Suppr超能文献

经口袋创造法辅助的结肠内镜黏膜下剥离术(附视频)。

The pocket-creation method facilitates colonic endoscopic submucosal dissection (with video).

机构信息

Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, Jichi Medical University, Shimotsuke, Japan.

Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, Jichi Medical University, Shimotsuke, Japan; Shinozaki Medical Clinic, Utsunomiya, Japan.

出版信息

Gastrointest Endosc. 2019 May;89(5):1045-1053. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2019.01.022. Epub 2019 Feb 1.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Colonic endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is more difficult than rectal ESD because of poor maneuverability of the endoscope due to physiologic flexion, peristalsis, and respiratory movements. The aim of this study was to assess the usefulness of the pocket-creation method (PCM) for colonic ESD compared with the conventional method (CM) regardless of lesion shape or location.

METHODS

A total of 887 colorectal lesions were treated by ESD. Of 887 lesions, 271 rectal lesions, 72 lesions smaller than 20 mm in diameter, and 1 non-neoplastic lesion were excluded. This is a retrospective chart review of the remaining 543 colon lesions in 512 patients. We divided them into the PCM group (n = 280) and the CM group (n = 263). The primary outcome was the en bloc resection rate. Secondary outcomes were R0 resection (en bloc resection with negative margin), adverse events, dissection time (in minutes), and dissection speed (in mm/min).

RESULTS

The PCM group achieved a significantly higher en bloc resection rate (PCM, 100% [280/280], vs CM, 96% [253/263]; P < .001) and R0 resection rate (91% [255/280] vs 85% [224/263], respectively; P = .033) than the CM group. Dissection time was similar (69.5 ± 44.4 vs 78.7 ± 62.6 minutes, P = .676). Dissection speed was significantly faster with the PCM than with the CM (23.5 ± 11.6 vs 20.9 ± 13.6 mm/min, P < .001). The incidence of adverse events was similar (perforation, 2% vs 4% [P = .152], and delayed bleeding, 2% vs 1% [P = .361]).

CONCLUSIONS

Colonic ESD using the PCM significantly improves the rates of en bloc resection and R0 resection and facilitates rapid dissection.

摘要

背景和目的

由于生理弯曲、蠕动和呼吸运动导致的内镜可操作性差,结肠内镜黏膜下剥离术(ESD)比直肠 ESD 更困难。本研究的目的是评估口袋创建法(PCM)在结肠 ESD 中的应用价值,无论病变形状或位置如何,与传统方法(CM)相比。

方法

共对 887 例大肠病变进行 ESD 治疗。887 例病变中,排除 271 例直肠病变、72 例直径小于 20mm 的病变和 1 例非肿瘤性病变。这是对 512 例患者的 543 个结肠病变的回顾性图表回顾。我们将其分为 PCM 组(n=280)和 CM 组(n=263)。主要结局是整块切除率。次要结局是 R0 切除(整块切除且无边缘阳性)、不良事件、剥离时间(分钟)和剥离速度(mm/min)。

结果

PCM 组整块切除率(PCM,100%[280/280],vs CM,96%[253/263];P<.001)和 R0 切除率(91%[255/280],vs CM,85%[224/263];P=.033)均显著高于 CM 组。剥离时间相似(69.5±44.4 vs 78.7±62.6 分钟,P=0.676)。PCM 的剥离速度明显快于 CM(23.5±11.6 vs 20.9±13.6 mm/min,P<.001)。不良事件发生率相似(穿孔,2%vs 4%[P=0.152],延迟出血,2%vs 1%[P=0.361])。

结论

使用 PCM 的结肠 ESD 显著提高了整块切除率和 R0 切除率,并促进了快速剥离。

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