• 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

在内镜黏膜下剥离术中开拓创新:在瘢痕病变中是否可行和安全?

Pushing the Envelope in Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection: Is It Feasible and Safe in Scarred Lesions?

机构信息

Digestive Diseases and Surgery Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio.

出版信息

Dis Colon Rectum. 2021 Mar 1;64(3):343-348. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000001870.

DOI:10.1097/DCR.0000000000001870
PMID:33395142
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic submucosal dissection is an established advanced polypectomy technique to manage large colorectal polyps.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate patients who had endoscopic submucosal dissection in the setting of significant scarring attributed to a previous intervention to determine whether this is safe and feasible.

DESIGN

The study used a prospectively maintained database.

SETTINGS

A scarred lesion was defined as a nonlifting polyp with a history of previous attempted removal with endoscopic mucosal resection, snare, or biopsy where there was no suspicion of malignancy.

PATIENTS

All consecutive patients in the previous 14 months were included.

INTERVENTION

Endoscopic submucosal dissection was the study intervention.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Thirty-day morbidity and mortality, readmission, length of stay, and recurrence were measured.

RESULTS

Ninety-one patients had endoscopic submucosal dissection over a 14-month period with a median polyp size of 31.5 mm (range, 20-45 mm). Eleven patients (12%) were confirmed as having significant scar. There were significantly more previous endoscopic mucosal resections in the scarred group (scarred: 63.6% vs nonscarred: 2.5%; p < 0.001). Significantly more of the scarred patients had their endoscopic submucosal dissection in the operating room versus the endoscopy suite (scarred: 82.0% vs nonscarred: 17.5%; p < 0.001). The 30-day morbidity rate was 18.7%. There were no mortalities. There was no difference in 30-day morbidity between scarred and nonscarred lesions (scarred: 9% vs nonscarred: 20%; p = 0.4). There were more day-case procedures in the nonscarred group (nonscarred: 93.7% vs scarred: 36.4%; p < 0.001). There was no malignancy on final pathology in the scarred group. There was no difference in readmission rate between the scarred and nonscarred lesions. The overall follow-up colonoscopy rate was 53%, and there were no polyp recurrences identified.

LIMITATIONS

The study was limited by its small sample size, single institute, surgeon experience, and short follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Not only is endoscopic submucosal dissection in patients who have scarred lesions technically feasible and safe, it avoids a bowel resection in the majority of patients who have exhausted other advanced endoscopy techniques. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B427.

EMPUJAR EL SOBRE EN LA DISECCIN ENDOSCPICA SUBMUCOSA ES FACTIBLE Y SEGURO EN LESIONES CICATRIZADAS

ANTECEDENTES:La disección endoscópica submucosa es una técnica de polipectomía avanzada establecida para tratar pólipos colorrectales grandes.OBJETIVO:Evaluar a pacientes que se sometieron a disección submucosa endoscópica en el contexto de cicatrices significativas debido a una intervención previa para determinar si esto es seguro y factible.DISEÑO:Base de datos mantenida prospectivamente.AJUSTE:Una lesión cicatrizada se definió como un pólipo que no se levanta con antecedentes de intento de extirpación previa con resección endoscópica de la mucosa, lazo o biopsia, donde no había sospecha de malignidad.PACIENTES:Todos los pacientes consecutivos en los últimos 14 meses.INTERVENCIÓN:Disección submucosa endoscópica.MEDIDAS DE RESULTADOS PRINCIPALES:Morbilidad y mortalidad a 30 días, reingreso, duración de la estadía, recurrencia.RESULTADOS:Noventa y un pacientes tuvieron disección submucosa endoscópica durante un período de 14 meses con tamaño de pólipo mediana de 31,5 mm (rango, 20 - 45 mm). Se confirmó que once pacientes (12%) tenían una cicatriz significativa. Hubo significativamente más resecciones de mucosa endoscópica previas en el grupo con cicatrices (con cicatrices: 63,6% vs. sin cicatrices: 2,5%, p <0,001). Significativamente más de los pacientes con cicatrices tuvieron su disección submucosa endoscópica en el quirófano en comparación con la sala de endoscopia (con cicatrices: 82% vs. sin cicatrices: 17.5%, p <0.001). La tasa de morbilidad a 30 días fue del 18,7%. No hubo muertes. No hubo diferencia en la morbilidad a 30 días entre las lesiones cicatrizadas y no cicatrizadas (cicatrizadas: 9% frente a no cicatrizadas: 20%, p = 0,4). Hubo más procedimientos ambulatorios en el grupo sin cicatrices (sin cicatrices: 93,7% frente a cicatrices: 36,36%, p <0,001). No hubo malignidad en la patología final en el grupo con cicatrices. No hubo diferencia en la tasa de reingreso entre las lesiones cicatrizadas y no cicatrizadas. La tasa general de colonoscopia de seguimiento fue del 53% y no se identificaron recurrencias de pólipos.LIMITACIONES:Tamaño de muestra pequeño, experiencia de un solo instituto y cirujanos y seguimiento corto.CONCLUSIÓN:La disección endoscópica submucosa en pacientes con lesiones cicatrizadas no solo es técnicamente factible y segura, sino que evita una resección intestinal en la mayoría de los pacientes que han agotado otras técnicas endoscópicas avanzadas. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B427.

摘要

内镜黏膜下剥离术是一种成熟的高级息肉切除术,用于治疗大型结直肠息肉。

目的

本研究旨在评估先前因内镜黏膜切除术、圈套或活检而导致有明显瘢痕的内镜黏膜下剥离术患者,以确定该方法的安全性和可行性。

设计

本研究使用前瞻性维护的数据库。

环境

定义瘢痕病变为有既往试图切除史的非提升息肉,既往尝试切除的方式包括内镜黏膜切除术、圈套或活检,但无恶性肿瘤的怀疑。

患者

所有连续患者均在过去 14 个月内纳入研究。

干预措施

内镜黏膜下剥离术为研究干预措施。

主要观察指标

30 天发病率和死亡率、再入院、住院时间和复发。

结果

在 14 个月期间,91 例患者接受了内镜黏膜下剥离术,息肉平均大小为 31.5mm(范围,20-45mm)。11 例(12%)患者被证实有明显瘢痕。瘢痕组中先前接受内镜黏膜切除术的比例显著更高(瘢痕组:63.6%,非瘢痕组:2.5%;p<0.001)。瘢痕组中更多患者在手术室而非内镜室接受内镜黏膜下剥离术(瘢痕组:82.0%,非瘢痕组:17.5%;p<0.001)。30 天发病率为 18.7%。无死亡病例。瘢痕和非瘢痕病变的 30 天发病率无差异(瘢痕组:9%,非瘢痕组:20%;p=0.4)。非瘢痕组日间手术比例更高(非瘢痕组:93.7%,瘢痕组:36.4%;p<0.001)。瘢痕组最终病理未见恶性肿瘤。瘢痕和非瘢痕病变的再入院率无差异。总的结肠镜随访率为 53%,未发现息肉复发。

局限性

本研究的局限性在于样本量小、单中心、术者经验和随访时间短。

结论

内镜黏膜下剥离术不仅在技术上可行且安全,而且可以避免大多数已经用尽其他先进内镜技术的患者进行肠切除术。在 http://links.lww.com/DCR/B427 查看视频摘要。

相似文献

1
Pushing the Envelope in Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection: Is It Feasible and Safe in Scarred Lesions?在内镜黏膜下剥离术中开拓创新:在瘢痕病变中是否可行和安全?
Dis Colon Rectum. 2021 Mar 1;64(3):343-348. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000001870.
2
Endoscopic Step Up: A Colon-Sparing Alternative to Colectomy to Improve Outcomes and Reduce Costs for Patients With Advanced Neoplastic Polyps.内镜递进策略:一种保肛结肠切除术替代方案,可改善晚期肿瘤性息肉患者的结局并降低成本。
Dis Colon Rectum. 2020 Jun;63(6):842-849. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000001645.
3
Impact of a Routine Colorectal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection in the Surgical Management of Nonmalignant Colorectal Lesions Treated in a Referral Cancer Center.常规结直肠内镜黏膜下剥离术在转诊癌症中心治疗的非恶性结直肠病变的外科治疗中的影响。
Dis Colon Rectum. 2023 Aug 1;66(8):e834-e840. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000002554. Epub 2022 Dec 27.
4
The Learning Curve for Advanced Endoscopy for Colorectal Lesions: A Surgeon's Experience at a High-Volume Center.结直肠病变的高级内镜检查学习曲线:一位高容量中心外科医生的经验
Dis Colon Rectum. 2023 Oct 1;66(10):1383-1391. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000002773. Epub 2023 Mar 2.
5
Management of Significant Polyp and Early Colorectal Cancer Is Optimized by Implementation of a Dedicated Multidisciplinary Team Meeting: Lessons Learned From the United Kingdom National Program.专门的多学科团队会议优化了显著息肉和早期结直肠癌的治疗:从英国国家计划中吸取的经验教训。
Dis Colon Rectum. 2022 May 1;65(5):654-662. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000002199.
6
Predictors of En Bloc, R0 Resection, and Postprocedural Complications After Advanced Endoscopic Resections for Colorectal Neoplasms: Results of 1213 Procedures.高级内镜下结直肠肿瘤切除术的整块切除、R0 切除和术后并发症的预测因素:1213 例手术结果。
Dis Colon Rectum. 2024 Sep 1;67(9):1185-1193. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000003394. Epub 2024 Jun 18.
7
Forceps Biopsies Are Not Reliable in the Workup of Large Colorectal Lesions Referred for Endoscopic Resection: Should They Be Abandoned?对于因内镜切除而转诊的大型结直肠病变,活检钳活检不可靠:是否应放弃?
Dis Colon Rectum. 2019 Sep;62(9):1063-1070. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000001440.
8
Colonic Wall Injuries After Endoscopic Resection: Still a Major Complication? A Retrospective Analysis of 3782 Endoscopic Resections.内镜切除术后的结肠壁损伤:仍是主要并发症吗?对3782例内镜切除术的回顾性分析
Dis Colon Rectum. 2022 Apr 1;65(4):581-589. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000001974.
9
Combined Endoscopic Robotic Surgery for Complex Colon Polyps.内镜机器人联合手术治疗复杂结肠息肉
Dis Colon Rectum. 2023 Aug 1;66(8):1132-1136. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000002689. Epub 2023 Mar 2.
10
Oncological Outcomes of Transanal Endoscopic Surgery for the Surgical Management of T2 and T3 Rectal Cancer.经肛门内镜微创手术治疗 T2、T3 期直肠癌的肿瘤学结局。
Dis Colon Rectum. 2023 Jul 1;66(7):1012-1021. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000002617. Epub 2023 Mar 6.

引用本文的文献

1
An Audit of Indications for Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Colorectal Lesions in North America: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.北美结直肠病变内镜下黏膜下剥离术适应证的审计:一项系统评价与荟萃分析
Dig Dis Sci. 2025 Jun 18. doi: 10.1007/s10620-025-09070-3.