The pocket-creation method may facilitate endoscopic submucosal dissection of large colorectal sessile tumors

Author:

Yamashina Takeshi12,Hayashi Yoshikazu1,Fukuda Hisashi1,Okada Masahiro1,Takezawa Takahito1,Kobayashi Yasutoshi1,Sakamoto Hirotsugu1,Miura Yoshimasa1,Shinozaki Satoshi13,Sunada Keijiro1,Lefor Alan Kawarai4,Yamamoto Hironori1

Affiliation:

1. Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, Jichi Medical University, Shimotsuke, Japan

2. Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Osaka Red Cross Hospital, Osaka, Japan

3. Shinozaki Medical Clinic, Utsunomiya, Japan

4. Department of Surgery, Jichi Medical University, Shimotsuke, Japan

Abstract

Abstract Background and study aims Resecting large colorectal sessile tumors using endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is challenging because of severe submucosal fibrosis. Previously, we reported that ESD strategy using the pocket-creation method (PCM) is useful for large colorectal sessile tumors, but there are no large studies reporting the effectiveness and safety of the PCM for resection of large colorectal sessile tumors. Patients and methods This was a retrospective review of 90 large colorectal sessile tumors in 89 patients who underwent ESD in our institution. Large colorectal sessile tumors were defined as polypoid lesions 20 mm or more in diameter. We divided them into PCM (n = 40) and conventional method (CM) groups (n = 50). The primary outcome measure was en bloc resection. The inverse-probability-treatment weighting (IPTW) approach was used to adjust for selection bias. Results Both PCM and CM achieved high en bloc resection (100 % vs. 94 %, non-adjusted P = 0.25, IPTW-adjusted P = 0.19) and R0 resection rates (88 % vs. 78 %, non-adjusted P = 0.28, IPTW-adjusted P = 0.27). When PCM was used, the rate of pathologically negative vertical margins was significantly greater than with the CM (IPTW-adjusted P = 0.045). The dissection time was significantly shorter (IPTW-adjusted P = 0.025) and dissection speed faster (IPTW-adjusted P = 0.013) using the PCM than when the CM was used. There was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse events (intraprocedural perforation and delayed bleeding, IPTW-adjusted P = 0.68). Conclusion Although en bloc resection and R0 resection rates were similar, PCM significantly increased the rate of negative vertical margins with rapid dissection for treatment of large colorectal sessile tumors.

Publisher

Georg Thieme Verlag KG

Subject

Gastroenterology,Medicine (miscellaneous)

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3