• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

R0切除边缘,国家肠道筛查时代的一项新的质量指标?

R0 Resection Margin, A New Quality Measure in the Era of National Bowel Screening?

作者信息

Parihar V, Sopena-Falco J, Leung E, Benz E, Cooney A, Keohane J, Sengupta S

机构信息

Department of Gastroenterology, Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital, Drogheda, Co. Louth, Ireland.

出版信息

Ir Med J. 2020 Jan 16;113(1):7.

PMID:32298567
Abstract

Aims To determine the completeness of polyp resection (i.e. achieving an R0 margin) and its relation with Endoscopists, histopathologist, size, location and technique of polypectomy in an NSS cohort. The definition of R0 margin is complete macroscopic resection with a negative microscopic margin at polypectomy. Method NCCS (National Colon Cancer Screening) colonoscopies are offered to bowel cancer screening patients after a positive faecal immunochemical test (FIT) test in a Joint Advisory Group (JAG) accredited Gastrointestinal Endoscopy centre. We histologically evaluated the polyp margins for complete resection, which was defined as the absence of adenomatous or hyperplastic tissue in the resected polyp margins in a cohort of faecal immunochemical test positive patients. Results A total of 186 consecutive NCCS colonoscopies out of a total of 542 performed between 2013 and 2017 were included in this study. Of the polyps excised 152(27%) had a R0 margin histologically, and 30(5%) had involvement of the margin. Surprisingly in 373(67%) of polyps pathologists were unable to assess the margin. Conclusion Achieving an R0 margin should be a key performance indicator for endoscopists performing polypectomy. At the same time more studies on polyp margins are recommended.

摘要

目的确定息肉切除的完整性(即实现R0切缘)及其与内镜医师、组织病理学家、息肉大小、位置和切除技术在全国筛查队列中的关系。R0切缘的定义是息肉切除时肉眼切除完整且显微镜下切缘阴性。方法在联合咨询小组(JAG)认可的胃肠内镜中心,对粪便免疫化学检测(FIT)呈阳性的肠癌筛查患者进行全国结肠直肠癌筛查(NCCS)结肠镜检查。我们对息肉边缘进行组织学评估以确定是否完全切除,完全切除的定义是在粪便免疫化学检测呈阳性的患者队列中,切除的息肉边缘不存在腺瘤性或增生性组织。结果在2013年至2017年间进行的542例结肠镜检查中,本研究共纳入了186例连续的NCCS结肠镜检查。在切除的息肉中,152例(27%)组织学上有R0切缘,30例(5%)切缘受累。令人惊讶的是,在373例(67%)息肉中,病理学家无法评估切缘。结论实现R0切缘应是进行息肉切除术的内镜医师的关键绩效指标。同时,建议对息肉切缘进行更多研究。

相似文献

1
R0 Resection Margin, A New Quality Measure in the Era of National Bowel Screening?R0切除边缘,国家肠道筛查时代的一项新的质量指标?
Ir Med J. 2020 Jan 16;113(1):7.
2
Incomplete resection rate of cold snare polypectomy: a prospective single-arm observational study.冷圈套息肉切除术的不完全切除率:一项前瞻性单臂观察性研究。
Endoscopy. 2017 Mar;49(3):251-257. doi: 10.1055/s-0043-100215. Epub 2017 Feb 13.
3
Cold snare polypectomy versus cold forceps polypectomy for diminutive and small colorectal polyps: a randomized controlled trial.冷圈套息肉切除术与冷活检钳息肉切除术治疗小和小的结直肠息肉:一项随机对照试验。
Gastrointest Endosc. 2015 Mar;81(3):741-7. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2014.11.048.
4
Surgical margin-negative endoscopic mucosal resection with simple three-clipping technique: a randomized prospective study (with video).采用简单三夹技术的手术切缘阴性内镜黏膜切除术:一项随机前瞻性研究(附视频)
Surg Endosc. 2016 Nov;30(11):4827-4834. doi: 10.1007/s00464-016-4816-y. Epub 2016 Feb 22.
5
Hot snare polypectomy with or without saline solution/epinephrine lift for the complete resection of small colorectal polyps.热圈套息肉切除术联合或不联合生理盐水/肾上腺素提升在完全切除小的结直肠息肉中的应用。
Gastrointest Endosc. 2018 Jun;87(6):1539-1547. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2018.01.031. Epub 2018 Feb 2.
6
Management of malignant colorectal polyps in New Zealand.新西兰恶性大肠息肉的管理
ANZ J Surg. 2017 May;87(5):350-355. doi: 10.1111/ans.13502. Epub 2016 Apr 8.
7
Outcomes of EMR of defiant colorectal lesions directed to an endoscopy referral center.内镜转诊中心导向的挑战性结直肠病变内镜黏膜下剥离术的结果。
Gastrointest Endosc. 2012 Aug;76(2):255-63. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2012.02.060. Epub 2012 May 31.
8
Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) in the management of large colo-rectal polyps.内镜黏膜切除术(EMR)在大肠大息肉治疗中的应用
Colorectal Dis. 2006 Jul;8(6):497-500. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2006.00966.x.
9
Colorectal polypectomy and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR): European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Clinical Guideline.结直肠息肉切除术和内镜黏膜切除术(EMR):欧洲胃肠内镜学会(ESGE)临床指南
Endoscopy. 2017 Mar;49(3):270-297. doi: 10.1055/s-0043-102569. Epub 2017 Feb 17.
10
Histological outcomes between hot and cold snare polypectomy for small colorectal polyps.小的结直肠息肉采用热圈套与冷圈套息肉切除术的组织学结果。
Saudi J Gastroenterol. 2017 Jul-Aug;23(4):246-252. doi: 10.4103/sjg.SJG_598_16.

引用本文的文献

1
Underwater conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for nonpedunculated colorectal neoplasms: A randomized controlled trial.水下常规内镜黏膜切除术治疗无蒂结直肠肿瘤:一项随机对照试验。
World J Gastrointest Surg. 2025 Jun 27;17(6):103635. doi: 10.4240/wjgs.v17.i6.103635.
2
Underwater Versus Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for Colorectal Laterally Spreading Tumors: A Post Hoc Analysis of Efficacy.水下与传统内镜黏膜切除术治疗大肠侧向发育型肿瘤:疗效的事后分析
JGH Open. 2024 Dec 12;8(12):e70075. doi: 10.1002/jgh3.70075. eCollection 2024 Dec.
3
Safety and efficacy of underwater versus conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for colorectal polyps: Systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs.
水下与传统内镜黏膜切除术治疗大肠息肉的安全性和有效性:随机对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析
Endosc Int Open. 2023 Aug 16;11(8):E768-E777. doi: 10.1055/a-2117-8327. eCollection 2023 Aug.
4
Advanced Endoscopic Resection Techniques in Cirrhosis-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Outcomes.肝硬化先进内镜切除术技术:结局的系统评价和荟萃分析。
Dig Dis Sci. 2022 Oct;67(10):4813-4826. doi: 10.1007/s10620-021-07364-w. Epub 2022 Jan 6.