JOMPAC
Journal of Medicine and Palliative Care

Journal of Medicine and Palliative Care (JOMPAC) is an open access scientific journal with independent, unbiased, and double-blind review under international guidelines. The purpose of JOMPAC is to contribute to the literature by publishing articles on health sciences and medicine.

eISSN: 2717-7505
Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 International License.
EndNote Style

Submit Manuscript

Index
Original Article
Impact of swift versusspray coagulation on procedural outcomes in colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection
Abstract
Aims: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is an established technique for the curative resection of large colorectal lesions; however, intraoperative bleeding remains a major technical challenge. Electrosurgical coagulation modes are modifiable procedural factors that may influence bleeding control and procedural efficiency. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of Swift and Spray coagulation modes during colorectal ESD. Methods: This retrospective, single-center study included 594 consecutive patients who underwent colorectal ESD between January 2021 and December 2025. Patients were divided into the Spray and Swift coagulation groups according to the coagulation mode used during submucosal dissection. Procedural characteristics, intraoperative and delayed bleeding, perforation rates, and other adverse events were analyzed and compared between groups. Results: Baseline patient and lesion characteristics were comparable between the two groups. The mean procedure time was significantly shorter in the Spray coagulation group compared with the Swift coagulation group (42.2±23.7 vs 51.7±31.9 minutes, p

Keywords : ESD, outcome, Spray, Swif

Download Article


1. Gotoda T. Endoscopic resection of early gastric cancer. Gastric Cancer. 2007;10(1):1-11. doi:10.1007/s10120-006-0408-1
2. Ono H, Kondo H, Gotoda T, et al. Endoscopic mucosal resection for treatment of early gastric cancer. Gut. 2001;48(2):225-229. doi:10.1136/gut.48.2.225
3. Saito Y, Uraoka T, Yamaguchi Y, et al. A prospective, multicenter study of colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection. Gastrointest Endosc. 2010;72(6):1217-1225. doi:10.1016/j.gie.2010.08.004
4. Yamada M, Saito Y, Takamaru H, et al. Risk factors for perforation in colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection. Endoscopy. 2014;46:476-482. doi:10.1055/s-0033-1351679
5. Esaki M, Suzuki S, Hayashi Y, et al. Spray and forced coagulation mode endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric neoplasms: a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Am J Gastroenterol. 2025; 120(11):2538-2547. doi:10.14309/ajg.000000000000336
6. Ishikawa Y, Goto O, Nakagome S, et al. Spray coagulation reduces the use of hemostatic forceps during gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection. JGH Open. 2024;8:e70002. doi:10.1002/jgh3.70002
7. Maehara K, Esaki M, Sumida Y, et al. Comparison of hemostatic ability between spray coagulation and forced coagulation modes in endoscopic submucosal dissection: a multicenter randomized trial (Spray-G trial). Trials. 2024;25(1):53. doi:10.1186/s13063-023-07852-6
8. Libânio D, Pimentel-Nunes P, Dinis-Ribeiro M. Endoscopic submucosal dissection: techniques and technology. Endoscopy. 2023;55(10):969-984. doi:10.1055/a-2031-0874
9. Sakamoto T, Saito Y, Nakajima T, et al. Current status and future perspectives of colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 2023;33(1):89-105. doi:10.1016/j.giec. 2022.08.002
10. Sakamoto T, Saito Y, Matsuda T, et al. Management of complications related to colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection. Endoscopy. 2015;47:111-117. doi:10.1055/s-0034-1392935
11. Yahagi N, Fujishiro M, Kakushima N, et al. The role of electrosurgical current in endoscopic submucosal dissection. Dig Endosc. 2009;21(Suppl 1):S7-S12. doi:10.1111/j.1443-1661.2009.00940.x
12. Oyama T. Endoscopic submucosal dissection: devices and energy settings. Clin Endosc. 2012;45(4):375-378. doi:10.5946/ce.2012.45.4.375
13. Toyonaga T, Man-i M, Fujita T, et al. The roles of different coagulation modes in endoscopic submucosal dissection. Dig Endosc. 2010;22:44-51. doi:10.1111/j.1443-1661.2009.00997.x
14. Kato M, Takeuchi Y, Yamasaki Y, et al. Technical outcomes and complications of colorectal ESD. Gastrointest Endosc. 2016;84:76-86. doi:10.1016/j.gie.2016.02.010
15. Tanaka S, Oka S, Kaneko I, et al. Endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal tumors: current status and future perspectives. Endoscopy. 2012;24(Suppl 1):73-79. doi:10.1111/j.1443-1661.2012.01252.x
16. Saito Y, Yamada M, So E, et al. Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: technical advantages compared with EMR. Gut. 2010;59:331-338. doi:10.1136/gut.2009.191436
17. Probst A, Ebigbo A, Märkl B, et al. Endoscopic submucosal dissection for early colorectal neoplasia. Surg Endosc. 2017;31:2389-2396. doi:10.1515/iss-2017-0037
18. Uraoka T, Parra-Blanco A, Yahagi N. Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: is it suitable in Western countries? Gastrointest Endosc. 2013; 28(3):406-414. doi:10.1111/jgh.12099
19. Repici A, Hassan C, De Paula Pessoa D, et al. ESD for colorectal lesions: a systematic review. Endoscopy. 2012;44(2):137-150. doi:10.1055/s-0031- 1291448
20. Moss A, Bourke MJ, Williams SJ, et al. Endoscopic mucosal resection outcomes and recurrence. Gut. 2011;60:166-173. doi:10.1136/gut.2010. 223021
21. Saito Y, Sakamoto T, Nakajima T. Colorectal ESD: indications and technique. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2017;31:441-452. doi:10. 1016/j.bpg.2017.09.002
22. Yamasaki Y, Takeuchi Y, Uedo N, et al. Factors associated with prolonged procedure time in colorectal ESD. Endoscopy. 2017;49:1093-1100. doi:10.1055/s-0043-117884
23. Sakamoto T, Matsuda T, Nakajima T, et al. Predictors of delayed bleeding after colorectal ESD. Gastrointest Endosc. 2016;83:129-137. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2015.07.020
24. Kakushima N, Fujishiro M. Endoscopic submucosal dissection for gastrointestinal neoplasms. World J Gastroenterol. 2008;14(19):2962-2967. doi:10.3748/wjg.14.2962
25. Oyama T, Kikuchi Y. Aggressive endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal tumors. Dig Endosc. 2013;25(Suppl 1):52–57. doi:10.1111/den. 12139
26. Saito Y, Hotta K, Imai K, et al. Clinical outcomes of colorectal ESD in Japan. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012;76:110-117. doi:10.1016/j.gie.2012.02.018
27. Tamegai Y, Saito Y, Masaki N, et al. Endoscopic management of complications during colorectal ESD. Endoscopy. 2007;39:864-868. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-983701
28. Yamaguchi Y, Saito Y, Takao T, et al. Long-term outcomes after colorectal ESD. Gastrointest Endosc. 2014;80:347-356. doi:10.1016/j.gie. 2014.04.010
29. Probst A, Golger D, Anthuber M, et al. Colorectal ESD: risk factors for complications. Endoscopy. 2014;46:111-119. doi:10.1055/s-0033-1348837
30. Pimentel-Nunes P, Libânio D, Bastiaansen BAJ, et al. Endoscopic submucosal dissection outcomes and future directions. Endoscopy. 2020;52:100-110. doi:10.1055/a-0958-5654
Article available in :
Volume 7, Issue 2, 2026
Page : 386-390
https://doi.org/10.47582/jompac.1865761
Article Information
Received : 17 Oca 2026
Accepted : 24 Mar 2026
Published : 27 Mar 2026
Corresponding Author :

Berk Baş: Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Aydın Adnan Menderes University, Aydın, Turkiye

[email protected]
Citation : Baş B, Küçükdemirci Ö, Kandemir A, et al. Impact of swift versusspray coagulation on procedural outcomes in colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection. J Med Palliat Care. 2026;7(2):386-390. doi:10.47582/jompac.1865761

Read: 36
Download : 74
Cited: 0
_Footer