sakamoto N, Ritsuno H. et al. Closure with clips to accelerate healing of mucosal defects caused by colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection. Surg Endosc 2016; 30: 4438-4444
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 15 Lian J, Chen S, Zhang Y. et al. A meta-analysis of endoscopic submucosal dissection and EMR for early gastric cancer. Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 76: 763-770
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 16 Hanaoka N, Uedo N, Ishihara R. et al. Clinical features and outcomes of delayed perforation after endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancer. Endoscopy 2010; 42: 1112-1115
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar