Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is used for the treatment of large colorectal superficial neoplasms. However, there have been no large studies on electrocoagulation syndrome developing after colorectal ESD. The aim of this study was to clarify the incidence and clinical risk factors of post-ESD electrocoagulation syndrome (PECS).

Methods

A total of 692 patients (median age: 70 years; 395 men) with 692 lesions, who underwent colorectal ESD at a tertiary cancer center between July 2010 and December 2015, were eligible. PECS was clinically diagnosed based on the presence of localized abdominal tenderness matching the ESD enforcement site and fever (> 37.5 °C) or an inflammatory response (C-reactive protein level > 0.5 mg/dL or leukocytosis > 10 000 cells/μL), without obvious findings of perforation, which developed at > 6 h post-ESD. Outcomes of the procedure, the incidence of PECS, and risk factors associated with PECS were assessed.

Results

The incidence of PECS was 4.8% (33 patients), and all patients improved by conservative treatment. On multivariate analysis, the female sex (odds ratio [OR] 2.6; 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 1.2–5.7), tumor location at the cecum (OR 14.5; 95% CI: 3.7–53.7 vs rectum), and the presence of submucosal fibrosis (OR 2.8; 95% CI: 1.1–7.5) were found to be independent risk factors of PECS.

Conclusions

This study identified the risk factors for PECS. Patients with high-risk factors of PECS require careful management after colorectal ESD.

References

1Saito 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.
10.1016/j.gie.2010.08.004
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
2Oka S, Tanaka S, Kanao H et al. Current status in the occurrence of postoperative bleeding, perforation and residual/local recurrence during colonoscopic treatment in Japan. Dig. Endosc. 2010; 22: 376–380.
10.1111/j.1443-1661.2010.01016.x
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
3Kobayashi N, Yoshitake N, Hirahara Y et al. Matched case-control study comparing endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection for colorectal tumors. J. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2012; 27: 728–733.
10.1111/j.1440-1746.2011.06942.x
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
4Nakajima T, Saito Y, Tanaka S et al. Current status of endoscopic resection strategy for large, early colorectal neoplasia in Japan. Surg. Endosc. 2013; 27: 3262–3270.
10.1007/s00464-013-2903-x
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
5Jung D, Youn YH, Jahng J, Kim JH, Park H. Risk of electrocoagulation syndrome after endoscopic submucosal dissection in the colon and rectum. Endoscopy 2013; 45: 714–717.
10.1055/s-0033-1344555
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
6Hong MJ, Kim JH, Lee SY, Sung IK, Park HS, Shim CS. Prevalence and clinical features of coagulation syndrome after endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal neoplasms. Dig. Dis. Sci. 2015; 60: 211–216.
10.1007/s10620-014-3484-9
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
7Yamashina T, Takeuchi Y, Uedo N et al. Features of electrocoagulation syndrome after endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal neoplasm. J. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2016; 31: 615–620.
10.1111/jgh.13052
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
8Lee SP, Sung IK, Kim JH et al. A randomized controlled trial of prophylactic antibiotics in the prevention of electrocoagulation syndrome after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection. Gastrointest. Endosc. 2017; 86: 349–357.
10.1016/j.gie.2016.11.022
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
9Waye JD. Management of complications of colonoscopic polypectomy. Gastroenterologist 1993; 1: 158–164.
CAS PubMed Google Scholar
10Cha JM, Lim KS, Lee SH et al. Clinical outcomes and risk factors of post-polypectomy coagulation syndrome: a multicenter, retrospective, case-control study. Endoscopy 2013; 45: 202–207.
10.1055/s-0032-1326104
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
11Choo WK, Subhani J. Complication rates of colonic polypectomy in relation to polyp characteristics and techniques: a district hospital experience. J. Interv. Gastroenterol. 2012; 2: 8–11.
10.4161/jig.20126
PubMed Google Scholar
12Levin TR, Zhao W, Conell C et al. Complications of colonoscopy in an integrated health care delivery system. Ann. Intern. Med. 2006; 145: 880–886.
10.7326/0003-4819-145-12-200612190-00004
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
13Tanaka S, Kashida H, Saito Y et al. JGES guidelines for colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection/endoscopic mucosal resection. Dig. Endosc. 2015; 27: 417–434.
10.1111/den.12456
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
14Hotta K, Oyama T, Shinohara T et al. Learning curve for endoscopic submucosal dissection of large colorectal tumors. Dig. Endosc. 2010; 22: 302–306.
10.1111/j.1443-1661.2010.01005.x
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
15Matsumoto A, Tanaka S, Oba S et al. Outcome of endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal tumors accompanied by fibrosis. Scand. J. Gastroenterol. 2010; 45: 1329–1337.
10.3109/00365521.2010.495416
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
16Berkley KJ. Sex differences in pain. Behav. Brain Sci. 1997; 20: 371–380.
10.1017/S0140525X97221485
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
17Aubrun F, Salvi N, Coriat P, Riou B. Sex- and age-related differences in morphine requirements for postoperative pain relief. Anesthesiology 2005; 103: 156–160.
10.1097/00000542-200507000-00023
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
18Lee H, Cheoi KS, Chung H et al. Clinical features and predictive factors of coagulation syndrome after endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric neoplasm. Gastric Cancer 2012; 15: 83–90.
10.1007/s10120-011-0073-x
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
19Isomoto H, Nishiyama H, Yamaguchi N et al. Clinicopathological factors associated with clinical outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal epithelial neoplasms. Endoscopy 2009; 41: 679–683.
10.1055/s-0029-1214979
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
20Nishiyama H, Isomoto H, Yamaguchi N et al. Endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal epithelial neoplasms. Dis. Colon rectum 2010; 53: 161–168.
10.1007/DCR.0b013e3181b78cb6
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
21Takeuchi Y, Iishi H, Tanaka S et al. Factors associated with technical difficulties and adverse events of colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: retrospective exploratory factor analysis of a multicenter prospective cohort. Int. J. Colorectal Dis. 2014; 29: 1275–1284.
10.1007/s00384-014-1947-2
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
22Lee 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. Hhepatol. 2015; 30: 872–878.
10.1111/jgh.12886
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
23Makino T, Kanmura S, Sasaki F et al. Preoperative classification of submucosal fibrosis in colorectal laterally spreading tumors by endoscopic ultrasonography. Endosc. Int. Open 2015; 3: E363–E7.
10.1055/s-0034-1391782
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
24Yoshida N, Naito Y, Murakami T et al. Tips for safety in endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal tumors. Ann. Transl. Med. 2017; 5: 185.
10.21037/atm.2017.03.33
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
25Sato K, Ito S, Kitagawa T et al. Factors affecting the technical difficulty and clinical outcome of endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal tumors. Surg. Endosc. 2014; 28: 2959–2965.
10.1007/s00464-014-3558-y
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
26Hori K, Uraoka T, Harada K et al. Predictive factors for technically difficult endoscopic submucosal dissection in the colorectum. Endoscopy 2014; 46: 862–870.
10.1055/s-0034-1377205
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
27Imai K, Hotta K, Yamaguchi Y et al. Preoperative indicators of failure of en bloc resection or perforation in colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: implications for lesion stratification by technical difficulties during stepwise training. Gastrointest. Endosc. 2016; 83: 954–962.
10.1016/j.gie.2015.08.024
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar

Citing Literature

Volume33, Issue12

December 2018

Pages 2001-2006

Risk factors of post-endoscopic submucosal dissection electrocoagulation syndrome for colorectal neoplasm

Abstract

Background and Aim

Methods

Results

Conclusions

References

Citing Literature

References

Information

About Wiley Online Library

Help & Support

Opportunities

Connect with Wiley

Risk factors of post-endoscopic submucosal dissection electrocoagulation syndrome for colorectal neoplasm

Abstract

Background and Aim

Methods

Results

Conclusions

References

Citing Literature

References

Related

Information