Introduction
The incidence of superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors (SNADETs) has markedly increased in recent endoscopic practice [1, 2]. Nevertheless, the detection rate during esophagogastroduodenoscopy remains low, with 0.15% for adenomas and 0.05% for carcinomas [3]. Large SNADETs, akin to other gastrointestinal malignancies, should be resected en bloc via endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). However, the incidence of perforation associated with duodenal ESD is notably high (11.6–35.7%), often necessitating invasive interventions such as pancreatoduodenectomy [4–6]. Endoscopists must learn duodenal ESD procedures through on-the-job training, as no suitable animal or simulation model exists. Although cadaver surgical training (CST) has become prevalent in surgical practice, its application in gastrointestinal endoscopic treatment has been infrequently documented. CST may provide superior anatomical landmarks and tissue fidelity compared to animal or simulation training. This study investigated the potential application of CST as a training model for duodenal ESD.
Aims & Methods
Between July 2024 and February 2025, CST was conducted on four donors preserved using the Thiel method. Upper gastrointestinal examination (UGIE) and multiple duodenal ESD procedures were performed. Among the participants, three had prior experience with these procedures (Experience; Group E), while four did not have such experience (Non-Experience; Group NE). Both groups executed all procedures, and subsequent retrospective studies were conducted: 1) the feasibility of UGIE and the performance of the duodenal ESD procedure for each donor, and 2) questionnaires administered to the participants (n=7) to assess the feasibility of each procedure (marking, submucosal injection, circumferential incision, submucosal dissection), realism of the simulation, and psychological barriers, using a 5-point rating scale ("1: significantly more challenging–5: significantly easier" or "1: strongly disagree–5: strongly agree"). Each score was compiled and presented as the median score.
Results
1) UGIE was feasible in all four cases, although one instance of duodenal perforation occurred due to duodenal stretching. Duodenal ESD was feasible in all four cases and was performed a total of seven times.
2) In UGIE, procedural scores, such as insertion and observation at each location, were predominantly rated 4 or 5, with a score of 3 exclusively noted for intragastric observation. In duodenal ESD, all procedural scores for tasks such as submucosal injection and dissection were consistently assigned a rating of 4. The questionnaire score for the item "Was the duodenal mural architecture preserved?" was 4.5. The scores for the items "Is there psychological stress associated with handling cadavers?" and "Is CST useful for learning duodenal ESD technique?" were 4 and 4.5, respectively. No significant differences were observed in the scores between the E and NE groups for any of the evaluations.
Conclusion
The mural architecture of the gastrointestinal tract in CST, when fixed using the Theil method, closely resembles that of a living organism. It was subsequently identified that CST could serve as an effective educational model for duodenal ESD, marking this as the inaugural report on the subject. This methodology is expected to have broader applications in the education of endoscopic treatments, particularly for rare and challenging procedures such as duodenal ESD, and to contribute to the advancement of endoscopic techniques in future research.
References
1. Legué LM, Bernards N, Gerritse SL, et al. Trends in incidence, treatment and survival of small bowel adenocarcinomas between 1999 and 2013: a population-based study in The Netherlands. Acta Oncol. 2016;55:1183-1189.
2. Yoshida M, Yabuuchi Y, Kakushima N, et al. The incidence of non-ampullary duodenal cancer in Japan: The first analysis of a national cancer registry. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2021;36:1216-1221.
3. Yoshimizu S, Hirasawa T, Horiuchi Y, et al. Differences in upper gastrointestinal neoplasm detection rates based on inspection time and esophagogastroduodenoscopy training. Endosc Int Open. 2018;06:E1190–E1197.
4. Hoteya S, Furuhata T, Takahito T, et al. Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection and Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for Non-Ampullary Superficial Duodenal Tumor. Digestion. 2017;95:36-42.
5. Jung JH, KD. C, JY. A, et al. Endoscopic submucosal dissection for sessile, nonampullary duodenal adenomas. Endoscopy. 2013;45:133-135.
6. Kato M, Takeuchi Y, Hoteya S, et al. Outcomes of endoscopic resection for superficial duodenal tumors: 10 years' experience in 18 Japanese high volume centers. Endoscopy. 2022;54:663-670.