Search

Background and study aims  We previously reported on a novel traction method called Multiloop (M-loop) for faster colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). In this study, we retrospectively compared the difference in submucosal dissection time (SDT), and submucosal dissection speed (SDS) between groups of patients who were treated using traction with the M-loop method, and with non-traction methods of colorectal ESD. Patients and methods  We reviewed and timed duration of colorectal ESD by the non-traction method from videos recorded between June 2016 and December 2017. From January 2018 onward, we used the M-loop method during all colorectal ESDs and timed it until August 2018. Outcomes of colorectal ESD with the M-loop method and non-traction methods were compared. The study involved two experts and eight non-experts and was carried out at a tertiary endoscopic center in Japan. Results  The study included 50 patients who treated with the M-loop method and 115 patients treated with the non-traction method. Submucosal dissection time (SDT) was not significantly different (M-loop group, 42.1  ±  4.2 min, non-traction ESD group, 51.9 ± 3.3 min) ( P  = 0.098), but submucosal dissection speed (SDS) was significantly greater (M-loop group, 28.0 ± 2.9 mm 2  /min, non-traction ESD group, 19.9 ± 2.0 mm 2 /min) ( P  = 0.0014) in the M-loop method group. Multivariate analysis showed that the M-loop method increased SDS by odds ratio of 1.46 ( P  = 0.001) when compared to the non-traction ESD method. A significant difference was also observed for SDT and SDS when the two methods were compared after propensity score matching ( P  = 0.001). No differences in unfavorable outcomes were observed. Conclusions  The M-loop method improved SDS compared to non-traction methods of ESD. The method is an effective tool to assist colorectal ESD., Competing Interests: Competing interests The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Background and study aims  We developed an e-learning program for endoscopic diagnosis of invasion depth of early gastric cancer (EGC) using a simple diagnostic criterion called non-extension sign, and the contribution of self-study quizzes to improvement of diagnostic accuracy was evaluated. Methods  We conducted a prospective randomized controlled study that recruited endoscopists throughout Japan. After completing a pretest, the participants watched video lectures and undertook post-test 1. The participants were then randomly allocated to either the self-study or non-self-study group, and participants in the first group completed the self-study program that comprised 100-case quizzes. Finally, participants in both groups undertook post-test 2. The primary endpoint was the difference in post-test 2 scores between the groups. The perfect score for the tests was set as 100 points. Results  A total of 423 endoscopists completed the pretest and were enrolled. Post-test 1 was completed by 415 endoscopists and 208 were allocated to the self-study group and 207 to the non-self-study group. Two hundred and four in the self-study group and 205 in the non-self-study group were included in the analysis. Video lectures improved the mean score of post-test 1 from 72 to 77 points. Participants who completed the self-study quizzes showed significantly better post-test 2 scores compared with the non-self-study group (80 vs. 76 points, respectively, P  < 0.0001). Conclusions  Our e-learning program showed that self-study quizzes consolidated knowledge of the non-extension sign and improved diagnostic ability of endoscopists for invasion depth of EGC.

Background and study aims  The usefulness of endoscopy for diagnosing histological type remains unclear. This study aimed to examine the diagnostic accuracy of white light endoscopy (WLE), magnified endoscopy with narrow band imaging (NBI-ME), and NBI-ME with acetic acid enhancement (NBI-AA) for histological type of gastric cancer. Patients and methods  Patients with depressed-type gastric cancers resected by endoscopic submucosal dissection were prospectively enrolled, and 221 cases were analyzed. Histological type was diagnosed by WLE, followed by NBI-ME and NBI-AA. Histological type was classified into differentiated adenocarcinoma and undifferentiated adenocarcinoma. Histological type was diagnosed based on lesion color in WLE, surface patterns (pit, villi, and unclear) and vascular irregularities in NBI-ME, and surface patterns in NBI-AA. Results  Histological types of target areas were differentiated adenocarcinoma and undifferentiated adenocarcinoma in 206 and 15 cases, respectively. Diagnostic accuracy of WLE, NBI-ME, and NBI-AA for the histological type was 96.4 % (213/221), 96.8 % (214/221), and 95.5 % (211/221), respectively. No significant differences were observed among modalities. Positive predictive value based on endoscopic findings in NBI-ME was 98.0 % (149/152) for the villi pattern, 100 % (19/19) for the irregular pit pattern, 100 % (9/9) for the unclear surface pattern with a vascular network, 90.3 % (28/31) for the unclear surface pattern with mild vascular irregularity, and 88.9 % (8/9) for the unclear surface pattern with severe vascular irregularity. Conclusions  NBI-ME and NBI-AA did not show any advantages over WLE for diagnostic accuracy. Villi pattern, irregular pit pattern, and vascular network may be useful for identifying differentiated adenocarcinoma.