Suppr超能文献

一项前瞻性随机对照研究,评估用于结直肠内镜黏膜下剥离术的双气囊介入式内镜平台(附视频)。

Prospective, randomized controlled study evaluating a double-balloon interventional endoscopic platform for colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (with video).

作者信息

Kantsevoy Sergey V, Palmer Angela, Hockett Deborah, Vilches April

机构信息

Institute for Digestive Health and Liver Diseases, Mercy Medical Center, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

出版信息

Gastrointest Endosc. 2025 Jan;101(1):149-157. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2024.07.001. Epub 2024 Jul 5.

Abstract

BACKGROUNDS AND AIMS

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) can be challenging and time-consuming. A double-balloon interventional platform (DBIP) was designed to assist with navigation, stabilization, traction, and device delivery during complex colorectal polypectomy. We compared traditional ESD (T-ESD) with DBIP-assisted ESD (DBIP-ESD) in a prospective, randomized trial.

METHODS

Patients with colorectal polyps ≥2 cm were randomly assigned (1:1) to DBIP-ESD or T-ESD. The primary study endpoint was the mean total procedure time difference between groups. Secondary endpoints were intraprocedural time points, en bloc resection rate, procedure cost, adverse events, and 3-month assessment. A sample size of 200 subjects for ≥80% power was calculated. Interim analysis for early study termination was planned at 70% enrollment if the primary endpoint was met (P ≤ .05).

RESULTS

One hundred forty-seven patients were enrolled between February 2019 and February 2020. Seven patients dropped out, and the interim analysis was performed on 140 patients (71 DBIP-ESD, 69 T-ESD). Demographics, comorbidities, and lesion size, location, and classification were similar between groups. The mean procedure time decreased with DBIP-ESD (88.6 ± 42.7 minutes) versus T-ESD (139.5 ± 83.2 minutes; difference of ∼51 minutes [36.5%]; P < .001], with procedural savings of $610.16 (11.4%) per patient after DBIP cost. The DBIP increased dissection speed by 49.0% (15.1 ± 8.0 vs 7.7 ± 6.6 cm/h, P < .001). En bloc resection was superior with the addition of DBIP (97.2% vs 87.0%, P = .030). The mean navigation time with DBIP-ESD for sutured defect closure decreased by 7.7 minutes (P < .001). There were no adverse events in the DBIP-ESD group.

CONCLUSIONS

DBIP-ESD decreased the total procedure time, improved the en bloc resection rate, and facilitated sutured defect closure, making DBIP a promising and cost-effective tool to improve colorectal ESD adoption. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03846609.).

摘要

背景与目的

内镜黏膜下剥离术(ESD)具有挑战性且耗时。设计了一种双气囊介入平台(DBIP),以辅助复杂结直肠息肉切除术中的导航、稳定、牵引和器械递送。我们在一项前瞻性随机试验中比较了传统ESD(T-ESD)与DBIP辅助ESD(DBIP-ESD)。

方法

将结直肠息肉≥2 cm的患者随机(1:1)分配至DBIP-ESD组或T-ESD组。主要研究终点是两组之间的平均总手术时间差异。次要终点是术中时间点、整块切除率、手术成本、不良事件和3个月评估。计算出样本量为200名受试者,检验效能≥80%。如果达到主要终点(P≤0.05),计划在入组70%时进行早期研究终止的中期分析。

结果

2019年2月至2020年2月共纳入147例患者。7例患者退出,对140例患者(71例DBIP-ESD,69例T-ESD)进行了中期分析。两组间的人口统计学、合并症以及病变大小、位置和分类相似。与T-ESD(139.5±83.2分钟)相比,DBIP-ESD的平均手术时间缩短(88.6±42.7分钟;差异约51分钟[36.5%];P<0.001),扣除DBIP成本后每位患者节省手术费用610.16美元(11.4%)。DBIP使剥离速度提高了49.0%(15.1±8.0 vs 7.7±6.6 cm/h,P<0.001)。增加DBIP后整块切除效果更好(97.2%对87.0%,P=0.030)。DBIP-ESD用于缝合缺损闭合的平均导航时间减少了7.7分钟(P<0.001)。DBIP-ESD组无不良事件发生。

结论

DBIP-ESD缩短了总手术时间,提高了整块切除率,并便于缝合缺损闭合,使DBIP成为一种有前景且具成本效益的工具,有助于提高结直肠ESD的应用。(临床试验注册号:NCT03846609。)

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