4.5 Article

Feasibility of electrocautery snaring as the final step of endoscopic submucosal dissection for stomach epithelial neoplasms

期刊

DIGESTIVE AND LIVER DISEASE
卷 41, 期 1, 页码 26-30

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.dld.2008.02.023

关键词

Endoscopic submucosal dissection; Piecemeal resection; Snaring resection; Stomach neoplasm

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a novel endolunninal technique that permits the resection of gastric neoplasms. Aim. To analyse the feasibility of snaring as the final step of ESD. Patients and methods. One hundred and ninety-nine consecutive gastric neoplasms resected by four ESD experts from January 2004 to May 2007 were investigated. Forty-five (22.6%) were finally resected finally using a snare. Rates of en bloc resection, complete (R0 plus ell bloc) resection, mean operation time, and complications were assessed between the snaring and the non-snaring groups. Results. En bloc resection rate was significantly lower and delayed bleeding rate was significantly higher in the snaring group than in the non-snaring group (91.1% [41/45] vs. 100% [154/154], 11.1% [5/45] vs. 1.9% [3/154], respectively), although complete resection rate (86.7% [39/45] vs. 92.9% [143/154]) and mean operation time (70.2 min vs. 75.8 min) were not significantly different between the two groups. Six perforation cases (3 [6.7%] in the snaring group, 3 [1.9%] in the non-snaring group) were observed, but snaring did not lead to perforation in any case. When the subjects were divided into small (<= 2 cm) and large (>2 cm) tumours, en bloc resection rate in large tumours was still significantly different between the groups (76.9% [10/13] vs. 100% [67/67]), whereas in small tumours it was no longer significantly different (96.9% [31/32] vs. 100% [87/87]). Conclusions. Snaring may facilitate successful ESD for smaller tumours, but multiple-piece resection should be taken into account especially for larger tumours. (C) 2008 Editrice Gastroenterologica Italiana S.r.l. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.5
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