Treffer: Effect of the Insulated-Tip Knife on Procedure Time in Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Colorectal Neoplasms: A Single-Center, Randomized Controlled Trial (NANO Study).
S. J. Winawer, A. G. Zauber, M. N. Ho, et al., “Prevention of Colorectal Cancer by Colonoscopic Polypectomy. The National Polyp Study Workgroup,” New England Journal of Medicine 329 (1993): 1977–1981.
A. G. Zauber, S. J. Winawer, M. J. O'Brien, et al., “Colonoscopic Polypectomy and Long‐Term Prevention of Colorectal‐Cancer Deaths,” New England Journal of Medicine 366 (2012): 687–696.
T. Zhan, T. Hielscher, F. Hahn, et al., “Risk Factors for Local Recurrence of Large, Flat Colorectal Polyps After Endoscopic Mucosal Resection,” Digestion 93 (2016): 311–317.
S. Oka, S. Tanaka, Y. Saito, et al., “Local Recurrence After Endoscopic Resection for Large Colorectal Neoplasia: A Multicenter Prospective Study in Japan,” American Journal of Gastroenterology 110 (2015): 697–707.
T. D. Belderbos, M. Leenders, L. M. Moons, and P. D. Siersema, “Local Recurrence After Endoscopic Mucosal Resection of Nonpedunculated Colorectal Lesions: Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis,” Endoscopy 46 (2014): 388–402.
K. Hotta, T. Fujii, Y. Saito, and T. Matsuda, “Local Recurrence After Endoscopic Resection of Colorectal Tumors,” International Journal of Colorectal Disease 24 (2009): 225–230.
C. M. Le Clercq, B. Winkens, C. M. Bakker, et al., “Metachronous Colorectal Cancers Result From Missed Lesions and Non‐Compliance With Surveillance,” Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 82 (2015): 325–333.e2.
D. J. Robertson, D. A. Lieberman, S. J. Winawer, et al., “Colorectal Cancers Soon After Colonoscopy: A Pooled Multicohort Analysis,” Gut 63 (2014): 949–956.
C. M. Le Clercq, M. W. Bouwens, E. J. Rondagh, et al., “Postcolonoscopy Colorectal Cancers Are Preventable: A Population‐Based Study,” Gut 63 (2014): 957–963.
W. D. Farrar, M. S. Sawhney, D. B. Nelson, F. A. Lederle, and J. H. Bond, “Colorectal Cancers Found After a Complete Colonoscopy,” Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 4 (2006): 1259–1264.
S. Tanaka, H. Kashida, Y. Saito, et al., “Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society Guidelines for Colorectal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection/Endoscopic Mucosal Resection,” Digestive Endoscopy 32 (2020): 219–239.
N. Patel, K. Patel, H. Ashrafian, T. Athanasiou, A. Darzi, and J. Teare, “Colorectal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection: Systematic Review of Mid‐Term Clinical Outcomes,” Digestive Endoscopy 28 (2016): 405–416.
R. R. Singh, J. Nanavati, H. Gopakumar, and N. A. Kumta, “Colorectal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection in the West: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis,” Endoscopy International Open 11 (2023): E1082–E1091.
N. Kobayashi, Y. Takeuchi, K. Ohata, et al., “Outcomes of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Colorectal Neoplasms: Prospective, Multicenter, Cohort Trial,” Digestive Endoscopy 34 (2022): 1042–1051.
K. Imai, K. Hotta, Y. Yamaguchi, 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,” Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 83 (2016): 954–962.
N. Hayashi, S. Tanaka, S. Nishiyama, et al., “Predictors of Incomplete Resection and Perforation Associated With Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Colorectal Tumors,” Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 79 (2014): 427–435.
K. Hotta, Y. Yamaguchi, Y. Saito, T. Takao, and H. Ono, “Current Opinions for Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Colorectal Tumors From Our Experiences: Indications, Technical Aspects and Complications,” Digestive Endoscopy 24, no. Suppl 1 (2012): 110–116.
K. Imai, K. Hotta, Y. Yamaguchi, S. Ito, and H. Ono, “Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Large Colorectal Neoplasms,” Digestive Endoscopy 29, no. Suppl 2 (2017): 53–57.
T. Suzuki, T. Hara, Y. Kitagawa, and T. Yamaguchi, “Usefulness of IT Knife Nano for Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection of Large Colorectal Lesions,” Acta Gastroenterologica Belgica 79 (2016): 186–190.
Y. Sano, S. Tanaka, S. E. Kudo, et al., “Narrow‐Band Imaging (NBI) Magnifying Endoscopic Classification of Colorectal Tumors Proposed by the Japan NBI Expert Team,” Digestive Endoscopy 28 (2016): 526–533.
S. Kudo, S. Tamura, T. Nakajima, H. Yamano, H. Kusaka, and H. Watanabe, “Diagnosis of Colorectal Tumorous Lesions by Magnifying Endoscopy,” Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 44 (1996): 8–14.
K. Boda, S. Oka, S. Tanaka, et al., “Real‐World Learning Curve Analysis of Colorectal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection: A Large Multicenter Study,” Surgical Endoscopy 34 (2020): 3344–3351.
Y. Kamigaichi, S. Oka, S. Tanaka, et al., “Factors for Conversion Risk of Colorectal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection: A Multicenter Study,” Surgical Endoscopy 36 (2022): 5698–5709.
Weitere Informationen
Background and Aim: The insulated-tip (IT) knife nano is a high-frequency electrosurgical knife designed to enhance the safety and efficiency of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), particularly in anatomically narrow lumens such as the colorectum. Although it is commonly used in combination with needle knives for colorectal ESD, its efficacy in this context has not been substantiated through randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We aimed to evaluate whether the adjunctive use of the ITknife nano significantly reduces ESD procedure time for colorectal neoplasms.
Methods: A single-center RCT involving patients with colorectal neoplasms measuring 30-50 mm was randomized to receive ESD with either the DualKnife J alone (D-group) or the addition of the ITknife nano (IT-group). Allocation adjustment factors included lesion location, tumor size, and macroscopic type. The primary outcome was the ESD procedure time. Secondary outcomes included submucosal dissection speed, en bloc and R0 resection rate, and incidence of adverse events.
Results: A total of 108 and 106 lesions in the D- and IT-groups, respectively, were analyzed. There was no significant difference in procedure time between groups (111.8 min vs. 114.3 min, p = 0.789) nor in submucosal dissection speed (22.9 mm <sup>2</sup> /min vs. 22.1 mm <sup>2</sup> /min, p = 0.669). However, subgroup analysis on allocation factors revealed significantly faster dissection speed for rectum lesions in the D-group (24.7 mm <sup>2</sup> /min vs. 16.2 mm <sup>2</sup> /min, p = 0.0496). Resection and safety outcomes were comparable between groups.
Conclusions: The adjunctive use of the ITknife nano with the DualKnife J did not significantly reduce procedure time in colorectal ESD (jRCT1042180137).
Trial Registration: University Hospital Medical Network Clinical Trials Registry: UMIN000030068; Japan Registry of Clinical Trials: jRCT1042180137.
(© 2025 Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Foundation and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)