Outcomes for Underwater Endoscopic Mucosal Resection and Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection of 21-30-mm Colorectal Polyps: A Feasible Study

被引:2
作者
Okimoto, Kenichiro [1 ]
Matsumura, Tomoaki [1 ]
Matsusaka, Keisuke [2 ]
Inaba, Yosuke [3 ]
Ishikawa, Tsubasa [1 ]
Akizue, Naoki [1 ]
Kaneko, Tatsuya [1 ]
Ota, Masayuki [4 ]
Ohta, Yuki [1 ]
Taida, Takashi [1 ]
Saito, Keiko [1 ]
Ogasawara, Sadahisa [1 ]
Maruoka, Daisuke [1 ,5 ]
Kato, Jun [1 ]
Ikeda, Jun-ichiro [2 ,4 ]
Kato, Naoya [1 ]
机构
[1] Chiba Univ, Grad Sch Med, Dept Gastroenterol, Inohana 1-8-1, Chiba 2608670, Japan
[2] Chiba Univ Hosp, Dept Pathol, Chiba, Japan
[3] Chiba Univ Hosp Clin Res Ctr, Biostat Sect, Chiba, Japan
[4] Chiba Univ, Grad Sch Med, Dept Diagnost Pathol, Chiba, Japan
[5] Kameido Endoscopy & Gastroenterol Clin, Tokyo, Japan
关键词
UEMR; ESD; Colorectal polyp; Colorectal cancer; LARGE SESSILE; NEOPLASIA; LESIONS; EMR; PREVENTION; INJECTION; CANCER;
D O I
10.1007/s10620-023-08093-y
中图分类号
R57 [消化系及腹部疾病];
学科分类号
摘要
Background and Aims This randomized controlled trial (RCT) was designed to evaluate the short-term outcomes of underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) of 21-30 mm colonic polyps. Method We conducted a single-center RCT. Patients diagnosed with suspected colorectal intramucosal carcinoma (21- 30 mm and adaptable for both UEMR and ESD) were randomly assigned to the UEMR and ESD groups at a 1:1 ratio. The primary endpoint was the R0 resection rate. We independently performed one-sample tests against the set threshold for each treatment. The significance level was set atp = 0.224. Result Eleven polyps each in the UEMR and ESD groups, respectively, were analyzed. The R0 resection rate (%) was 36 (95% confidence interval 11-69) and 100 (72-100) for UEMR and ESD, respectively, with a significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.002). The p-value against the set threshold for UEMR was 0.743, whereas that for ESD was < 0.001 (one-sample binomial test). The en bloc resection rates (%) were 82 (48-97) and 100 (72-100) for UEMR and ESD, respectively; however, no significant difference was observed (p = 0.167). The mean treatment time (min) was significantly shorter in the UEMR group (8 +/- 6) than in the ESD group (48 +/- 29) (p = 0.001). Conclusion ESD could achieve a high R0 resection rate, while the en bloc resection rate was comparable between the two treatment techniques with less burden on patients undergoing UEMR for 21-30-mm colorectal polyps. [GRAPHICS] .
引用
收藏
页码:3963 / 3973
页数:11
相关论文
共 38 条
[1]   Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: a systematic review and meta-analysis [J].
Akintoye, Emmanuel ;
Kumar, Nitin ;
Aihara, Hiroyuki ;
Nas, Hala ;
Thompson, Christopher C. .
ENDOSCOPY INTERNATIONAL OPEN, 2016, 4 (10) :E1030-E1044
[2]   Clip Closure After Resection of Large Colorectal Lesions With Substantial Risk of Bleeding [J].
Albeniz, Eduardo ;
Antonio Alvarez, Marco ;
Espinos, Jorge C. ;
Nogales, Oscar ;
Guarner, Carlos ;
Alonso, Pedro ;
Rodriguez-Tellez, Manuel ;
Herreros de Tejada, Alberto ;
Santiago, Jose ;
Bustamante-Balen, Marco ;
Rodriguez Sanchez, Joaquin ;
Ramos-Zabala, Felipe ;
Valdivielso, Eduardo ;
Martinez-Alcala, Felipe ;
Fraile, Maria ;
Elosua, Alfonso ;
Guerra Veloz, Maria Fernanda ;
Ibanez Beroiz, Berta ;
Capdevila, Ferran ;
Enguita-German, Monica .
GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2019, 157 (05) :1213-+
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2004, Dig. Endosc, DOI DOI 10.1111/J.1443-1661.2004.00396.X
[4]   Underwater EMR without submucosal injection: Is less more? [J].
Binmoeller, Kenneth F. .
GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2019, 89 (06) :1117-1119
[5]   "Underwater" EMR without submucosal injection for large sessile colorectal polyps (with video) [J].
Binmoeller, Kenneth F. ;
Weilert, Frank ;
Shah, Janak ;
Bhat, Yasser ;
Kane, Steve .
GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2012, 75 (05) :1086-1091
[6]   Efficacy and histologic accuracy of underwater versus conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for large (&gt;20 mm) colorectal polyps: a comparative review and meta-analysis [J].
Chandan, Saurabh ;
Khan, Shahab R. ;
Kumar, Anand ;
Mohan, Babu P. ;
Ramai, Daryl ;
Kassab, Lena L. ;
Draganov, Peter V. ;
Othman, Mohamed O. ;
Kochhar, Gursimran S. .
GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2021, 94 (03) :471-+
[7]   Underwater versus conventional EMR for colorectal polyps: systematic review and meta-analysis [J].
Choi, Alyssa Y. ;
Moosvi, Zain ;
Shah, Sagar ;
Roccato, Mary Kathryn ;
Wang, Andrew Y. ;
Hamerski, Christopher M. ;
Samarasena, Jason B. .
GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2021, 93 (02) :378-389
[8]   Endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal lesions: A systematic review [J].
De Ceglie, Antonella ;
Hassan, Cesare ;
Mangiavillano, Benedetto ;
Matsuda, Takahisa ;
Saito, Yutaka ;
Ridola, Lorenzo ;
Bhandari, Pradeep ;
Boeri, Federica ;
Conio, Massimo .
CRITICAL REVIEWS IN ONCOLOGY HEMATOLOGY, 2016, 104 :138-155
[9]  
Fitzmaurice C, 2017, JAMA ONCOL, V3, P524, DOI [10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.5688, 10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.2706]
[10]   Clinical outcomes after endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal neoplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis [J].
Fuccio, Lorenzo ;
Hassan, Cesare ;
Ponchon, Thierry ;
Mandolesi, Daniele ;
Farioli, Andrea ;
Cucchetti, Alessandro ;
Frazzoni, Leonardo ;
Bhandari, Pradeep ;
Bellisario, Cristina ;
Bazzoli, Franco ;
Repici, Alessandro .
GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2017, 86 (01) :74-+