Endoscopic resection has been the standard treatment for intramucosal esophageal cancers (ECs) because of the low risk of lymph node metastases in the lesions. In recent years, endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), which can resect large ECs, has been performed. However, the risk of esophageal stricture after ESD is high when the mucosal defect caused by the treatment exceeds 3/4 of the circumference of the lumen. Despite the subsequent high risk of luminal stricture, ESD has been performed even in cases of circumferential EC. In such cases, it is necessary to take measures to prevent stricture. Therefore, in this review, we aimed to clarify the current status of stricture prevention methods after esophageal ESD based on previous literature. Although various prophylactic methods have been reported to have stricture-preventing effects, steroid injection therapy and oral steroid administration are mainstream. However, in cases of circumferential EC, both steroid injection therapy and oral steroid administration cannot effectively prevent luminal stricture. To solve this issue, clinical applications, such as tissue shielding methods with polyglycolic acid sheet, autologous oral mucosal epithelial sheet transplantation, and stent placement, have been developed. However, effective prophylaxis of post-ESD mucosal defects of the esophagus is still unclear. Therefore, further studies in this research field are needed.

The sample adequacy and diagnostic accuracy of an endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) for gastric subepithelial lesions (SELs) have been reported to be imperfect. To resolve these issues, a fork-tip needle as an EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needle has been developed. This study was conducted to evaluate the usefulness of a fork-tip needle in an EUS-FNB for gastric SELs. Seventy-nine patients who received an EUS-FNA or FNB using a fork-tip needle for gastric SELs were included in the study. The sample adequacy and diagnostic accuracy were compared between the EUS-FNB with the fork-tip needle group (fork-tip group, n = 13) and the EUS-FNA with FNA needle group (FNA group, n = 66). In addition, a multivariate analysis of the factors influencing diagnostic accuracy was conducted. Regarding sample adequacy, there was no significant difference between the groups (100% vs. 90.9%, respectively; p = 0.582). The diagnostic accuracy of the fork-tip group was numerically higher than that of the FNA group (92.3% vs. 81.8%, respectively; p = 0.682). In a multivariate analysis, the diagnostic accuracy was related to the tumor size and location of the SEL but not to the needle type. In conclusion, this study does not show statistical superiority, but suggests the useful potential of a fork-tip needle.

Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) has become a popular treatment for esophageal achalasia and other esophageal motility disorders. However, its efficacy and safety in elderly patients are unclear. To clarify that, we reviewed the medical records of patients who underwent POEM in our hospital. A total of 11 patients who underwent POEM for esophageal achalasia (n = 10) and jackhammer esophagus (n = 1) were included. Procedural success, defined as the completion of an esophageal and gastric myotomy, was 100%. Clinical success, defined as an Eckardt score of 3 or less, without the use of additional treatments at 2 months, was 100%. The median Eckardt score significantly decreased after the POEM (baseline vs. 2 months after POEM; 7 (2–8) vs. 0 (0–1), p < 0.01). In the second and third years, the cumulative treatment effect maintenance rate was 88.9%. All patients taking antithrombotic agents had safe operations with the temporary discontinuation of these agents. There were four adverse events (two pneumoperitoneum, one mucosal injury, and one pneumonia), all of which improved with fasting or antibiotics. In conclusion, POEM is an effective and safe treatment for esophageal achalasia and achalasia-related diseases in patients aged 75 years and over.

Endoscopic resection is a treatment of choice for a metachronous early-stage esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) appearing after a radical cure of esophageal cancer by chemoradiotherapy (CRT). However, non-curative resection, and procedural complications including perforation due to radiation-induced submucosal fibrosis, are a concern. This study aimed to evaluate the association between submucosal fibrosis and the usefulness and safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in ESCC after CRT. This study retrospectively analyzed 13 lesions in 11 patients in our institute. Submucosal fibrosis under the lesion (F score) was classified into three levels (F0: none or mild, F1: moderate, and F2: severe) based on endoscopic and histopathologic findings. All lesions were F1 or greater (F1: 8 lesions and F2: 5 lesions). En bloc and R0 resection rates were both 100%. The procedural speed was slower in F2 than in F1 (F1 vs. F2; 15.1 mm²/min vs. 7.1 mm²/min, p = 0.019), without procedure-related adverse events. At a median follow-up of 42 months (range: 14–117 months) after ESD, 7 of 11 (63.6%) patients were alive without recurrence, and without ESCC-related death. ESCC after CRT reliably and safely resected en bloc by ESD but was more difficult in lesions with strong submucosal fibrosis.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has become the standard treatment for superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (SESCC). However, the treatment strategy for SESCC complicated by esophageal varices (EVs) has not been established. We report two cases of SESCC in patients with alcoholic cirrhosis complicated by EVs who underwent ESD. Case 1 presented with EVs on the anal side of the SESCC, and endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) was performed before ESD. After EVL, the SESCC was successfully treated by ESD without any adverse events. Case 2 presented EVs from the anal side of the SESCC to the submucosa just below the SESCC. Then, EVL and endoscopic injection sclerotherapy with polidocanol were performed before ESD. However, ESD was not completed because of severe bleeding by uncontrolled blood flow below and around the SESCC. Bleeding during ESD was controlled in case 1, but not in case 2.