Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) versus endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for resection of large distal non-pedunculated colorectal adenomas (MATILDA-trial): Rationale and design of a multicenter randomized clinical trial

Publication date

2016-05-26

Authors

Backes, Yara
Moons, Leon M GORCID 0000-0002-6913-9954ISNI 0000000393157578
van Bergeijk, J. D.
Berk, L.
ter Borg, F.
ter Borg, P. C J
Elias, Sjoerd G.ISNI 0000000388198607
Geesing, J. M J
Groen, J. N.
Hadithi, M.

Editors

Advisors

Supervisors

Document Type

Article

Collections

Open Access logo

License

Abstract

Background: Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is currently the most used technique for resection of large distal colorectal polyps. However, in large lesions EMR can often only be performed in a piecemeal fashion resulting in relatively low radical (R0)-resection rates and high recurrence rates. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a newer procedure that is more difficult resulting in a longer procedural time, but is promising due to the high en-bloc resection rates and the very low recurrence rates. We aim to evaluate the (cost-)effectiveness of ESD against EMR on both short (i.e. 6 months) and long-term (i.e. 36 months). We hypothesize that in the short-run ESD is more time consuming resulting in higher healthcare costs, but is (cost-) effective on the long-term due to lower patients burden, a higher number of R0-resections and lower recurrence rates with less need for repeated procedures. Methods: This is a multicenter randomized clinical trial in patients with a non-pedunculated polyp larger than 20 mm in the rectum, sigmoid, or descending colon suspected to be an adenoma by means of endoscopic assessment. Primary endpoint is recurrence rate at follow-up colonoscopy at 6 months. Secondary endpoints are R0-resection rate, perceived burden and quality of life, healthcare resources utilization and costs, surgical referral rate, complication rate and recurrence rate at 36 months. Quality-adjusted-life-year (QALY) will be estimated taking an area under the curve approach and using EQ-5D-indexes. Healthcare costs will be calculated by multiplying used healthcare services with unit prices. The cost-effectiveness of ESD against EMR will be expressed as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) showing additional costs per recurrence free patient and as ICER showing additional costs per QALY. Discussion: If this trial confirms ESD to be favorable on the long-term, the burden of extra colonoscopies and repeated procedures can be prevented for future patients. Trial registration:NCT02657044(Clinicaltrials.gov), registered January 8, 2016.

Keywords

Colonoscopy, Colorectal adenoma, Endoscopic mucosal resection, Endoscopic submucosal dissection, Randomized clinical trial, Gastroenterology, Journal Article, Multicenter Study, Randomized Controlled Trial

Citation

Backes, Y, Moons, L M G, van Bergeijk, J D, Berk, L, ter Borg, F, ter Borg, P C J, Elias, S G, Geesing, J M J, Groen, J N, Hadithi, M, Hardwick, J C H, Kerkhof, M, Mangen, M J J, Straathof, J W A, Schröder, R, Schwartz, M P, Spanier, B W M, de Vos tot Nederveen Cappel, W H, Wolfhagen, F H J & Koch, A D 2016, 'Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) versus endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for resection of large distal non-pedunculated colorectal adenomas (MATILDA-trial) : Rationale and design of a multicenter randomized clinical trial', BMC Gastroenterology [E], vol. 16, no. 1, 56. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12876-016-0468-6