EMR and ESD: Indications, techniques and results

This Guideline is an official statement of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE). The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system 1 2 was adopted to define the strength of recommendations and the quality of evidence.

Many clinical studies on narrow-band imaging (NBI) magnifying endoscopy classifications advocated so far in Japan (Sano, Hiroshima, Showa, and Jikei classifications) have reported the usefulness of NBI magnifying endoscopy for qualitative and quantitative diagnosis of colorectal lesions. However, discussions at professional meetings have raised issues such as: (i) the presence of multiple terms for the same or similar findings; (ii) the necessity of including surface patterns in magnifying endoscopic classifications; and (iii) differences in the NBI findings in elevated and superficial lesions. To resolve these problems, the Japan NBI Expert Team (JNET) was constituted with the aim of establishing a universal NBI magnifying endoscopic classification for colorectal tumors (JNET classification) in 2011. Consensus was reached on this classification using the modified Delphi method, and this classification was proposed in June 2014. The JNET classification consists of four categories of vessel and surface pattern (i.e. Types 1, 2A, 2B, and 3). Types 1, 2A, 2B, and 3 are correlated with the histopathological findings of hyperplastic polyp/sessile serrated polyp (SSP), low-grade intramucosal neoplasia, high-grade intramucosal neoplasia/shallow submucosal invasive cancer, and deep submucosal invasive cancer, respectively.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has recently been applied to the treatment of superficial colorectal cancer. Clinical outcomes compared with conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) have not been determined so our aim was to compare the effectiveness of ESD with conventional EMR for colorectal tumors >or=20 mm. This was a retrospective case-controlled study performed at the National Cancer Center Hospital in Tokyo, Japan involving 373 colorectal tumors >or=20 mm determined histologically to be curative resections. Data acquisition was from a prospectively completed database. We evaluated histology, tumor size, procedure time, en bloc resection rate, recurrence rate, and associated complications for both the ESD and EMR groups. A total of 145 colorectal tumors were treated by ESD and another 228 were treated by EMR. ESD was associated with a longer procedure time (108 +/- 71 min/29 +/- 25 min; p < 0.0001), higher en bloc resection rate (84%/33%; p < 0.0001) and larger resected specimens (37 +/- 14 mm/28 +/- 8 mm; p = 0.0006), but involved a similar percentage of cancers (69%/66%; p = NS). There were three (2%) recurrences in the ESD group and 33 (14%) in the EMR group requiring additional EMR (p < 0.0001). The perforation rate was 6.2% (9) in the ESD group and 1.3% (3) in the EMR group (p = NS) with delayed bleeding occurring in 1.4% (2) and 3.1% (7) of the procedures (p = NS), respectively, as all complications were effectively treated endoscopically. Despite its longer procedure time and higher perforation rate, ESD resulted in higher en bloc resection and curative rates compared with EMR and all ESD perforations were successfully managed by conservative endoscopic treatment.