Conventional versus traction-assisted endoscopic submucosal dissection for gastric neoplasms: a multicenter, randomized controlled trial (with video)

The aim of this study was to clarify whether dental floss clip (DFC) traction improves the technical outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD).A superiority, randomized control trial was conducted at 14 institutions across Japan. Patients with single gastric neoplasm meeting the indications of the Japanese guidelines for gastric treatment were enrolled and assigned to receive conventional ESD or DFC traction-assisted ESD (DFC-ESD). Randomization was performed according to a computer-generated random sequence with stratification by institution, tumor location, tumor size, and operator experience. The primary endpoint was ESD procedure time, defined as the time from the start of the submucosal injection to the end of the tumor removal procedure.Between July 2015 and September 2016, 640 patients underwent randomization. Of these, 316 patients who underwent conventional ESD and 319 patients who underwent DFC-ESD were included in our analysis. The mean ESD procedure time was 60.7 and 58.1 minutes for conventional ESD and DFC-ESD, respectively (P = .45). Perforation was less frequent in the DFC-ESD group (2.2% vs .3%, P = .04). For lesions located in the greater curvature of the upper or middle stomach, the mean procedure time was significantly shorter in the DFC-ESD group (104.1 vs 57.2 minutes, P = .01).Our findings suggest that DFC-ESD does not result in shorter procedure time in the overall patient population, but it can reduce the risk of perforation. When selectively applied to lesions located in the greater curvature of the upper or middle stomach, DFC-ESD provides a remarkable reduction in procedure time.