BACKGROUND: Endoscopic mucosal resection with a cap-fitted panendoscope is a useful, effective, and safe technique. The effectiveness and safety of a newly designed larger but softer cap was compared in this study with the conventional hard cap. The soft cap has a significantly larger diameter (18 mm) compared with that of the hard cap (16.5 mm). METHODS: Eighty-three patients who underwent mucosal resection of gastric lesions were included in analysis. The diameter, resection specimen depth, and the rate of en bloc resection were compared. The operability of the endoscope with the cap attached, patient tolerance, and safety of the procedure were analyzed. RESULTS: Mean diameter (+/- SEM) of specimens resected with the soft cap was larger: 22.1 (+/- 0.7) versus 15.8 (+/- 0.3) mm (p < 0.001). The specimen was also thicker: 1.54 (+/- 0.10) versus 1.08 (+/- 0.11) mm (p < 0.001). Use of the soft cap led to higher rate of en bloc resection: 66.7% versus 43.2% (p < 0.05). The operability of the endoscope with the larger, softer cap attached was similar to that when the hard cap was used. Both caps were equally safe. CONCLUSION: The soft cap is safe and useful for mucosal resection of larger gastric lesions. Its use increases the rate of en bloc resection.
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic mucosal resection with a cap-fitted panendoscope is a useful, effective, and safe technique. The effectiveness and safety of a newly designed larger but softer cap was compared in this study with the conventional hard cap. The soft cap has a significantly larger diameter (18 mm) compared with that of the hard cap (16.5 mm). METHODS: Eighty-three patients who underwent mucosal resection of gastric lesions were included in analysis. The diameter, resection specimen depth, and the rate of en bloc resection were compared. The operability of the endoscope with the cap attached, patient tolerance, and safety of the procedure were analyzed. RESULTS: Mean diameter (+/- SEM) of specimens resected with the soft cap was larger: 22.1 (+/- 0.7) versus 15.8 (+/- 0.3) mm (p < 0.001). The specimen was also thicker: 1.54 (+/- 0.10) versus 1.08 (+/- 0.11) mm (p < 0.001). Use of the soft cap led to higher rate of en bloc resection: 66.7% versus 43.2% (p < 0.05). The operability of the endoscope with the larger, softer cap attached was similar to that when the hard cap was used. Both caps were equally safe. CONCLUSION: The soft cap is safe and useful for mucosal resection of larger gastric lesions. Its use increases the rate of en bloc resection.
Authors: Young Rak Choi; Joung-Ho Han; Young Shim Cho; Hye-Suk Han; Hee Bok Chae; Seon Mee Park; Sei Jin Youn Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2013-04-07 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Durayd Alzoubaidi; David Graham; Paul Bassett; Cormac Magee; Martin Everson; Matthew Banks; Marco Novelli; Marnix Jansen; Laurence B Lovat; Rehan Haidry Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2019-01-22 Impact factor: 4.584