Browse
Submit Data
Databases
API
Help

Dataset Information

0 Views

0 Connections

0 Citations

0 Reanalyses

0 Downloads

Omics score: 0

A new device to expedite endoscopic submucosal dissection procedures: a randomized animal study of efficacy and safety (with videos).

ABSTRACT: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a recognized method for the curative treatment of superficial neoplasia, but its use is limited by lengthy procedures and the lack of versatility of existing knives. We developed a prototype ESD device with the ability to work as a needle, hook, or "scythe." This new device was compared to regular ESD knives in a randomized animal study.Eight pigs underwent two gastric ESD procedures each, similar in size and difficulty, one with a regular ESD device and the other with the new device. The order and location of each ESD, as well as the performing operator, were randomized. Primary judgment criterion was safety of procedures. Overall and submucosal dissection procedure times were measured. Time-to-surface ratios were measured and estimated for ESDs larger than those performed. Histopathology of the resected tissue and remaining stomach was done after each experiment.No complications were observed throughout the study and all resections were completed en-bloc and uneventfully. The submucosal extension of resections was similar with both the standard and the new devices. A comparison of time-consumption between groups did not show statistically significant differences, but a dramatic reduction of procedure duration was observed in some procedures with the new device; based on observed data, a potential time-saving of up to 66 % was anticipated, with a relatively short learning curve.This new versatile device proved to be as safe as regular ESD knives, and seems likely to help reduce the duration of the procedure.

SUBMITTER: Leblanc S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4612242 | biostudies-other | 2015 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Json Xml

Similar Datasets

Endoscopic submucosal tunneling dissection: use of a novel bipolar radiofrequency and microwave-powered device for colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection.

Project description: Not available

| S-EPMC7426889 | biostudies-literature

Endoscopic submucosal dissection by using a new traction device.

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.

| S-EPMC8645833 | biostudies-literature

A novel curved wire retraction device for endoscopic submucosal dissection.

Project description:Video 1Traction wire presentation and demonstration of technology in 3 endoscopic submucosal dissection cases.

| S-EPMC8350987 | biostudies-literature

A Novel Retractable Robotic Device for Colorectal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection.

Project description:Background/aims: Appropriate tissue tension and clear visibility of the dissection area using traction are essential for effective and safe endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). In this study, we developed a retractable robot-assisted traction device and evaluated its performance in colorectal ESD.Methods: An experienced endoscopist performed ESD 18 times on an ex vivo porcine colon using the robot and 18 times using the conventional method. The outcome measures were procedure time, dissection speed, procedure-related adverse events, and blind dissection rate.Results: Thirty-six colonic lesions were resected from ex vivo porcine colon samples. The total procedure time was significantly shorter in robot-assisted ESD (RESD) than in conventional ESD (CESD) (20.1±4.1 minutes vs 34.3±8.3 minutes, p<0.05). The submucosal dissection speed was significantly faster in the RESD group than in the CESD group (36.8±9.2 mm2/min vs 18.1±4.7 mm2/min, p<0.05). The blind dissection rate was also significantly lower in the RESD group (12.8%±3.4% vs 35.1%±3.9%, p<0.05). In an in vivo porcine feasibility study, the robotic device was attached to a colonoscope and successfully inserted into the proximal colon without damaging the colonic wall, and ESD was successfully performed.Conclusions: The dissection speed and safety profile improved significantly with the retractable RESD. Thus, our robotic device has the potential to provide simple, effective, and safe multidirectional traction during colonic ESD.

| S-EPMC11249931 | biostudies-literature

Impact of Traction Direction in Traction-Assisted Gastric Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection (with Videos).

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.

| S-EPMC9971682 | biostudies-literature

Efficacy and safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial cancer of the cervical esophagus.

Project description:Cervical esophageal cancer (CEC) is a less common form of cancer and often locally advanced at the time of diagnosis; thus, survival rates for patients with CEC remain poor. However, no reports exist on results of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for superficial cancer at the cervical esophagus. The aim of this retrospective study was to elucidate the clinicopathological features and clinical outcomes of ESD for superficial CEC. ESD was performed on 891 lesions (in 662 patients) for superficial esophageal cancer from January 2008 to December 2015. Of these, 45 lesions (45 patients) were enrolled in the case group (CEC), and 405 lesions (375 patients) were enrolled in the control group (superficial cancer in the middle thoracic esophagus). The safety of ESD, including R0 resection rate and adverse events, and the efficacy, such as the local recurrence rate and overall survival rate, were evaluated. The R0 resection rate was 91.1 % in the case group and 96 % in the control group. The rate of esophageal stricture was significantly higher in the case group (20 %) than in the control group (6.6 %). There was no local recurrence, and the 3-year survival rate was 88.4 % in the case group and 96.7 % in the control group.ESD for superficial cancer in the cervical esophagus was achieved safely, and successful local control was also confirmed. However, the esophageal stricture after ESD was more frequent.

| S-EPMC5546892 | biostudies-other

The Efficacy of an Endoscopic Grasp-and-Traction Device for Gastric Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection: An Ex Vivo Comparative Study (with Video).

Project description:Background/aimsTo investigate whether the EndoLifter (Olympus), a counter-traction device facilitating submucosal dissection, can accelerate endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD).MethodsTwo endoscopists (novice/expert in ESD) performed 64 ESDs (artificial 3-cm lesions) in 16 ex vivo pig stomachs: per stomach, two at the posterior wall (forward approach) and two at the lesser curvature (retroflex approach). Per approach, one lesion was dissected with (EL+) and one without (EL-) the EndoLifter. The submucosal dissection time (SDT), corrected for specimen size, and the influence of ESD experience on EndoLifter usefulness were assessed.ResultsEn bloc resection rate was 98.4%. In the forward approach, the median SDT was shorter with the EndoLifter (0.56 min/cm(2) vs. 0.91 min/cm(2)), although not significantly (p=0.09). The ESD-experienced endoscopist benefitted more from the EndoLifter (0.45 [EL+] min/cm(2) vs. 0.68 [EL-] min/cm(2), p=0.07) than the ESD-inexperienced endoscopist (0.77 [EL+] min/cm(2) vs. 1.01 [EL-] min/cm(2), p=0.48). In the retroflex approach, the median SDTs were 1.06 (EL+) and 0.48 (EL-) min/cm(2) (p=0.16). The EndoLifter did not shorten the SDT for the ESD-experienced endoscopist (0.68 [EL+] min/cm(2) vs. 0.68 [EL-] min/cm(2), p=0.78), whereas the ESD-inexperienced endoscopist seemed hindered (1.65 [EL+] min/cm(2) vs. 0.38 [EL-] min/cm(2), p=0.03).ConclusionsIn gastric ESD, the EndoLifter, in trend, shortens SDTs in the forward, but not in the retroflex approach. Given the low numbers in this study, a type II error cannot be excluded.

| S-EPMC4461666 | biostudies-literature

Efficacy and safety of a thermosensitive hydrogel for endoscopic submucosal dissection: An in vivo swine study.

Project description:Injectable thermo-sensitive chitosan hydrogels have recently been developed for the use of submucosal fluids in endoscopic submucosal dissections (ESD). This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of chitosan hydrogels during ESD. Submucosal fluids were administered as follows: 0.9% normal saline (NS), 0.4% hyaluronic acid (HA) and chitosan/β-glycerophosphate (CS/GP) hydrogel. Each solution was administered twice into the stomach and colon of a pig, with a total of 72 ESD procedures performed on 12 pigs. The injected volume and procedure-related parameters were recorded and analyzed. ESDs that created ulcers after 7 days were histologically compared. All ESD specimens were resected en bloc. The total injected volumes during ESD of the stomach (NS, 16.09±3.27 vs. HA, 11.17±2.32 vs. CS/GP, 9.44±2.33; p<0.001) and colon (NS, 9.17±1.80 vs. HA, 6.67±1.50 vs. CS/GP, 6.75±1.57; p = 0.001) were significantly different. Hydrogel showed significant differences from normal saline in terms of fluid power (mm2/vol; NS, 35.70±9.00 vs. CS/GP 57.48±20.77; p = 0.001) and consumption rate (vol/min; NS, 2.59±0.86 vs. CS/GP, 1.62±0.65; p = 0.013) in the stomach. Histological examination revealed preserved muscularis propria, although the chitosan hydrogel resulted in a partial inflammatory response, with a hypertrophied submucosal layer. Chitosan hydrogel was found to be superior to normal saline, with an efficacy similar to that of hyaluronic acid. Nonetheless, long-term histological changes should be evaluated before clinical implementation.

| S-EPMC8659419 | biostudies-literature

The safety and efficacy of endoscopic submucosal dissection for treating early oesophageal carcinoma: a meta-analysis.

Project description:IntroductionOesophageal carcinoma is the sixth most lethal cancer in the world. At present, the choice of specific surgical methods is controversial. This study compares the safety and efficacy of endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection in treating early oesophageal carcinoma.MethodsWe carried out a search of online databases including the Web of Science, PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library with no language restrictions. The inclusion criteria were patients with early oesophageal carcinoma who accepted the treatment of endoscopic submucosal dissection compared with endoscopic mucosal resection.FindingsA total of 1,462 patients with 1,650 lesions from nine studies were included in the meta-analysis. When compared with the endoscopic mucosal resection group, the en bloc resection (endoscopic submucosal dissection 67.94% vs endoscopic mucosal resection 52.78%; odds ratio 19.79, p = 0.000) and complete resection (endoscopic submucosal dissection 75.57% vs endoscopic mucosal resection 59.47%; odds ratio 16.10, p = 0.000) rates were significantly higher in the endoscopic submucosal dissection group, while the local recurrence rate was significantly lower in the endoscopic submucosal dissection group (endoscopic submucosal dissection 0.08% vs endoscopic mucosal resection 2.66%; odds ratio 0.08, p = 0.000). The incidence of complications and procedural time were also tested.

| S-EPMC7591627 | biostudies-literature

Countertraction in endoscopic submucosal dissection.

Project description: Not available

| S-EPMC5989134 | biostudies-literature