Advertisement

Surgical Endoscopy

, Volume 28, Issue 4, pp 1348–1354 | Cite as

Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection of colorectal neoplasia is easily learned, efficacious, and safe

  • Andrew Y. WangEmail author
  • Mary M. Flynn
  • James T. Patrie
  • Dawn G. Cox
  • Wissam Bleibel
  • James A. Mann
  • Bryan G. Sauer
  • Vanessa M. Shami
Dynamic Manuscript

Abstract

Background

Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) without submucosal injection is a novel endoscopic procedure. It is not known if UEMR can be easily taught and learned, and the efficacy and safety of UEMR has not been demonstrated at multiple medical centers. Our aims were to demonstrate that (1) UEMR is a technique that can be easily learned by an endoscopist trained in traditional EMR, (2) endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) may not be required before UEMR, and (3) UEMR is an efficacious and safe method for resection of large or flat neoplastic colorectal lesions.

Methods

An experienced interventional endoscopist began performing UEMR after observing UEMR procedures. Colorectal UEMR was performed using a pediatric colonoscope with a cap, a waterjet, and a ‘duck-bill’ snare using blended current. Submucosal injection was not used. Patient data were collected prospectively.

Results

A total of 21 patients (17 men, mean age 64.9 years, range 51–83) referred for polypectomy of large colorectal lesions underwent UEMR. A total of 43 colorectal lesions with a mean size of 20 mm (range 8–50) were resected by UEMR. Lesions were found in the right colon (N = 16), transverse colon (N = 5), left colon (N = 19), and rectum (N = 3). Pathology demonstrated tubular adenoma (N = 29), tubulovillous adenoma (N = 5), high-grade dysplasia (N = 3), serrated sessile adenoma without dysplasia (N = 3), and non-neoplastic tissue (N = 3). EUS was used in only two cases of rectal neoplasia (4.7 %). Of the UEMRs, 97.7 % were successful with complete resection of colorectal polyps. The only adverse event was one case (2.3 %) of delayed post-UEMR bleeding.

Conclusions

UEMR was easily learned by an endoscopist already skilled in conventional EMR. EUS may not be required prior to most UEMR procedures. UEMR appears to be an efficacious and safe alternative to traditional EMR or ESD for large or flat colorectal neoplasms.

Keywords

Underwater EMR Colorectal polyp Endoscopic ultrasound Efficacy Safety 

Abbreviations

EMR

Endoscopic mucosal resection

ESD

Endoscopic submucosal dissection

GI

Gastrointestinal

UEMR

Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection

EUS

Endoscopic ultrasound

GEE

Generalized estimating equation

APC

Argon plasma coagulation

EPMR

Endoscopic piecemeal mucosal resection

TA

Tubular adenoma

NBI

Narrow-band imaging

TVA

Tubulovillous adenoma

SSA

Serrated sessile adenoma

Notes

Acknowledgments

Special thanks to Dr. Kenneth F. Binmoeller for his contributions to the field of endoscopy and for teaching Dr. Wang the UEMR technique.

Disclosures

Andrew Y. Wang, Mary M. Flynn, James T. Patrie, Dawn G. Cox, Wissam Bleibel, James A. Mann, Bryan G. Sauer, Vanessa M. Shami have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose with respect to this manuscript. This work was not supported by any external grants or funding.

Supplementary material

Supplementary material 1 (WMV 25,111 kb)

Supplementary material 2 (WMV 66,439 kb)

Supplementary material 3 (WMV 10,710 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Wang AY, Ahmad NA, Zaidman JS, Brensinger CM, Lewis JD, Long WB, Kochman ML, Ginsberg GG (2008) Endoluminal resection for sessile neoplasia in the GI tract is associated with a low recurrence rate and a high 5 years survival rate. Gastrointest Endosc 68:160–169PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wang AY, Emura F, Oda I, Cox DG, Kim HS, Yeaton P (2010) Endoscopic submucosal dissection with electrosurgical knives in a patient on aspirin therapy (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 72:1066–1071PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Teoh AY, Chiu PW, Wong SK, Sung JJ, Lau JY, Ng EK (2010) Difficulties and outcomes in starting endoscopic submucosal dissection. Surg Endosc 24:1049–1054PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Binmoeller KF, Weilert F, Shah J, Bhat Y, Kane S (2012) ‘Underwater’ EMR without submucosal injection for large sessile colorectal polyps (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 75:1086–1091PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Leung FW, Amato A, Ell C, Friedland S, Harker JO, Hsieh YH, Leung JW, Mann SK, Paggi S, Pohl J, Radaelli F, Ramirez FC, Siao-Salera R, Terruzzi V (2012) Water-aided colonoscopy: a systematic review. Gastrointest Endosc 76:657–666PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Henry ZH, Yeaton P, Shami VM, Kahaleh M, Patrie JT, Cox DG, Peura DA, Emura F, Wang AY (2010) Meshed capillary vessels found on narrow-band imaging without optical magnification effectively identifies colorectal neoplasia: a North American validation of the Japanese experience. Gastrointest Endosc 72:118–126PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hardin JW, Hilbe J (2003) Generalized estimating equations. Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, FLGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    No authors listed (2003) The Paris endoscopic classification of superficial neoplastic lesions: esophagus, stomach, and colon: November 30 to December 1, 2002. Gastrointest Endosc 58(6):S3–43Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Waxman I (2006) EUS and EMR/ESD: is EUS in patients with Barrett’s esophagus with high-grade dysplasia or intramucosal adenocarcinoma necessary prior to endoscopic mucosal resection? Endoscopy 38(1):S2–S4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Choi J, Kim SG, Im JP, Kim JS, Jung HC, Song IS (2010) Is endoscopic ultrasonography indispensable in patients with early gastric cancer prior to endoscopic resection? Surg Endosc 24:3177–3185PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ahmad NA, Kochman ML, Long WB, Furth EE, Ginsberg GG (2002) Efficacy, safety, and clinical outcomes of endoscopic mucosal resection: a study of 101 cases. Gastrointest Endosc 55:390–396PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tajika M, Niwa Y, Bhatia V, Kondo S, Tanaka T, Mizuno N, Hara K, Hijioka S, Imaoka H, Ogura T, Haba S, Yamao K (2011) Comparison of endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection for large colorectal tumors. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 23:1042–1049PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sakamoto T, Matsuda T, Otake Y, Nakajima T, Saito Y (2012) Predictive factors of local recurrence after endoscopic piecemeal mucosal resection. J Gastroenterol 47:635–640PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrew Y. Wang
    • 1
    Email author
  • Mary M. Flynn
    • 1
  • James T. Patrie
    • 2
  • Dawn G. Cox
    • 1
  • Wissam Bleibel
    • 1
  • James A. Mann
    • 1
  • Bryan G. Sauer
    • 1
  • Vanessa M. Shami
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of Gastroenterology and HepatologyUniversity of Virginia Health SystemCharlottesvilleUSA
  2. 2.Division of Biostatistics and EpidemiologyUniversity of Virginia Health SystemCharlottesvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations