A novel multimodality endoscopic device for colonic submucosal dissection using a combination of bipolar radiofrequency and microwave modalities

Background and study aims: Current submucosal dissection devices are technically challenging to use, resulting in long and sometimes incomplete colonic polyp resections. The aim of this feasibility preclinical study was to evaluate a new, multimodality instrument with novel electrocautery properties.

Methods: Six female adult pigs underwent colonic submucosal resections. The novel device was used to cut mucosa and submucosa using bipolar radiofrequency (BRF; at 400 KHz), provide hemostasis with microwave coagulation (MWC; at 5.8 GHz), and inject fluid via a retractable needle. The main outcomes measured were safety (histological analysis post-recovery), performance, and time needed to achieve complete resection.

Results: A total of 12 consecutive colonic pseudopolyps were completely excised (two per subject) using BRF cutting. The median time to complete resection was 44.3 minutes (SD 8.9). The median defect size was 32.8 mm (SD 4.3). MWC was applied on 37 occasions for pre-coagulation or treatment of bleeding vessels. One microperforation was treated successfully with endoscopic clips. All animals recovered uneventfully during the 28-day survival period. Histology confirmed adequate healing in all postmortem defects.

Conclusions: In this preclinical evaluation, the novel multimodality endoscopic device facilitated rapid and safe en bloc resection of colonic pseudopolyps.

• References

• 1 Farhat S, Chaussade S, Ponchon T et al. Endoscopic submucosal dissection in a European setting. A multi-institutional report of a technique in development. Endoscopy 2011; 43: 664-70
• 2 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
• 3 Repici A, Hassan C, De Paula Pessoa D et al. Efficacy and safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal neoplasia: a systematic review. Endoscopy 2012; 44: 137-150
• 4 Deprez PH, Bergman JJ, Meisner S et al. Current practice with endoscopic submucosal dissection in Europe: position statement from a panel of experts. Endoscopy 2010; 42: 853-858
• 5 Mizushima T, Kato M, Iwanaga I et al. Technical difficulty according to location, and risk factors for perforation, in endoscopic submucosal dissection of colorectal tumors. Surg Endosc 2015; 29: 133-139
• 6 Saito Y, Uraoka T, Yamaguchi Y et al. A prospective, multicenter study of 1111 colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissections (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 72: 1217-1225
• 7 Tanaka S, Terasaki M, Kanao H et al. Current status and future perspectives of endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal tumors. Dig Endosc 2012; 24 (Suppl. 01) 73-79
• 8 Yamashina T, Takeuchi Y, Uedo N et al. Features of electrocoagulation syndrome after endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal neoplasm. J Gastroenterol Hepatol In press 2015;
• 9 Jung D, Youn YH, Jahng J et al. Risk of electrocoagulation syndrome after endoscopic submucosal dissection in the colon and rectum. Endoscopy 2013; 45: 714-717
• 10 Yahagi N, Neuhaus H, Schumacher B et al. Comparison of standard endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) versus an optimized ESD technique for the colon: an animal study. Endoscopy 2009; 41: 340-345
• 11 Toyonaga T, Man-I M, Fujita T et al. The performance of a novel ball-tipped Flush knife for endoscopic submucosal dissection: a case–control study. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2010; 32: 908-915
• 12 Sullivan TP, Eaglstein WH, Davis SC et al. The pig as a model for human wound healing. Wound Repair Regen 2001; 9: 66-76
• 13 Kilkenny C, Browne WJ, Innes C et al. Improving bioscience research reporting: the ARRIVE guidelines for reporting animal research. PLoS Biol 2010; 8: e1000412
• 14 Rich L, Whittaker P. Collagen and picrosirius red staining: a polarized light assessment of fibrillar hue and spatial distribution. Braz J Morphol Sci 2005; 22: 97-104
• 15 Kim ES, Cho KB, Park KS et al. Factors predictive of perforation during endoscopic submucosal dissection for the treatment of colorectal tumors. Endoscopy 2011; 43: 573-578