BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge
Review
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2026.
World J Gastrointest Endosc. Jan 16, 2026; 18(1): 114033
Published online Jan 16, 2026. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v18.i1.114033
Table 1 Endoscopic modalities for gastrointestinal defect closure
Endoscopic modality
Benefits
Limitations
Ideal use case
TTSCWidely available and low-costLimited closure strengthSmall defects
Easy to deploy through standard endoscopesNot suitable for large defects
Short procedure timeMultiple clips may be requiredHealthy tissue
Multiple sizesSpontaneous dislodgement
OTSCFull-thickness closure and strong compressionRequires withdrawal and reinsertionLarge defects
Durable closure with a single deviceDifficult to removeFibrotic tissue
Useful for larger defectsArea with easy access
Endoscopic stentsEarly oral intakeMigration risk, especially SEPSEsophagus
Diversion of luminal contents, promoting healingMay cause pressure necrosis or ulceration
Useful in leaks not amenable to direct closureNeed for repeat endoscopy for stent retrieval/replacementLarge defects
Can cover large defectsDifficult use in lower GI
EVTHighly effective for chronic leaks and large cavitiesMultiple endoscopic sessions for sponge changesLarge cavities with abscess formation
Promotes granulation tissue and healingPatient discomfortPatients with significant surgical risk
Can be used when other modalities failLess widely available and technically demanding
Tissue adhesivesMinimally invasive and easy to applyLimited efficacy as a stand-alone therapySmall defects
Useful as an adjunct to clips or stentsVariable durabilityCombination with other modalities
Limited data
Endoscopic suturingFull-thickness, flexible, and customizable closureSpecialized equipment and advanced expertiseLarge defects
Fibrotic tissue
Effective for larger defectsLonger procedure timeArea with easy access
Can be combined with stents or other therapiesLimited availability and high costPost-ESD defects