• 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

内镜套扎电切术治疗胃底小黏膜下肿瘤的临床疗效分析。

Clinical efficacy analysis of endoscopic band electrocision ligation surgical method in the treatment of small submucosal tumors of the gastric fundus.

机构信息

Department of Gastroenterology, The Affiliated Hexian Memorial Hospital of Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.

Department of Pathology, The Affiliated Hexian Memorial Hospital of Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.

出版信息

Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol. 2024 Dec;33(6):387-395. doi: 10.1080/13645706.2024.2413113. Epub 2024 Oct 11.

DOI:10.1080/13645706.2024.2413113
PMID:39392255
Abstract

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to compare and analyze the clinical effects of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and endoscopic band electrocision ligation (EEL) in the removal of gastric submucosal tumors (SMTs).

METHOD

We analyzed the clinical data of 130 patients with gastrointestinal SMTs (diameter ≤10 mm) who underwent endoscopic resection, including 62 cases in the EEL group and 68 in the ESD group, and compared indicators such as surgical time, intraoperative and postoperative complications, postoperative hospital stay, and surgical cost, between the EEL and ESD group.

RESULTS

EEL surgery time (8.9 ± 1.1 min) was significantly shorter than the ESD group (62.3 ± 2.8 min) ( < .05), EEL surgery cost (5126.8 ± 26.5 yuan) was significantly lower than the ESD group (15721.3 ± 39.6 yuan) ( < .05), and intraoperative blood loss was also markedly lower in the EEL group (5.6 ± 1.7 ml) compared to the ESD group (42.3 ± 3.5 ml) ( < .05). There was no statistically significant difference in postoperative hospitalization time or postoperative complication incidence between the two groups ( > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

In treating gastric muscular, mucosal, or submucosal tumors with a diameter of less than 10 mm, the EEL surgical method was superior to the ESD surgical method in terms of surgical time, intraoperative blood loss, and cost. There was no difference in hospital stay and postoperative complication rate between the two methods, which was worthy of clinical application.

摘要

背景

本研究旨在比较和分析内镜黏膜下剥离术(ESD)与内镜套扎电切术(EEL)治疗胃黏膜下肿瘤(SMT)的临床效果。

方法

回顾性分析我院 130 例胃肠 SMT(直径≤10mm)患者的内镜下切除治疗资料,其中 EEL 组 62 例,ESD 组 68 例,比较两组患者的手术时间、术中及术后并发症、术后住院时间、手术费用等指标。

结果

EEL 组手术时间(8.9±1.1min)显著短于 ESD 组(62.3±2.8min)(<0.05),EEL 组手术费用(5126.8±26.5 元)显著低于 ESD 组(15721.3±39.6 元)(<0.05),术中出血量(5.6±1.7ml)也显著少于 ESD 组(42.3±3.5ml)(<0.05)。两组患者术后住院时间、术后并发症发生率差异均无统计学意义(>0.05)。

结论

对于直径<10mm 的胃固有肌层、黏膜层或黏膜下肿瘤,EEL 手术方法在手术时间、术中出血量和费用方面优于 ESD 手术方法。两种方法在住院时间和术后并发症发生率方面无差异,值得临床应用。

相似文献

1
Clinical efficacy analysis of endoscopic band electrocision ligation surgical method in the treatment of small submucosal tumors of the gastric fundus.内镜套扎电切术治疗胃底小黏膜下肿瘤的临床疗效分析。
Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol. 2024 Dec;33(6):387-395. doi: 10.1080/13645706.2024.2413113. Epub 2024 Oct 11.
2
Comparison of endoscopic submucosal dissection and surgery for the treatment of gastric submucosal tumors originating from the muscularis propria layer: a single-center study (with video).内镜黏膜下剥离术与手术治疗源于固有肌层的胃黏膜下肿瘤的比较:一项单中心研究(附视频)
Surg Endosc. 2016 Nov;30(11):5099-5107. doi: 10.1007/s00464-016-4860-7. Epub 2016 Mar 22.
3
Band-assisted endoscopic mucosal resection for small (≤ 1.5 cm) submucosal tumors originating from the muscularis propria in the gastric fundus: a prospective study.内镜黏膜下剥离术联合圈套器切除胃固有基层小(≤1.5cm)黏膜下肿瘤:一项前瞻性研究。
Surg Endosc. 2023 Mar;37(3):1806-1812. doi: 10.1007/s00464-022-09688-8. Epub 2022 Oct 13.
4
Efficacy analysis of modified double band ligation-assisted endoscopic submucosal resection and endoscopic mucosal dissection in the treatment of gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (≤ 1.5 cm).改良双环套扎辅助内镜黏膜下剥离术与内镜黏膜下切除术治疗胃胃肠道间质瘤(≤1.5厘米)的疗效分析
Surg Endosc. 2025 Apr;39(4):2471-2480. doi: 10.1007/s00464-025-11598-4. Epub 2025 Feb 24.
5
Clinical Values of Dental Floss Traction Assistance in Endoscopic Full-Thickness Resection for Submucosal Tumors Originating from the Muscularis Propria Layer in the Gastric Fundus.牙线牵引辅助在胃底固有肌层来源的黏膜下肿瘤内镜全层切除术中的临床价值
J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2018 Oct;28(10):1261-1265. doi: 10.1089/lap.2018.0030. Epub 2018 Jun 6.
6
[Efficacy comparison between surgical resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection of early gastric cancer in a domestic single center].[国内单中心早期胃癌手术切除与内镜黏膜下剥离术的疗效比较]
Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2018 Feb 25;21(2):190-195.
7
Safety analysis of laparoscopic endoscopic cooperative surgery versus endoscopic submucosal dissection for selected gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors: a propensity score-matched study.腹腔镜内镜联合手术与内镜下黏膜下剥离术治疗特定胃胃肠道间质瘤的安全性分析:一项倾向评分匹配研究
Surg Endosc. 2017 Feb;31(2):843-851. doi: 10.1007/s00464-016-5042-3. Epub 2016 Aug 4.
8
Endoscopic band ligation versus endoscopic submucosal dissection and laparoscopic resection for small gastric stromal tumors.内镜下套扎术与内镜黏膜下剥离术及腹腔镜切除术治疗小胃间质瘤的比较
Surg Endosc. 2016 Jul;30(7):2873-8. doi: 10.1007/s00464-015-4571-5. Epub 2015 Oct 21.
9
Conventional versus rubber band traction-assisted endoscopic submucosal dissection for rectal neuroendocrine tumors: a single-center retrospective study (with video).传统与橡皮圈牵引辅助内镜黏膜下剥离术治疗直肠神经内分泌肿瘤:单中心回顾性研究(附视频)。
Surg Endosc. 2024 Nov;38(11):6485-6492. doi: 10.1007/s00464-024-11244-5. Epub 2024 Sep 13.
10
A comparison of submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection and endoscopic full-thickness resection for gastric fundus submucosal tumors.胃底黏膜下肿瘤的黏膜下隧道内镜切除术与内镜全层切除术的比较
Rev Esp Enferm Dig. 2018 Mar;110(3):160-165. doi: 10.17235/reed.2017.4699/2016.