4.6 Article

Risk factors for postoperative complications in endoscopic resection of gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors: a multi-center analysis

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00464-023-10177-9

关键词

Postoperative complications; Endoscopic resection; Gastrointestinal stromal tumors

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aimed to determine the risk factors for postoperative complications in endoscopic resection (ER) of gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (gGISTs). The results showed that long operative time and severe intraoperative bleeding were risk factors for delayed bleeding, while long operative time and perforation were risk factors for postoperative infection.
BackgroundEndoscopic resection (ER) is widely used in treating gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (gGISTs); however, complications occur frequently after resection. We aimed to determine factors associated with postoperative complications for ER of gGISTs.MethodsThis was a retrospective, multi-center, observational study. Consecutive patients who underwent ER of gGISTs at five institutes from January 2013 to December 2022 were analyzed. The risk factors for delayed bleeding and postoperative infection were assessed.ResultsA total of 513 cases were finally analyzed. Of 513 patients, 27 (5.3%) had delayed bleeding and 69 (13.4%) had a postoperative infection. Multivariate analysis indicated that risk factors for delayed bleeding were long operative time (OR = 50.655; 95% CI, 13.777-186.252; P < 0.001) and severe intraoperative bleeding (OR = 4.731, 95% CI, 1.139-19.658; P = 0.032), and risk factors for postoperative infection were long operative time (OR = 13.749, 95% CI, 6.884-27.461; P < 0.001) and perforation (OR = 4.339, 95% CI, 2.178-8.644; P < 0.001).ConclusionsOur study indicated the risk factors for postoperative complications in ER of gGISTs. Long operation time is a common risk factor for delayed bleeding and postoperative infection. Patients with these risk factors should be given careful observation postoperatively.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据