Suppr超能文献

采用帽式内镜和内镜黏膜下剥离术进行内镜黏膜切除术是治疗早期食管癌的最佳内镜治疗方法。

Endoscopic mucosal resection using a cap-fitted panendoscope and endoscopic submucosal dissection as optimal endoscopic procedures for superficial esophageal carcinoma.

机构信息

Department of Gastroenterology, Akita City Hospital, 4-30 Kawamotomatsuoka-machi, Akita, Akita, 010-0933, Japan.

出版信息

Surg Endosc. 2011 Aug;25(8):2541-6. doi: 10.1007/s00464-011-1584-6. Epub 2011 Feb 27.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic mucosal resection using a cap-fitted panendoscope (EMRC) and an endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) are increasingly performed to treat superficial esophageal carcinoma (SEC). As an endoscopic procedure appropriate for en bloc complete resection, ESD requires a much higher level of skill and experience than EMRC.

METHODS

This retrospective study reviewed 127 SECs in 112 patients treated by EMRC or ESD from January 1997 to September 2009.

RESULTS

For lesions 10 mm in diameter or smaller, EMRC and ESD had equivalent en bloc resection rates with tumor-free margins (en bloc + R0 resection rates). For lesions 11 mm in diameter or larger, however, the rate was significantly higher in the ESD group than in the EMRC group (p < 0.01). The mean procedure time was significantly longer in the ESD group than in the EMRC group (p < 0.01) regardless of lesion size. No significant difference was found in esophageal perforation rate between the EMRC and ESD groups. Severe esophageal stricture developed after EMRC of eight lesions (14.3%) and after ESD of six lesions (8.5%). For patients with a mucosal defect involving more than three-fourths of the esophageal circumference, the incidence of severe esophageal stricture after procedure was significantly higher in the EMRC group than in the ESD group (p < 0.05). The overall local recurrence rate was 3.1% (4/127) during an average follow-up period of 39 months (range, 8-123 months). All local recurrences were detected as superficial cancers after EMRC and then treated endoscopically.

CONCLUSIONS

For lesions 10 mm in diameter or smaller, EMRC was found to be optimal. For lesions 11 mm in diameter or larger, however, ESD was superior to EMRC in efficacy as assessed by the en bloc + R0 resection rate. Furthermore, ESD was advantageous in preventing stricture formation. The operating endoscopist should carefully select EMRC or ESD according to lesion size.

摘要

背景

内镜黏膜下剥离术(ESD)和内镜下黏膜切除术(EMRC)用于治疗早期食管癌(SEC)的应用日益增多。ESD 作为一种整块完整切除的内镜方法,需要比 EMRC 更高的技能和经验水平。

方法

本回顾性研究分析了 1997 年 1 月至 2009 年 9 月间,112 例 SEC 患者接受 EMRC 或 ESD 治疗的 127 例 SEC。

结果

对于直径 10mm 或更小的病变,EMRC 和 ESD 在无肿瘤边缘的整块切除率(整块+R0 切除率)方面相当。然而,对于直径 11mm 或更大的病变,ESD 组的切除率明显高于 EMRC 组(p<0.01)。无论病变大小,ESD 组的平均手术时间均明显长于 EMRC 组(p<0.01)。EMRC 和 ESD 组之间的食管穿孔率无显著差异。8 例(14.3%)EMRC 后和 6 例(8.5%)ESD 后发生严重食管狭窄。对于黏膜缺损超过食管周长四分之三的患者,EMRC 组术后严重食管狭窄的发生率明显高于 ESD 组(p<0.05)。在平均 39 个月(8-123 个月)的随访期间,总体局部复发率为 3.1%(4/127)。所有局部复发均在 EMRC 后被发现为表浅性癌症,并随后进行内镜治疗。

结论

对于直径 10mm 或更小的病变,EMRC 是最佳选择。然而,对于直径 11mm 或更大的病变,ESD 在整块+R0 切除率方面优于 EMRC。此外,ESD 有利于预防狭窄形成。内镜医生应根据病变大小仔细选择 EMRC 或 ESD。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验