A pilot animal and clinical study of autologous blood solution compared with normal saline for use as an endoscopic submucosal cushion

Wen,Wei; Shi,Chuanbing; Shi,Yan; Ji,Guozhong; Wu,Ping; Fan,Zhining; Zhang,Faming

doi:10.3892/etm.2012.626

A pilot animal and clinical study of autologous blood solution compared with normal saline for use as an endoscopic submucosal cushion

Authors:
- Wei Wen
- Chuanbing Shi
- Yan Shi
- Guozhong Ji
- Ping Wu
- Zhining Fan
- Faming Zhang
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Institute of Digestive Endoscopy and Medical Center for Digestive Diseases, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing 210011, P.R. China, Department of Pathology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing 210011, P.R. China
Published online on: June 29, 2012 https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2012.626
Pages: 419-424

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

Normal saline is the most popular agent used during endoscopic submucosal injection. However, endoscopists have never identified an optimal submucosal injection solution, which is not only safe and cost-effective but has a unique lifting ability with endoscopic submucosal cushion and causes less tissue damage. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and microscopic characteristics of a blood solution, including whole blood and plasma solution, as a submucosal cushioning agent, compared with normal saline. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) procedures in pig stomachs were performed by injecting plasma solution (n=4) and normal saline (n=4). A total of 38 patients with gastrointestinal neoplasms underwent endoscopic musocal resection (EMR) procedures. Of 38 EMRs, 7 used whole blood injection, and 31 of 38 acting as the control group used normal saline. A tissue damage scoring system was developed based on injection-induced hydrops and tears for the evaluation of tissue damage. In animal experiments, the lifting time of the injection with normal saline in the pig colon was shorter than that of the group with plasma solution (18.25±5.44 min vs. 6.5±2.38 min, P=0.007). In animal experiments with ESD procedures in the stomach, the hydrops in the normal saline injection group were more extensive than those in the group with plasma (P=0.011). The degree of tearing in the group with normal saline was observed to be less than that in the group with plasma (P=0.008). In patients with EMR, using the histological scoring method, it was determined that the degree of hydrops in the group with normal saline injection was more extensive than that in the group with whole blood (P<0.001). The effective submucosal tearing in the group with normal saline was less than that in the group with blood (P<0.001). The blood solution, including whole blood and plasma solution, as a novel submucosal injection agent, may outperform normal saline with a unique lifting ability, less pronounced tissue damage and marked effective submucosal blunt dissection.

View Figures

View References

1.	Rösch T, Sarbia M, Schumacher B, et al: Attempted endoscopic en bloc resection of mucosal and submucosal tumors using insulated-tip knives: a pilot series. Endoscopy. 36:788–801. 2004.PubMed/NCBI
2.	Inoue H, Minami H, Kobayashi Y, et al: Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for esophageal achalasia. Endoscopy. 42:265–271. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar
3.	Bures J, Kopácová M, Kvetina J, et al: Different solutions used for submucosal injection influenced early healing of gastric endoscopic mucosal resection in a preclinical study in experimental pigs. Surg Endosc. 23:2094–2101. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar
4.	Goto O, Fujishiro M, Kodashima S, et al: Short-term healing process of artificial ulcers after gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection. Gut Liver. 5:293–297. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
5.	Fujishiro M, Yahagi N, Kashimura K, et al: Comparison of various submucosal injection solutions for maintaining mucosal elevation during endoscopic mucosal resection. Endoscopy. 36:579–583. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar
6.	Eun SH, Cho JY, Jung IS, et al: Effectiveness of sodium alginate as a submucosal injection material for endoscopic mucosal resection in animal. Gut Liver. 1:27–32. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
7.	Uraoka T, Fujii T, Saito Y, et al: Effectiveness of glycerol as a submucosal injection for EMR. Gastrointest Endosc. 61:736–740. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
8.	Polymeros D, Kotsalidis G, Triantafyllou K, Karamanolis G, Panagiotides JG and Ladas SD: Comparative performance of novel solutions for submucosal injection in porcine stomachs: An ex vivo study. Dig Liver Dis. 42:226–229. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
9.	Hirao M, Masuda K, Asanuma T, et al: Endoscopic resection of early gastric cancer and other tumors with local injection of hypertonic saline-epinephrine. Gastrointest Endosc. 34:264–269. 1988. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
10.	Yamamoto H, Yube T, Isoda N, et al: A novel method of endoscopic mucosal resection using sodium hyaluronate. Gastrointest Endosc. 50:251–256. 1999. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
11.	Feitoza AB, Gostout CJ, Burgart LJ, Burkert A, Herman LJ and Rajan E: Hydroxypropyl methylcellulose: A better submucosal fluid cushion for endoscopic mucosal resection. Gastrointest Endosc. 57:41–47. 2003. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
12.	Akagi T, Yasuda K, Tajima M, et al: Sodium alginate as an ideal submucosal injection material for endoscopic submucosal resection: preliminary experimental and clinical study. Gastrointest Endosc. 74:1026–1032. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar
13.	Giday SA, Magno P, Buscaglia JM, et al: Is blood the ideal submucosal cushioning agent? A comparative study in a porcine model. Endoscopy. 38:1230–1234. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
14.	Matsui Y, Inomata M, Izumi K, Sonoda K, Shiraishi N and Kitano S: Hyaluronic acid stimulates tumor-cell proliferation at wound sites. Gastrointest Endosc. 60:539–543. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
15.	Tan B, Wang JH, Wu QD, Kirwan WO and Redmond HP: Sodium hyaluronate enhances colorectal tumour cell metastatic potential in vitro and in vivo. Br J Surg. 88:246–250. 2001. View Article : Google Scholar
16.	Obara S, Muto H, Shigeno H, et al: A three-month repeated oral administration study of a low viscosity grade of hydroxypropyl methylcellulose in rats. J Toxicol Sci. 24:33–43. 1999. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
17.	Shastri YM, Kriener S, Caspary WF and Schneider A: Autologous blood as a submucosal fluid cushion for endoscopic mucosal therapies: results of an ex vivo study. Scand J Gastroenterol. 42:1369–1375. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
18.	Sato T: A novel method of endoscopic mucosal resection assisted by submucosal injection of autologous blood (blood patch EMR). Dis Colon Rectum. 49:1636–1641. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
19.	Tajika M, Niwa Y, Bhatia V, et al: Comparison of endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection for large colorectal tumors. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 23:1042–1049. 2011.PubMed/NCBI
20.	Rosenberg N: Submucosal saline wheal as safety factor in fulguration or rectal and sigmoidal polypi. AMA Arch Surg. 70:120–122. 1955. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
21.	Uraoka T, Kawahara Y, Ohara N, Kato J, Hori K, Okada H and Yamamoto K: Carbon dioxide submucosal injection cushion: an innovative technique in endoscopic submucosal dissection. Dig Endosc. 23:5–9. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
22.	Arantes V, Albuquerque W, Benfica E, et al: Submucosal injection of 0.4% hydroxypropyl methylcellulose facilitates endoscopic mucosal resection of early gastrointestinal tumors. J Clin Gastroenterol. 44:615–619. 2010.
23.	Fujishiro M, Yahagi N, Kashimura K, et al: Tissue damage of different submucosal injection solutions for EMR. Gastrointest Endosc. 62:933–942. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
24.	Shi Q, Zhong YS, Yao LQ, Zhou PH, Xu MD and Wang P: Endoscopic submucosal dissection for treatment of esophageal submucosal tumors originating from the muscularis propria layer. Gastrointest Endosc. 74:1194–1200. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
25.	Xu MD, Cai MY, Zhou PH, et al: Submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection: a new technique for treating upper GI submucosal tumors originating from the muscularis propria layer. Gastrointest Endosc. 75:195–199. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
26.	Sumiyama K, Gostout CJ, Rajan E, Bakken TA, Knipschield MA and Marler RJ: Submucosal endoscopy with mucosal flap safety valve. Gastrointest Endosc. 65:688–694. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
27.	Khashab MA and Kalloo AN: NOTES: Current status and new horizons. Gastroenterology. 142:704–710. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI