Resection depth: a very important advantage for underwater EMR

This paper compared the histopathological results of consecutive cases of 6- to 9-mm definite benign tumors resected by cold snare polypectomy (CSP), hot snare polypectomy (HSP), or underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) by two endoscopists at one institution. The authors assessed whether the specimens contained muscularis mucosa (MM) and submucosal (SM) tissues and measured the thickness from the MM to the vertical resection margin of SM tissue at the center of the resected specimens.

Publikationsverlauf

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
10. Juni 2022

• References

• 1 Nagl S, Ebigbo A, Goelder SK. et al. Underwater vs conventional endoscopic mucosal resection of large sessile or flat colorectal polyps: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Gastroenterology 2021; 161: 1460-1474.e1
• 2 Saito Y, Ono A. underwater endoscopic mucosal resection for colorectal lesions: a bridge between conventional endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection. Gastroenterology 2021; 161: 1369-1371
• 3 Kobayashi S, Yamada M, Takamaru H. et al. Diagnostic yield of the Japan NBI Expert Team (JNET) classification for endoscopic diagnosis of superficial colorectal neoplasms in a large-scale clinical practice database. United European Gastroenterol J 2019; 7: 914-923
• 4 Sakamoto T, Takamaru H, Sekiguchi M. et al. Reliability of Japan Narrow-Band Imaging Expert Team Classification for the diagnosis of colorectal neoplasms: a pilot study. Digestion 2020; 101: 638-643
• 5 Iwatate M, Sano Y, Tanaka S. et al. Validation study for development of the Japan NBI Expert Team classification of colorectal lesions. Dig Endosc 2018; 30: 642-651
• 6 Matsuda T, Fujii T, Saito Y. et al. Efficacy of the invasive/non-invasive pattern by magnifying chromoendoscopy to estimate the depth of invasion of early colorectal neoplasms. Am J Gastroenterol 2008; 103: 2700-2706
• 7 Choi AY, Moosvi Z, Shah S. et al. Underwater versus conventional EMR for colorectal polyps: systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2021; 93: 378-389
• 8 Garg R, Singh A, Mohan BP. et al. Underwater versus conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for colorectal lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Endosc Int Open 2020; 8: E1884-E1894
• 9 Yamashina T, Uedo N, Akasaka T. et al. Comparison of underwater vs conventional endoscopic mucosal resection of intermediate-size colorectal polyps. Gastroenterology 2019; 157: 451-461.e2
• 10 Takeuchi Y, Shichijo S, Uedo N. et al. Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection for colorectal lesions: Can it be an “underwater” revolution?. Endosc Int Open 2022; 2: E84
• 11 Saito Y, Abe S, Inoue H. et al. How to perform a high-quality endoscopic submucosal dissection. gastroenterology 2021; 161: 405-410
• 12 Saito Y, Uraoka T, Yamaguchi Y. et al. A prospective, multicenter study of 1111 colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissections (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 72: 1217-1225
• 13 Tanaka S, Kashida H, Saito Y. et al. Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society guidelines for colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection/endoscopic mucosal resection. Dig Endosc 2020; 32: 219-239
• 14 Saito Y, Sylvia Wu SY, Ego M. et al. Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection with use of a bipolar and insulated tip knife. VideoGIE 2019; 4: 314-318