Predicting procedure duration of colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection at Western endoscopy centers

Abstract

Background and study aims Overcoming logistical obstacles for the implementation of colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) requires accurate prediction of procedure times. We aimed to evaluate existing and new prediction models for ESD duration.

Patients and methods Records of all consecutive patients who underwent single, non-hybrid colorectal ESDs before 2020 at three Dutch centers were reviewed. The performance of an Eastern prediction model [GIE 2021;94(1):133–144] was assessed in the Dutch cohort. A prediction model for procedure duration was built using multivariable linear regression. The model’s performance was validated using internal validation by bootstrap resampling, internal-external cross-validation and external validation in an independent Swedish ESD cohort.

Results A total of 435 colorectal ESDs were analyzed (92% en bloc resections, mean duration 139 minutes, mean tumor size 39 mm). The performance of current unstandardized time scheduling practice was suboptimal (explained variance: R²=27%). We successfully validated the Eastern prediction model for colorectal ESD duration <60 minutes (c-statistic 0.70, 95% CI 0.62–0.77), but this model was limited due to dichotomization of the outcome and a relatively low frequency (14%) of ESDs completed <60 minutes in the Dutch centers. The model was more useful with a dichotomization cut-off of 120 minutes (c-statistic: 0.75; 88% and 17% of “easy” and “very difficult” ESDs completed <120 minutes, respectively). To predict ESD duration as continuous outcome, we developed and validated the six-variable cESD-TIME formula (https://cesdtimeformula.shinyapps.io/calculator/; optimism-corrected R²=61%; R²=66% after recalibration of the slope).

Conclusions We provided two useful tools for predicting colorectal ESD duration at Western centers. Further improvements and validations are encouraged with potential local adaptation to optimize time planning.

Keywords

Polyps / adenomas / ... - Endoscopic resection (polypectomy, ESD, EMRc, ...) - Endoscopy Lower GI Tract - Colorectal cancer - Quality and logistical aspects - Preparation

Publication History

Received: 24 December 2022

Accepted after revision: 27 June 2023

Accepted Manuscript online:
03 July 2023

Article published online:
07 August 2023

• References

• 1 Ma MX, Bourke MJ. Endoscopic submucosal dissection in the West: Current status and future directions. Dig Endosc 2018; 30: 310-320 DOI: 10.1111/den.12960. (PMID: 28884493)
• 2 Fuccio L, Hassan C, Ponchon T. et al. Clinical outcomes after endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal neoplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2017; 86: 74-86 e17 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2017.02.024. (PMID: 28254526)
• 3 Heitman SJ, Bourke MJ. Endoscopic submucosal dissection and EMR for large colorectal polyps: "the perfect is the enemy of good". Gastrointest Endosc 2017; 86: 87-89 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2017.03.022. (PMID: 28610868)
• 4 Fujiya M, Tanaka K, Dokoshi T. et al. Efficacy and adverse events of EMR and endoscopic submucosal dissection for the treatment of colon neoplasms: a meta-analysis of studies comparing EMR and endoscopic submucosal dissection. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 81: 583-595 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2014.07.034. (PMID: 25592748)
• 5 Hassan C, Repici A, Sharma P. et al. Efficacy and safety of endoscopic resection of large colorectal polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gut 2016; 65: 806-820 DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2014-308481. (PMID: 25681402)
• 6 Li B, Shi Q, Xu EP. et al. Prediction of technically difficult endoscopic submucosal dissection for large superficial colorectal tumors: a novel clinical score model. Gastrointest Endosc 2021; 94: 133-144 e133 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2020.11.012. (PMID: 33221323)
• 7 Yahagi N, Maehata T. What is important for a smooth implementation of endoscopic submucosal dissection?. Gastrointest Endosc 2021; 94: 145-147 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2021.04.007. (PMID: 34148570)
• 8 Backes Y, Moss A, Reitsma JB. et al. Narrow band imaging, magnifying chromoendoscopy, and gross morphological features for the optical diagnosis of t1 colorectal cancer and deep submucosal invasion: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Gastroenterol 2017; 112: 54-64 DOI: 10.1038/ajg.2016.403. (PMID: 27644737)
• 9 Baldaque-Silva F, Marques M, Andrade AP. et al. Endoscopic submucosal dissection of gastrointestinal lesions on an outpatient basis. United European Gastroenterol J 2019; 7: 326-334 DOI: 10.1177/2050640618823874. (PMID: 31080617)
• 10 Haasnoot K, Baldaque-Silva F, Koch AD. et al. Low risk of local recurrence after a successful en bloc Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for non-invasive colorectal lesions with positive horizontal resection margins(R-ESD study). Endoscopy 2023; 55: 245-251
• 11 Kaosombatwattana U, Yamamura T, Limsrivilai J. et al. Preoperative endoscopic predictors of severe submucosal fibrosis in colorectal tumors undergoing endoscopic submucosal dissection. Endosc Int Open 2019; 7: E421-E430 DOI: 10.1055/a-0848-8225. (PMID: 30931372)
• 12 Lee SP, Kim JH, Sung IK. et al. Effect of submucosal fibrosis on endoscopic submucosal dissection of colorectal tumors: pathologic review of 173 cases. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2015; 30: 872-878 DOI: 10.1111/jgh.12886. (PMID: 25641510)
• 13 Draganov PV, Aihara H, Karasik MS. et al. Endoscopic submucosal dissection in North America: a large prospective multicenter study. Gastroenterology 2021; 160: 2317-2327 e2312 DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2021.02.036. (PMID: 33610532)
• 14 Kamigaichi Y, Oka S, Tanaka S. et al. Factors for conversion risk of colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: a multicenter study. Surg Endosc 2022; 36: 5698-5709 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-022-09250-6. (PMID: 35579699)
• 15 Tanaka H, Oka S, Tanaka S. et al. Salvage endoscopic submucosal dissection for local residual/recurrent colorectal tumor after endoscopic resection: Large multicenter 10-year study. Dig Endosc 2021; 33: 608-615 DOI: 10.1111/den.13797. (PMID: 33448492)
• 16 Kuroha M, Shiga H, Kanazawa Y. et al. Factors associated with fibrosis during colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: Does pretreatment biopsy potentially elicit submucosal fibrosis and affect endoscopic submucosal dissection outcomes?. Digestion 2021; 102: 590-598
• 17 Miyaguchi K, Tashima T, Terada R. et al. A retrospective cohort study of factors influencing long procedure times in colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection. Scand J Gastroenterol 2021; 56: 1255-1263 DOI: 10.1080/00365521.2021.1958000. (PMID: 34320880)
• 18 Chiba H, Tachikawa J, Arimoto J. et al. Predictive factors of mild and severe fibrosis in colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection. Dig Dis Sci 2020; 65: 232-242 DOI: 10.1007/s10620-019-05735-y. (PMID: 31312991)
• 19 Fukunaga S, Nagami Y, Shiba M. et al. Impact of preoperative biopsy sampling on severe submucosal fibrosis on endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal laterally spreading tumors: a propensity score analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2019; 89: 470-478 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2018.08.051. (PMID: 30201398)
• 20 Ngamruengphong S, Aihara H, Friedland S. et al. Endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal dysplasia in inflammatory bowel disease: a US multicenter study. Endosc Int Open 2022; 10: E354-E360 DOI: 10.1055/a-1783-8756. (PMID: 35433226)
• 21 Kasuga K, Yamada M, Shida D. et al. Treatment outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection and surgery for colorectal neoplasms in patients with ulcerative colitis. United European Gastroenterol J 2021; 9: 964-972
• 22 Ronnow CF, Uedo N, Toth E. et al. Endoscopic submucosal dissection of 301 large colorectal neoplasias: outcome and learning curve from a specialized center in Europe. Endosc Int Open 2018; 6: E1340-E1348
• 23 Spychalski M, Skulimowski A, Dziki A. et al. Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the West – when can satisfactory results be obtained? A single-operator learning curve analysis. Scand J Gastroenterol 2017; 52: 1442-1452
• 24 Probst A, Golger D, Anthuber M. et al. Endoscopic submucosal dissection in large sessile lesions of the rectosigmoid: learning curve in a European center. Endoscopy 2012; 44: 660-667 DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1309403. (PMID: 22528673)
• 25 Yamashina T, Nemoto D, Hayashi Y. et al. Prospective randomized trial comparing the pocket-creation method and conventional method of colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection. Gastrointest Endosc 2020; 92: 368-379 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2020.02.034. (PMID: 32119937)
• 26 Jacques J, Legros R, Wallenhorst T. et al. Prediction of technically difficult, colorectal, endoscopic submucosal dissection: Is the procedural time a good endpoint?. Gastrointest Endosc 2021; 93: 1435-1436 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2021.01.002. (PMID: 33993913)
• 27 Hayashi N, Tanaka S, Nishiyama S. et al. Predictors of incomplete resection and perforation associated with endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal tumors. Gastrointest Endosc 2014; 79: 427-435
• 28 Thorlacius H, Ronnow CF, Toth E. European experience of colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: a systematic review of clinical efficacy and safety. Acta Oncol 2019; 58: S10-S14 DOI: 10.1080/0284186X.2019.1568547. (PMID: 30724676)
• 29 Goel R, Kanhere H, Trochsler M. The 'Surgical Time': a myth or reality? Surgeons' prediction of operating time and its effect on theatre scheduling. Aust Health Rev 2020; 44: 772-777 DOI: 10.1071/AH19222. (PMID: 32988434)
• 30 Eijkemans Marinus JC, van Houdenhoven M, Nguyen T. et al. Predicting the unpredictable: a new prediction model for operating room times using individual characteristics and the surgeon's estimate. Anesthesiology 2010; 112: 41-49
• 31 Edelman ER, van Kuijk SMJ, Hamaekers AEW. et al. Improving the prediction of total surgical procedure time using linear regression modeling. Front Med (Lausanne) 2017; 4: 85 DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2017.00085. (PMID: 28674693)
• 32 Stromblad CT, Baxter-King RG, Meisami A. et al. Effect of a predictive model on planned surgical duration accuracy, patient wait time, and use of presurgical resources: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Surg 2021; 156: 315-321 DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2020.6361. (PMID: 33502448)
• 33 Kayis E, Wang H, Patel M. et al. Improving prediction of surgery duration using operational and temporal factors. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2012; 2012: 456-462 (PMID: 23304316)
• 34 Martinez O, Martinez C, Parra CA. et al. Machine learning for surgical time prediction. Comput Methods Programs Biomed 2021; 208: 106220 DOI: 10.1016/j.cmpb.2021.106220. (PMID: 34161848)
• 35 Jacques J, Juglard C, Lambin T. et al. The size, manoeuvrability, site, history scorE (SMSH) – A new tool for predicting the outcomes of colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection. Gastrointest Endosc 2022; 95: AB149-AB150