UEG's educational platform for gastroenterology education bringing recordings, courses, guidelines, and more together in one place.

UEG Week Berlin 2025 Recordings Gut Guide online

Rate for better recommendations!

Your feedback helps us show you more of what you like and less of what you dislike!

More of this!

We will show you more similar content.

Not for me!

We won't suggest this again.

Bookmark!

Save this content for later!

New to myUEG? Create an account! Log In with myUEG account

UEG Presentation

Share via Email Share on Facebook Share on X Share on LinkedIn Share on Bluesky

You found a lesion, what to do now? EMR vs. ESD

Free for all myUEG account holders. Your access level is set automatically based on your occupation. Medical professionals get full access to all content. If you are a non-medical user, you can only access UEG Week content from congresses you attended.

Not sure what you can access? Learn more about account types.

You found a lesion, what to do now? EMR vs. ESD

Raf Bisschops 1, Alanna Ebigbo 2

1 Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

2 Klinikum Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany

Event

UEG Postgraduate Teaching Programme Berlin 2025

Session

Best of Barrett’s oesophagus

Citation

United European Gastroenterology Journal 2025; 13 (Supplement 8)

Published

2025

UEG Presentation

Share via Email Share on Facebook Share on X Share on LinkedIn Share on Bluesky

Not sure what you can access? Learn more about account types.

How to optimise your Barrett's endoscopies and report your imaging techniques and lesion classification

David G. Graham 1, Roos E. Pouw 2

1 University College London Hospital, London, United Kingdom

2 Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, Netherlands

Event

UEG Postgraduate Teaching Programme Berlin 2025

Session

Best of Barrett’s oesophagus

Citation

United European Gastroenterology Journal 2025; 13 (Supplement 8)

Published

2025

UEG Presentation

Share via Email Share on Facebook Share on X Share on LinkedIn Share on Bluesky

ENDOSCOPIC RESECTION FOR GASTRIC GASTROINTESTINAL STROMAL TUMORS WITH DETACHABLE SNARE

Not sure what you can access? Learn more about account types.

Introduction

Gastric Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GISTs) are among the most common mesenchymal tumors arising in the gastrointestinal tract. Despite many international guidelines, the treatment of GISTs with tumor diameters less than 50 mm remains controversial. Although surgical resection is indicated for histologically diagnosed GISTs, endoscopic resection has recently been reported. However, endoscopic resection, mainly Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), often requires a full-layer resection of the gastric wall, which requires extensive suturing. Therefore, we have developed an ESD technique for endoscopic resection of the gastric wall that uses a threaded clip and a detachable snare to strangulate the muscle layer prior to resection and allows safe and easy complete resection without perforation (EISMR: Endoscopic inversion and strangulation of the muscle layer and resection). We now report seven cases of EISMR for gastric GISTs.

Aims & Methods

We evaluated the safety and efficacy of EISMR for GISTs. Seven gastric GISTs (4 males and 3 females) with tumor diameters of 50 mm or less for which we performed EISMR were included in this study, and the en bloc resection rate, R0 resection rate, procedure time, and complications were investigated. All patients underwent EUS and abdominal CT scan before treatment to confirm that the pathological diagnosis was GIST, that the tumor diameter was less than 50 mm, and that the tumor was intraluminal growth type.
In the EISMR procedure, sodium hyaluronate solution was first injected into the submucosal layer of the lesion to dissect the submucosa as in ESD. After a yellowish GIST continuity with the muscularis propria is observed, the submucosa and muscle layer are dissected to expose as much of the submucosa as possible without damaging the tumor. Next, a threaded clip is attached to the tumor and pulled in order to invert the muscle layer. The muscle layer is then retracted into the gastric lumen to form a polyp-like shape, and the base of the muscle layer is strangulated using an detachable snare (PolyLoop Ligating Device, Olympus). The upper margin of the strangulated area is then incised to complete the resection. After confirming that there is no perforation, the strangulated area is additionally sutured with a clip.

Results

All seven cases could be resected en bloc, with a median time of 90.5 minutes (58-120). Of the seven EISMR cases, five cases were performed by experts and two by non-experts. All patients were discharged on postoperative day 5 or 6 without adverse events. Pathology results showed complete resection in the low-risk GIST group. Upper endoscopy 3-6 months after EISMR showed no tumor recurrence and only scarring.

Conclusion

EISMR for gastric GISTs is potentially safe, easy and useful without excessive invasion.

ENDOSCOPIC RESECTION FOR GASTRIC GASTROINTESTINAL STROMAL TUMORS WITH DETACHABLE SNARE

Masahiro Takeo 1, Takeshi Yamashina 1, Masaaki Shimatani 1, Hironao Matsumoto 1, Makoto Naganuma 2

1 Kansai Medical University Medical Center, Moriguchi, Japan

2 Kansai Medical University 3rd Dept. of Internal Medicine, Hirakata, Japan

Event

UEG Week Berlin 2025

Topics

Digestive Oncology Endoscopy Oesophagus

Submission format

Video Case

Session

Video Case Session: Third space endoscopy

Citation

United European Gastroenterology Journal 2025; 13 (Supplement 8)

Published

2025

UEG Presentation

Share via Email Share on Facebook Share on X Share on LinkedIn Share on Bluesky

Not sure what you can access? Learn more about account types.

Ablation

Arnaud Lemmers 1

1 Hôpital Univ. Erasme (Gastro), Bruxelles, Belgium

Event

UEG Week Berlin 2025

Topics

Endoscopy Oesophagus

Session

Barrett's oesophagus: Are we getting there?

Citation

United European Gastroenterology Journal 2025; 13 (Supplement 8)

Published

2025

UEG Presentation

Share via Email Share on Facebook Share on X Share on LinkedIn Share on Bluesky

UNDERWATER ENDOSCOPIC SUBMUCOSAL DISSECTION (U-ESD) VERSUS GAS ENDOSCOPIC SUBMUCOSAL DISSECTION (G-ESD) FOR NON-PEDUNCULATED COLORECTAL LESIONS: PRELIMINARY RESULTS

Not sure what you can access? Learn more about account types.

Introduction

Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection (ESD) is the best endoscopic technique that enables en bloc resection of superficial colorectal neoplasms.Despite its effectiveness, ESD is not very widespread in Western countries due to technical complexity, long procedure times, and a steep learning curve. These barriers have created a significant gap in adoption and outcomes between Eastern and Western centers. Underwater ESD (U-ESD) has been introduced to simplify the procedure. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of U-ESD versus conventional gas-based ESD (G-ESD) in a Western center, focusing on procedural efficiency and safety.

Aims & Methods

This is a single-center, prospective randomized controlled trial conducted at Fondazione Campus Bio-Medico in Rome between December 2024 and April 2025.Forty patients with non-pedunculated colorectal lesions were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to undergo either Underwater ESD (U-ESD) or conventional ESD with insufflation of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) (G-ESD).The primary outcome was total procedure time. Secondary outcomes included dissection speed, en bloc and R0 resection rates, use of hemostatic forceps, and the incidence of adverse events such as delayed bleeding, perforation, and post-ESD coagulation syndrome (PECS).

Results

A total of 40 patients referred to our endoscopic unit for ESD between December 2024 and April 2025. The mean size of the colorectal lesions was 57.4 mm and 40.7 mm in the U-ESD and G-ESD groups. The location of the lesions was in the rectum in 15% and 55% of the U-ESD and C-ESD groups, respectively; in the right side of the colon in 35% and 20% of the U-ESD and G-ESD groups, respectively. The morphology of LST was classified as LST-nongranular in 20 % and 25% of the U-ESD and G-ESD groups, respectively; as LST granular in 60% and 35% of the U-ESD and G-ESD groups, respectively. Fibrosis (grade 1 and 2) was present in 45% and 30% of the U-ESD and G-ESD groups, respectively. The mean total procedure time was shorter in the U-ESD group compared with the G-ESD group (53.3 ±33 minutes vs 78.7 ± 25.6 minutes; mean difference,–25.4 minutes; P=0.009).Mean dissection speed was faster in the U-ESD group compared with the G-ESD group (42 ± 26.3 mm2/min vs 13.3 ± 8 mm2/min; mean difference, 28.7 mm2/min; P= 0.001). En bloc and R0 resection rates in both groups were 100%. The use of a hemostatic forceps was significantly lower in U-ESD compared G-ESD (40% vs 90%, P= 0.001). Delayed bleeding occurred in only one patient in G-ESD group and was managed successfully by endoscopic clipping. No perforations occurred in either group. PECS was noted in only one patient in the G-ESD group.

Conclusion

UESD has shown a significantly shorter procedure time and faster dissection speed compared with GESD. These both empower the possibility of considering U-ESD as the preferred colorectal ESD method for colorectal lesions.