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 50 条
  • [41] Endoscopic submucosal dissection/endoscopic mucosal resection guidelines for esophageal cancer
    Ishihara, Ryu
    Arima, Miwako
    Iizuka, Toshiro
    Oyama, Tsuneo
    Katada, Chikatoshi
    Kato, Motohiko
    Goda, Kenichi
    Goto, Osamu
    Tanaka, Kyosuke
    Yano, Tomonori
    Yoshinaga, Shigetaka
    Muto, Manabu
    Kawakubo, Hirofumi
    Fujishiro, Mitsuhiro
    Yoshida, Masahiro
    Fujimoto, Kazuma
    Tajiri, Hisao
    Inoue, Haruhiro
    DIGESTIVE ENDOSCOPY, 2020, 32 (04) : 452 - 493
  • [42] Endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection of epithelial neoplasia of the colon
    Kaimakliotis, Pavlos Z.
    Chandrasekhara, Vinay
    EXPERT REVIEW OF GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY, 2014, 8 (05) : 521 - 531
  • [43] Efficacy of endoscopic submucosal dissection for residual or recurrent superficial colorectal tumors after endoscopic mucosal resection
    Rahmi, Gabriel
    Tanaka, Shinwa
    Ohara, Yoshiko
    Ishida, Tsukasa
    Yoshizaki, Tetsuya
    Morita, Yoshinori
    Toyonaga, Takashi
    Azuma, Takeshi
    JOURNAL OF DIGESTIVE DISEASES, 2015, 16 (01) : 14 - 21
  • [44] Underwater colorectal EMR: remodeling endoscopic mucosal resection
    Curcio, Gabriele
    Granata, Antonino
    Ligresti, Dario
    Tarantino, Ilaria
    Barresi, Luca
    Liotta, Rosa
    Traina, Mario
    GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2015, 81 (05) : 1238 - 1242
  • [45] Underwater endoscopic submucosal dissection and hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection as rescue therapy in difficult colorectal cases
    Cecinato, Paolo
    Lucarini, Matteo
    Campanale, Chiara
    Azzolini, Francesco
    Bassi, Fabio
    Sassatelli, Romano
    ENDOSCOPY INTERNATIONAL OPEN, 2022, 10 (09) : E1225 - E1232
  • [46] Endoscopic resection (endoscopic mucosal resection/endoscopic submucosal dissection) for early gastric cancer
    Gotoda, Takuji
    Jung, Hwoon-Yong
    DIGESTIVE ENDOSCOPY, 2013, 25 : 55 - 63
  • [47] Clinical outcome of endoscopic submucosal dissection versus endoscopic mucosal resection of large colorectal tumors as determined by curative resection
    Saito, Yutaka
    Fukuzawa, Masakatsu
    Matsuda, Takahisa
    Fukunaga, Shusei
    Sakamoto, Taku
    Uraoka, Toshio
    Nakajima, Takeshi
    Ikehara, Hisatomo
    Fu, Kuang-I
    Itoi, Takao
    Fujii, Takahiro
    SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2010, 24 (02): : 343 - 352
  • [48] Comparison of underwater and conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for removing sessile colorectal polyps: a propensity-score matched cohort study
    Chien, Hsu-Chih
    Uedo, Noriya
    Hsieh, Ping-Hsin
    ENDOSCOPY INTERNATIONAL OPEN, 2019, 7 (11) : E1528 - E1536
  • [49] A novel gel provides durable submucosal cushion for endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection
    Vinay Chandrasekhara
    John C. Sigmon
    Vihar C. Surti
    Michael L. Kochman
    Surgical Endoscopy, 2013, 27 : 3039 - 3042
  • [50] Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Locally Recurrent Colorectal Lesions After Previous Endoscopic Mucosal Resection
    Zhou, Pinghong
    Yao, Liqing
    Qin, Xinyu
    Xu, Meidong
    Zhong, Yunshi
    Chen, Weifeng
    DISEASES OF THE COLON & RECTUM, 2009, 52 (02) : 305 - 310