Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2018
Short-term outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial cecal tumors: a comparison between extension and nonextension into the appendiceal orifice.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Boda Kazuki, Oka Shiro, Tanaka Shinji, Tanaka Hidenori, Matsumoto Kenta, Yamashita Ken, Sumimoto Kyoku, Hirano Daiki, Tamaru Yuzuru, Ninomiya Yuki, Hayashi Nana, Chayama Kazuaki
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Few studies have investigated the use of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for cecal tumors extending into the appendiceal orifice. Herein, we assessed the feasibility and safety of ESD for cecal tumors extending into the appendiceal orifice.
METHODS: We retrospectively examined the outcomes of ESD for 78 patients with 78 cecal tumors (male/female ratio, 40/38; mean [standard deviation, SD] age, 67 [9] years; mean [SD] tumor size, 32 [15] mm), who underwent ESD at the Hiroshima University Hospital between October 2008 and March 2016. The indication for ESD in cecal tumors extending into the appendiceal orifice was recognition of the distal edge of the lesion in the appendix. They were classified into two groups: patients with cecal tumors extending (Group A: 29 patients, 29 tumors) and not extending (Group B: 49 patients, 49 tumors) into the appendiceal orifice. We compared the outcomes of ESD between both groups.
RESULTS: No significant differences in clinicopathological characteristics were observed between both groups. The rate of severe submucosal fibrosis in Group A (48%) was significantly higher than that in Group B (24%) (p < 0.05). The mean (SD) procedure speed in Group A (14 [10] mm2/min) was significantly slower than that in Group B (23 [16] mm2/min) (p < 0.01). The en bloc resection rates in Groups A and B were 90% and 96%, respectively. There were no significant differences in adverse events reported between both groups.
CONCLUSIONS: ESD for cecal tumors with extension into the appendiceal orifice is effective and safe.
METHODS: We retrospectively examined the outcomes of ESD for 78 patients with 78 cecal tumors (male/female ratio, 40/38; mean [standard deviation, SD] age, 67 [9] years; mean [SD] tumor size, 32 [15] mm), who underwent ESD at the Hiroshima University Hospital between October 2008 and March 2016. The indication for ESD in cecal tumors extending into the appendiceal orifice was recognition of the distal edge of the lesion in the appendix. They were classified into two groups: patients with cecal tumors extending (Group A: 29 patients, 29 tumors) and not extending (Group B: 49 patients, 49 tumors) into the appendiceal orifice. We compared the outcomes of ESD between both groups.
RESULTS: No significant differences in clinicopathological characteristics were observed between both groups. The rate of severe submucosal fibrosis in Group A (48%) was significantly higher than that in Group B (24%) (p < 0.05). The mean (SD) procedure speed in Group A (14 [10] mm2/min) was significantly slower than that in Group B (23 [16] mm2/min) (p < 0.01). The en bloc resection rates in Groups A and B were 90% and 96%, respectively. There were no significant differences in adverse events reported between both groups.
CONCLUSIONS: ESD for cecal tumors with extension into the appendiceal orifice is effective and safe.