Efficacy and Safety of Single Clip Traction Assisted Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Colonic Neoplasms: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis.

Abstract

Aim: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for colonic neoplasms is a technically intricate procedure. Internal traction using a single clip has emerged as a promising supportive technique for colonic ESD. Therefore, this study aimed to comprehensively evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety of ESD with and without the aid of single-clip traction.

Methods: This retrospective study encompassed 36 patients who underwent single clip traction-assisted colonic ESD and 66 who underwent the traditional method of colonic ESD at Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital Clinical College of Nanjing Medical University. We employed the propensity score-matching method to mitigate disparities in resected specimen size and tumor location. Post-matching, we comprehensively assessed treatment outcomes and incidence of adverse events between the two treatment groups (single clip traction-assisted ESD (scESD) and conventional ESD (cESD)).

Results: After propensity score matching, we observed 34 matched pairs. There were no significant differences between the two treatment groups regarding the en bloc resection rate, complete resection rate, and curative rate. However, the procedure duration was significantly shorter in the single clip traction-assisted ESD group compared to the conventional ESD group (20.00 [Interquatile Range (IQR)] (16.00-32.50) minutes vs 31.50 [IQR] (17.00-54.00) minutes, p = 0.0474). Furthermore, there was a significant increase in dissection speed in the single clip traction-assisted ESD group compared to the conventional ESD group (0.29 [IQR] (0.20-0.45) mm2/min vs 0.19 [IQR] (0.11-0.35) mm2/min, p = 0.0015). All lesions were resected in a single piece. Among the propensity-score-matched patients, only those treated with single clip traction-assisted ESD exhibited faster dissection speeds (p = 0.015). Furthermore, there were no substantial differences in adverse events such as intraoperative perforation, delayed perforation, or delayed bleeding.

Conclusions: Our findings suggest that single clip traction-assisted colonic ESD is preferable to traditional colonic ESD, owing to its shorter procedure duration and faster dissection speed.