Juan J. Vila, Ángel Calderón, Oscar Nogales Rincon, José Miguel Esteban, Aitor Orive-Calzada, Sarbelio Rodríguez-Muñoz, Joaquin De La Peña, David Martínez-Ares, Eloy Sánchez-Hernández, Leopoldo López-Rosés, and Gloria Fernández-Esparrach
Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection With Hydrodissection Technique: Results and Learning Curve in an Animal Model Joaquin De La Pena*, Jose Miguel Esteban, Oscar Nogales Rincon, Sarbelio RodriGuez-MunOz, Angel Calderon, Aitor Orive-Calzada, Leopoldo Lopez-Roses, David Martinez-Ares, Eloy Sanchez-Hernandez, Juan J. Vila, Gloria Fernandez-Esparrach Experimental surgery, HVirtual Valdecilla, Santander, Spain; Endoscopia, H clinico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain; Endoscopia, h 12 Octubre, Madrid, Spain; Digestivo, h Basurto, Bilbao, Spain; Digestivo, h Galdakao-usansolo, Galdakao, Spain; Digestivo, CHU Lugo, Lugo, Spain; Digestivo, CHU Vigo, Vigo, Spain; Digestivo, CHU Ourense, Ourense, Spain; Digestivo, CH Navarra, Pamplona, Spain; Endoscopy unit Institut de Malalties Digestives i Metaboliques, H Clinic, Barcelona, Spain; Digestivo, H Gregorio Maranon, Madrid, Spain Background: ESD in an effective but time-consuming treatment for early neoplasia that requires a high level of expertise. The combination of high-pressure water jet with electrocautery needle in the same device could facilitate the procedure, especially among beginners. Aim: To assess the efficacy and learning curve of gastric ESD with ERBE hybrid knife in a set of endoscopists with preliminary experience with ESD in experimental models. Methods: Hybrid and classic gastric ESD were alternatively performed in live pigs. For Hybrid technique we used a water-jet hybrid knife (ERBE). For classic ESD we used needle Knife (DND2718A,PENTAX) and Mucosectome isolated (DP-D2518, PENTAX). Dissection with electrocautery was alternate with submucosal fluid injection as many times as needed. All the endoscopists had previously completed their training in animal models. Variables analyzed were: number of ESD completed, number of ESD with all marks included (R0), size of specimens, time and speed of dissection and complications. Results: 10 endoscopists performed a total of 50 gastric ESD (30 hybrid and 20 classic). 46 (92%) ESD were completed and 25 (50%) were R0 (hybrid: n 12, 40%; classic: n 13, 65%; p 0.004). The size of the specimens was not different in both groups (hybrid: 40.3 13.2 mm; classic: 35.5 10.9 mm; p 0.826). Hybrid ESD was faster than classic (time: 44.6 21.4 minutes vs 68.7 33.5 minutes; p 0.009 and velocity: 20.8 9.2 mm2/seg vs 14.3 9.3 mm2/seg; p 0.033). Complications were no different with an incidence of perforation of 4 (13%) and 2 (10%), respectively (p 0.722). It was a trend to improve the velocity with both techniques (hybrid: from 20.33 to 28.18 mm2/seg; p 0.615 and classic: from 6.4 to 19.48 mm2/seg; p 0.607). the learning curve showed an improvement in R0 rate in the hybrid group (from 30% to 100%). Conclusions: ESD with hydrodissection technique is faster than classic ESD but is associated with a decrease in R0. The learning curve with the hydrodissection technique is short and shows a rapid improvement. ESD is a very effective technique when performed properly and the introduction of new tools to facilitate the implementation of ESD should be done with caution to avoid a negative impact on the results.