Dataset Information

EUS of a submucosal lesion at the appendiceal orifice using a double-balloon endoluminal intervention platform.

ABSTRACT: Video 1Video demonstrating the use of a DEIP to facilitate both radial and linear EUS in the proximal colon.

SUBMITTER: Shah-Khan SM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10020377 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

EUS of a submucosal lesion at the appendiceal orifice using a double-balloon endoluminal intervention platform.

Shah-Khan Sardar Momin SM Patel Ankoor A Shah-Khan Sardar Musa SM Shahid Haroon H Tyberg Amy A Kahaleh Michel M Sarkar Avik A

VideoGIE : an official video journal of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 20230208 3

Video 1Video demonstrating the use of a DEIP to facilitate both radial and linear EUS in the proximal colon. ...[more]

PMID: 36935804

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundColonic endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) at "challenging sites" such as the cecum, ascending colon, and colonic flexures could be difficult even for expert endoscopists due to poor endoscope stability/maneuverability, steep angles, and thinner wall thickness. A double-balloon endoluminal intervention platform (EIP) has been introduced in the market to fasten and facilitate ESD, particularly when located at difficult sites. Here, we report our initial experience with an EIP comparing the outcomes of an EIP versus standard ESD (S-ESD) at "challenging sites".Materials and methodsWe retrospectively collected data on consecutive patients with colonic lesions located in the right colon and at flexures who underwent ESD in our tertiary referral center between March 2019 and May 2023. Endoscopic and clinical outcomes (technical success, en bloc resection rate, R0 resection rate, procedure time, time to reach the lesion, and adverse events) and 6-month follow-up outcomes were analyzed.ResultsOverall, 139 consecutive patients with lesions located at these challenging sites were enrolled (EIP: 31 and S-ESD: 108). Demographic characteristics did not differ between groups. En bloc resection was achieved in 92.3% and 93.5% of patients, respectively, in the EIP and S-ESD groups. Both groups showed a comparable R0 resection rate (EIP vs. S-ESD: 92.3% vs. 97.2%). In patients undergoing EIP-assisted ESD, the total procedure time was shorter (96.1 [30.6] vs. 113.6 [42.3] minutes, p = 0.01), and the mean size of the resected lesions was smaller (46.2 ± 12.7 vs. 55.7 ± 17.6 mm, p = 0.003). The time to reach the lesion was significantly shorter in the EIP group (1.9 ± 0.3 vs. 8.2 ± 2.7 min, p ≤ 0.01). Procedure speed was comparable between groups (14.9 vs. 16.6 mm2/min, p = 0.29). Lower adverse events were observed in the EIP patients (3.8 vs. 10.2%, p = 0.31).ConclusionsEIP allows results that do not differ from S-ESD in the resection of colorectal superficial neoplasms localized in "challenging sites" in terms of efficacy and safety. EIP reduces the time to reach the lesions and may more safely facilitate endoscopic resection.

Project description:BackgroundFlexible endoscopes ability to manipulate the intestinal environment is limited. As a result, complex endolumenal procedures are often technically demanding and result in long procedure times, impacting institutional resources. Single- and double-balloon add-on endoscopic devices have been employed throughout the GI tract to facilitate tissue control e.g., small bowel enteroscopy, with recent reports suggesting a possible colonic utility for complex procedures e.g., ESD. Our objective was to objectively analyze the efficacy of a new double-balloon device in performing ESD.MethodsEx vivo-12 simulated colonic lesions were created in porcine rectum using a standard 40 mm diameter template. Two categories were evaluated, standard cap technique ESD and double-balloon assisted ESD with retraction (ESD-R). Cases were performed sequentially. In vivo-Six, 40 mm lesion ESD-R's were performed in a porcine model. The primary outcomes of this study were total procedure and dissection times.ResultsIn ex vivo studies, the median total procedure time with the double-balloon platform was significantly shorter than the traditional ESD technique (29 ± 18 vs. 57 ± 21 min, p = 0.03). In the in vivo studies, lesions were successfully removed in a mean time of 48 min, with a dissection time of 20 min with no significant complications. Balloon-clip retraction and specimen retrieval capabilities were used in all double-balloon assisted cases. After 6 cases, times were significantly shorter (ex vivo 47 vs. 17 min; in vivo 57 vs. 27 min).ConclusionsWe have demonstrated the development of a unique technical ESD method facilitated by a new double-balloon device. Ex and in vivo investigation demonstrated superiority of ESD-R over the conventional ex vivo method. The DB device provided increased stability, improved visualization and tissue traction, which significantly reduced dissection time. Such an approach may increase safety, improve patient outcomes, and may prevent unnecessary surgeries for benign conditions.

Dataset Information

EUS of a submucosal lesion at the appendiceal orifice using a double-balloon endoluminal intervention platform.

Publications

EUS of a submucosal lesion at the appendiceal orifice using a double-balloon endoluminal intervention platform.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets