Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Endoscopy 2022; 54(06): 585-590
DOI: 10.1055/a-1675-2625
Innovations and brief communications

Endoscopic transcecal appendectomy: a new endotherapy for appendiceal orifice lesions

Linjie Guo‡   *
1   Department of Gastroenterology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, China
,
Liansong Ye‡   *
1   Department of Gastroenterology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, China
,
Yilong Feng
1   Department of Gastroenterology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, China
,
Johannes Bethge
2   Department of Gastroenterology, University Medical Center Schleswig Holstein, Campus Kiel, Germany
,
Juliana Yang
3   The Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, United States
,
Stefan Schreiber
2   Department of Gastroenterology, University Medical Center Schleswig Holstein, Campus Kiel, Germany
,
Bing Hu 
1   Department of Gastroenterology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, China
› Author AffiliationsSupported by: 1·3·5 project for disciplines of excellence, West China Hospital, Sichuan University ZYJC21011
Supported by: National Natural Science Foundation of China 82170675
› Further Information
Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints


Referred to by:

Author commentary on Linjie Guo et al.Endoscopy 2022; 54(06): v24-v24
DOI: 10.1055/a-1719-7658

Abstract

Background Endoscopic transcecal appendectomy (ETA) has been reported as a minimally invasive alternative procedure for lesions involving the appendiceal orifice. The aim of this case series study was to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and effectiveness of ETA for lesions at the appendiceal orifice.

Methods This retrospective study included consecutive patients with appendiceal orifice lesions who underwent ETA between December 2018 and March 2021. The primary outcome was technical success. The secondary outcomes included postoperative adverse events, postoperative hospital stay, and recurrence.

Results 13 patients with appendiceal orifice lesions underwent ETA during the study period. The median lesion size was 20 mm (range 8–50). Lesions morphologies were polypoid lesions (n = 5), laterally spreading tumors (n = 4), and submucosal lesions (n = 4). Technical success with complete resection was achieved in all 13 cases. There were no postoperative bleeding, perforation, or intra-abdominal abscess. The median length of hospital stay after ETA was 8 days (range 6–18). There was no tumor recurrence during a median follow-up of 17 months (range 1–28).

Conclusions ETA is feasible, safe, and effective for complete resection of appendiceal orifice lesions. Larger, multicenter, prospective studies are needed to further assess this technique.

* These authors contributed equally to this work.


Fig. 1 s



Publication History

Received: 12 May 2021

Accepted after revision: 20 September 2021

Article published online:
14 December 2021

© 2021. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Tanaka S, Kashida H, Saito Y. et al. JGES guidelines for colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection/endoscopic mucosal resection. Dig Endosc 2015; 27: 417-434
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Tate DJ, Desomer L, Awadie H. et al. EMR of laterally spreading lesions around or involving the appendiceal orifice: technique, risk factors for failure, and outcomes of a tertiary referral cohort (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 2018; 87: 1279-1288
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Jacob H, Toyonaga T, Ohara Y. et al. Endoscopic submucosal dissection of cecal lesions in proximity to the appendiceal orifice. Endoscopy 2016; 48: 829-836
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Song EM, Yang HJ, Lee HJ. et al. Endoscopic resection of cecal polyps involving the appendiceal orifice: a KASID multicenter study. Dig Dis Sci 2017; 62: 3138-3148
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Kulaylat AS, Boltz MM, Moyer M. et al. Management of large cecal polyps: when can the ileocecal valve be spared?. Dis Colon Rectum 2018; 61: 1089-1095
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Bronzwaer MES, Bastiaansen BAJ, Koens L. et al. Endoscopic full-thickness resection of polyps involving the appendiceal orifice: a prospective observational case study. Endosc Int Open 2018; 6: E1112-E1119
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Ichkhanian Y, Barawi M, Seoud T. et al. Endoscopic full-thickness resection of polyps involving the appendiceal orifice: a multicenter international experience. Endoscopy 2021; DOI: 10.1055/a-1345-0044.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Schmidbaur S, Wannhoff A, Walter B. et al. Risk of appendicitis after endoscopic full-thickness resection of lesions involving the appendiceal orifice: a retrospective analysis. Endoscopy 2021; 53: 424-428
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Liu BR, Song JT, Liu ZH. et al. Endoscopic transcecal appendectomy: the first human case report. Gastrointest Endosc 2018; 87: 311-312
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Chen T, Xu A, Lian J. et al. Transcolonic endoscopic appendectomy: a novel natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) technique for the sessile serrated lesions involving the appendiceal orifice. Gut 2021; 70: 1812-1814
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Yuan XL, Cheung O, Du J. et al. Endoscopic transcecal appendectomy. Endoscopy 2019; 51: 994-995
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Liu BR, Ullah S, Ye L. et al. Endoscopic transcecal appendectomy: a novel option for the treatment of appendiceal polyps. VideoGIE 2019; 4: 271-273
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Mochizuki S, Uedo N, Oda I. et al. Scheduled second-look endoscopy is not recommended after endoscopic submucosal dissection for gastric neoplasms (the SAFE trial): a multicentre prospective randomised controlled non-inferiority trial. Gut 2015; 64: 397-405
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Cotton PB, Eisen GM, Aabakken L. et al. A lexicon for endoscopic adverse events: report of an ASGE workshop. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 71: 446-454
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Tang SJ, Wu R. Ilececum: a comprehensive review. Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2019; 2019: 1451835
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Young S, Sueda SK, Hotta M. et al. Surgical management of appendiceal mucinous neoplasm: is appendectomy sufficient?. J Surg Oncol 2020; 122: 1173-1178
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Sakpal SV, Bindra SS, Chamberlain RS. Laparoscopic appendectomy conversion rates two decades later: an analysis of surgeon and patient-specific factors resulting in open conversion. J Surg Res 2012; 176: 42-49
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Kim HS, Kim HG, Yang SY. et al. Single-incision laparoscopic surgery compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery for appendiceal mucocele: a series of 116 patients. Surg Endosc 2021; DOI: 10.1007/s00464-020-08263-3.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Oung B, Rivory J, Chabrun E. et al. ESD with double clips and rubber band traction of neoplastic lesions developed in the appendiceal orifice is effective and safe. Endosc Int Open 2020; 8: E388-E395
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Curtiss LE. High frequency currents in endoscopy: a review of principles and precautions. Gastrointest Endosc 1973; 20: 9-12
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar