Comparison of treatment outcomes between endoscopic submucosal dissection with the needle-type knife and insulated-tip knife for superficial esophageal neoplasms.

Our study aimed to compare the treatment outcomes between endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) with an insulated-tip knife (ESD-IT) and a needle-type knife (ESD-N) for large superficial esophageal neoplasms, as no study of this kind has been previously reported. We used the dataset of a multicenter, randomized controlled trial that compared conventional ESD (C-ESD) and traction-assisted ESD (TA-ESD) for superficial esophageal neoplasms. We compared the procedural outcomes between ESD-IT and ESD-N in a post hoc analysis and conducted sub-analyses based on traction assistance and electrical knife type. We included 223 (EST-IT, n = 169; ESD-N, n = 54) patients with no significant differences in baseline characteristics. The operator handover rate due to ESD difficulties was significantly higher in ESD-N (ESD-IT = 0.6% vs. ESD-N = 13.0%, P = 0.001), while the injection volume was significantly higher in ESD-IT than in ESD-N (40.0 vs. 20.5 mL, P < 0.001). Other outcomes were comparable between both groups (procedural time: 51.0 vs. 49.5 minute, P = 0.89; complete resection: 90.5% vs. 90.7%, P > 0.99; and complication rate: 1.8% vs. 3.7%, P = 0.60 for ESD-IT and ESD-N, respectively). In the sub-analyses, the handover rate was significantly lower with TA-ESD than with C-ESD for ESD-N (3.2% vs. 26.1%, P = 0.034), and a significantly smaller injection volume was used in TA-ESD than in C-ESD for ESD-IT (31.5 vs. 47.0 mL, P < 0.01). ESD with either endoscopic device achieved favorable treatment outcomes with low complication rates. The handover rate in ESD-N and the injection volume in ESD-IT improved with the traction method.