Suppr超能文献

低功率纯切割热圈套息肉切除术治疗小的无蒂结直肠息肉与传统切除方法相比的安全性和有效性:一项倾向评分匹配分析

Safety and efficacy of low-power pure-cut hot snare polypectomy for small nonpedunculated colorectal polyps compared with conventional resection methods: A propensity score matching analysis.

作者信息

Kimura Hidenori, Oi Masayuki, Imai Kenichiro, Imai Takayuki, Morita Yukihiro, Nishida Atsushi, Bamba Shigeki, Inatomi Osamu, Andoh Akira

机构信息

Department of Medicine Division of Digestive Endoscopy Shiga University of Medical Science Shiga Japan.

Department of Medicine Division of Gastroenterology Shiga University of Medical Science Shiga Japan.

出版信息

DEN Open. 2024 May 7;5(1):e378. doi: 10.1002/deo2.378. eCollection 2025 Apr.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Cold snare polypectomy (CSP) is widely performed for small colorectal polyps. However, small colorectal polyps sometimes include high-grade adenomas or carcinomas that require endoscopic resection with electrocautery. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a novel resection technique, hot snare polypectomy with low-power pure-cut current (LPPC-HSP) for small colorectal polyps, compared with CSP and conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR).

METHODS

Records of patients who underwent CSP, EMR, or LPPC-HSP for nonpedunculated colorectal polyps less than 10 mm between April 2021 and March 2022 were retrospectively evaluated. We analyzed and compared the treatment outcomes of CSP and EMR with those of LPPC-HSP using propensity score matching.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching of 396 pairs, an analysis of CSP and LPPC-HSP indicated that LPPC-HSP had a significantly higher R0 resection rate (84% vs. 68%; < 0.01). Delayed bleeding was observed in only two cases treated with CSP before matching. Perforation was not observed with either treatment. After propensity score matching of 176 pairs, an analysis of EMR and LPPC-HSP indicated that their en bloc and R0 resection rates were not significantly different (99.4% vs. 100%, = 1.00; 79% vs. 81%, = 0.79). Delayed bleeding and perforation were not observed with either treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The safety of LPPC-HSP was comparable to that of CSP. The treatment outcomes of LPPC-HSP were comparable to those of conventional EMR for small polyps. These results suggest that this technique is a safe and effective treatment for nonpedunculated polyps less than 10 mm.

摘要

目的

冷圈套息肉切除术(CSP)广泛应用于小的结直肠息肉。然而,小的结直肠息肉有时包含高级别腺瘤或癌,需要用电灼进行内镜切除。本研究旨在评估一种新型切除技术——低功率纯切割电流热圈套息肉切除术(LPPC-HSP)治疗小的结直肠息肉的有效性和安全性,并与CSP及传统内镜黏膜切除术(EMR)进行比较。

方法

回顾性评估2021年4月至2022年3月期间接受CSP、EMR或LPPC-HSP治疗直径小于10mm的无蒂结直肠息肉患者的记录。我们使用倾向评分匹配分析并比较了CSP和EMR与LPPC-HSP的治疗结果。

结果

在396对倾向评分匹配后,CSP与LPPC-HSP的分析表明,LPPC-HSP的R0切除率显著更高(84%对68%;<0.01)。匹配前仅2例接受CSP治疗的患者出现延迟出血。两种治疗均未观察到穿孔。在176对倾向评分匹配后,EMR与LPPC-HSP的分析表明,它们的整块切除率和R0切除率无显著差异(99.4%对100%,=1.00;79%对81%,=0.79)。两种治疗均未观察到延迟出血和穿孔。

结论

LPPC-HSP的安全性与CSP相当。对于小息肉,LPPC-HSP的治疗结果与传统EMR相当。这些结果表明,该技术是治疗直径小于10mm的无蒂息肉的一种安全有效的方法。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b943/11075073/b7cb56b19cce/DEO2-5-e378-g001.jpg

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