Department of Gastroenterology, National Hospital Organization Kure Medical Center and Chugoku Cancer Center, Kure, Japan.
Department of Gastroenterology and Metabolism, Hiroshima University Hospital, Hiroshima, Japan.
Gastrointest Endosc. 2022 Jul;96(1):108-117. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2022.02.042. Epub 2022 Mar 2.
Many knives have been developed to improve the efficacy and safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of scissor-type knives for colorectal ESD compared with needle-type knives.
We performed a post-hoc propensity score-matched analysis in an 11-facility study between August 2013 and December 2018. A total of 2330 patients (2498 lesions) who underwent colorectal ESD were divided into needle-type (1923 patients, 2067 lesions) and scissor-type (407 patients, 431 lesions) knife groups. Short-term outcomes were compared between the 2 groups.
Two-to-one propensity score-matched analysis identified 814 (709 patients) and 407 (386 patients) lesions in the needle- and scissor-type knife groups, respectively. The median resection speed was significantly faster in the needle-type group (18.3 mm/min) than in the scissor-type group (13.2 mm/min, P < .0001), whereas en-bloc and histologic complete resection rates were not significantly different between the needle- and scissor-type groups (96.8% [788/814] vs 98.3% [400/407], P = .1888 and 95.1% [774/814] vs 95.6% [389/407], P = .7763, respectively). The rate of lesions resected using a single knife was significantly higher in the scissor-type group (98.5% [401/407]) than in the needle-type group (43.9% [357/814], P < .0001). Rates of intraoperative perforation and delayed bleeding were significantly lower in the scissor-type group than in the needle-type group (.7% [3/407] vs 2.5% [20/814], P = .0431 for each).
Scissor-type knives are safer for colorectal ESD. However, they are associated with slower resection speeds compared with needle-type knives. (Clinical trial registration number: UMIN000016197.).
为提高内镜黏膜下剥离术(ESD)的疗效和安全性,已经开发出多种刀。本研究旨在评估剪刀型刀在结直肠 ESD 中的疗效和安全性,并与针型刀进行比较。
本研究为一项 2013 年 8 月至 2018 年 12 月在 11 家医院进行的回顾性队列研究。将 2330 例(2498 处病变)接受结直肠 ESD 的患者分为针型(1923 例,2067 处病变)和剪刀型(407 例,431 处病变)刀组。比较两组的短期结局。
采用二比一倾向评分匹配分析,在针型和剪刀型刀组中分别纳入 814 例(709 例患者)和 407 例(386 例患者)的病变。与剪刀型组(13.2mm/min)相比,针型组的平均切除速度明显更快(18.3mm/min,P<0.0001),但两组的整块和组织学完全切除率无显著差异(96.8%[788/814]vs98.3%[400/407],P=0.1888 和 95.1%[774/814]vs95.6%[389/407],P=0.7763)。剪刀型组中单个刀切除的病变比例明显高于针型组(98.5%[401/407]vs43.9%[357/814],P<0.0001)。剪刀型组术中穿孔和迟发性出血的发生率明显低于针型组(分别为 0.7%[3/407]和 2.5%[20/814],P=0.0431)。
剪刀型刀用于结直肠 ESD 更安全,但与针型刀相比,其切除速度较慢。(临床试验注册号:UMIN000016197.)。