Project description:Video 1Traction-assisted colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection using the multiloop method for a previously tattooed laterally spreading tumor in the sigmoid colon.
Project description:AimsDuring intraoperative bleeding in endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), switching to spray coagulation may be beneficial compared with the continuous use of swift coagulation and can reduce the need for hemostatic forceps. We retrospectively assessed the effectiveness of spray modes on intraoperative bleeding during gastric ESD.Methods and resultsA total of 316 bleeding events (156 in the Swift group and 160 in the Spray group) were consecutively recorded. In the Swift group, hemostasis was performed using the swift mode with a retracted tip of the needle-type knife, followed by the hemostatic forceps. In the Spray group, bleeding was treated in a stepwise manner: the swift mode, the spray mode, and the hemostatic forceps. All bleeding events were assigned to one of two groups by an endoscopist who retrospectively reviewed the videos. We compared the use of hemostatic forceps, the total hemostatic time, and the cumulative hemostasis rate between the two groups.The use of hemostatic forceps was significantly lower in the Spray group than in the Swift group (32.7% vs. 13.8%, P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the total hemostatic time (Swift group, 20 s.; Spray group, 16 s.; P = 0.42), whereas the cumulative hemostasis rate with the knife was significantly higher in the Spray group (P = 0.007).ConclusionThe results suggested that spray coagulation from the tip of the needle-type knife could reduce the use of hemostatic forceps. In gastric ESD, spray coagulation may facilitate the hemostasis of intraoperative bleeding.
Project description:Video 1Patient with a history of gastric ectopic pancreas and epigastric pain. We illustrate the endoscopic submucosal dissection of the ectopic pancreas using a new traction device, the ProdiGi traction wire. Using this device, we were able to resect the lesion en bloc with no adverse events.
Project description:BackgroundThe impact of traction direction in traction-assisted gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has not been adequately investigated. A clip with line (CWL) is a classical single-directional traction device. In contrast, a spring and loop with clip (SLC; S-O clip) is a newly developed multidirectional traction device.AimsTo investigate the impact of traction direction in gastric ESD by comparing the procedure-related outcomes of CWL-assisted ESD (CWL-ESD) and SLC-assisted ESD (SLC-ESD).MethodsWe retrospectively examined 140 patients with superficial gastric neoplasms who underwent SLC-ESD or CWL-ESD by a single ESD expert during November 2017-September 2020. The traction direction was classified based on the endoscopic finding in the following five categories: proximal, diagonally proximal, vertical, diagonally distal, and distal. In SLC-ESD, we set vertical traction, using the multidirectional traction function. Propensity score matching was conducted to compensate for the differences in lesion size, injection function of electrosurgical knife, ulcerative lesion, lesion location, and lesion position. The primary outcome was gastric ESD procedure time.ResultsPropensity score matching created 42 pairs. The median gastric ESD procedure time in the SLC-ESD group was significantly shorter than that in the CWL-ESD group (28.3 min vs. 51.0 min, P = 0.022). All traction direction in the SLC-ESD group was vertical, while only 16.7% in the CWL-ESD group. En bloc resection was attained without perforation in all the patients in both groups.ConclusionOur findings suggest that SLC can provide vertical traction, which reduces the gastric ESD procedure time. Multidirectional traction devices can provide vertical traction in most cases of gastric ESD, unlike single-directional traction devices. Vertical traction may reduce the gastric ESD procedure time.