Zhao Chen-Yi, Ning Bo, Feng Xiu-Xue, Li Hui-Kai, Zhang Wen-Gang, Dong Hao, Chai Ning-Li, Linghu En-Qiang
Department of Digestive Diseases, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing 100853, China.
World J Gastrointest Surg. 2025 Jul 27;17(7):105503. doi: 10.4240/wjgs.v17.i7.105503.
Conventional reusable endoscopes have high disinfection costs because of their large size. In this study, we compared the effectiveness, safety, and operation performance of the portable disposable large-channel endoscope that we developed with those of a conventional gastroscope in endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD).
To compare two gastroscopes in ESD for effectiveness and safety.
Ten Bama pigs were subjected to gastroscopy and ESD after general anesthesia. The experiment was completed by four experienced endoscopists. First, two endoscopists randomly selected the portable disposable large-channel or conventional gastroscope to complete gastroscopy procedures. The other two endoscopists assessed the quality of endoscopic images. After endoscopy, all of the endoscopists randomly used the portable disposable large-channel endoscope or the conventional gastroscope for ESD. Endoscopic operation performance, submucosal dissection time, total procedure time, total submucosal injection volume, specimen size, success rate of resection, muscular injury rate, and complications were compared between the endoscopes.
No significant differences in gastroscopy duration or in the integrity, sharpness, saturation, and brightness of the gastroscopic images were observed between the gastroscopes. For ESD, no significant differences in endoscopic operation performance, incision time, submucosal dissection time, total procedure time, total submucosal injection volume, specimen size, or success rate of resection were observed between the gastroscopes. Neither gastroscope caused muscular injury or treatment-related complications.
The portable disposable large-channel endoscope can be used safely and effectively for gastroscopy and treatment.
传统的可重复使用内镜因其尺寸较大，消毒成本高昂。在本研究中，我们将我们研发的便携式一次性大通道内镜与传统胃镜在内镜黏膜下剥离术（ESD）中的有效性、安全性及操作性能进行了比较。
比较两种胃镜在ESD中的有效性和安全性。
十只巴马猪在全身麻醉后接受胃镜检查及ESD。实验由四名经验丰富的内镜医师完成。首先，两名内镜医师随机选择便携式一次性大通道内镜或传统胃镜完成胃镜检查程序。另外两名内镜医师评估内镜图像质量。内镜检查后，所有内镜医师随机使用便携式一次性大通道内镜或传统胃镜进行ESD。比较两种内镜的内镜操作性能、黏膜下剥离时间、总操作时间、黏膜下注射总量、标本大小、切除成功率、肌肉损伤率及并发症。
两种胃镜在胃镜检查持续时间或胃镜图像的完整性、清晰度、饱和度及亮度方面均未观察到显著差异。对于ESD，两种胃镜在内镜操作性能、切开时间、黏膜下剥离时间、总操作时间、黏膜下注射总量、标本大小或切除成功率方面均未观察到显著差异。两种胃镜均未造成肌肉损伤或与治疗相关的并发症。
便携式一次性大通道内镜可安全有效地用于胃镜检查及治疗。
