Literature DB >> 20806155

Retrospective study of technical aspects and complications of endoscopic submucosal dissection for laterally spreading tumors of the colorectum.

T Toyonaga1, M Man-i, T Fujita, J E East, E Nishino, W Ono, Y Morita, T Sanuki, M Yoshida, H Kutsumi, H Inokuchi, T Azuma.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Laterally spreading tumors - non granular type (LST-NG) are more often considered candidates for endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) than laterally spreading tumors - granular type (LST-G), because of their higher potential for submucosal invasion. However, ESD for LST-NG can be technically difficult. The aim of our study was to compare our ESD results for LST-NG and for LST-G. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Ninety-nine LST-NG and 169 LST-G measuring 20 mm in size or more were removed by ESD. We retrospectively evaluated the clinicopathological features of the tumors and treatment results (en bloc resection rate, procedure time and speed, rate of use of ancillary devices, and complication and recurrence rates).
RESULTS: Histopathology revealed that there were more submucosally invasive lesions in the LST-NG than in the LST-G group (28 % vs. 9 %; P < 0.0001). The en bloc resection rate, en bloc R0 resection rate, and en bloc curative resection rate of LST-NG were similar to those of LST-G (LST-NG: 99 %, 98 %, and 88 %; LST-G: 99 %, 98 %, and 91 %). In LST-NG, the median procedure time tended to be longer (LST-NG: 69 min; LST-G: 60 min) and the median procedure speed was slower (LST-NG: 0.15 cm (2)/min; LST-G: 0.25 cm (2)/min; P < 0.0001). Use of ancillary devices was higher for LST-NG (38 % vs. 15 % for LST-G; P < 0.0001), as was the perforation rate (5.1 % vs. 0.6 % for LST-G; P = 0.027). No recurrence was seen in either group.
CONCLUSIONS: ESD was an effective treatment method for both LST-NG and LST-G. However, the degree of technical difficulty appears higher for LST-NG than for LST-G lesions, as shown by the lower dissection speed and higher perforation rate. ESD for LST-NG should probably be performed by those with significant experience of colorectal ESD. Copyright Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart . New York.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20806155     DOI: 10.1055/s-0030-1255654

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Endoscopy        ISSN: 0013-726X            Impact factor:   10.093


  40 in total

Review 1.  Coagulation syndrome: Delayed perforation after colorectal endoscopic treatments.

Authors:  Kingo Hirasawa; Chiko Sato; Makomo Makazu; Hiroaki Kaneko; Ryosuke Kobayashi; Atsushi Kokawa; Shin Maeda
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2015-09-10

2.  Endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancer in anastomosis site after distal gastrectomy.

Authors:  Shinwa Tanaka; Takashi Toyonaga; Yoshinori Morita; Tsuyoshi Fujita; Tetsuya Yoshizaki; Fumiaki Kawara; Chika Wakahara; Daisuke Obata; Aya Sakai; Tsukasa Ishida; Nobunao Ikehara; Takeshi Azuma
Journal:  Gastric Cancer       Date:  2013-07-19       Impact factor: 7.370

3.  Endoscopic submucosal dissection for laterally spreading tumors in the rectum ≥40 mm.

Authors:  X W Tang; Y T Ren; J Q Zhou; Z J Wei; Z Y Chen; B Jiang; W Gong
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2016-04-06       Impact factor: 3.781

4.  The efficacy of endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal tumors extending to the dentate line.

Authors:  Satohiro Matsumoto; Hirosato Mashima
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2017-02-10       Impact factor: 2.571

5.  Can endoscopic submucosal dissection be safely performed in a smaller specialized clinic?

Authors:  Naondo Sohara; Satoshi Hagiwara; Riki Arai; Haruhisa Iizuka; Yasuhiro Onozato; Satoru Kakizaki
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2013-01-28       Impact factor: 5.742

6.  Risk factors for bleeding after endoscopic submucosal dissection of colorectal neoplasms.

Authors:  Sho Suzuki; Akiko Chino; Teruhito Kishihara; Naoyuki Uragami; Yoshiro Tamegai; Takanori Suganuma; Junko Fujisaki; Masaaki Matsuura; Takao Itoi; Takuji Gotoda; Masahiro Igarashi; Fuminori Moriyasu
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-02-21       Impact factor: 5.742

7.  Principles of quality controlled endoscopic submucosal dissection with appropriate dissection level and high quality resected specimen.

Authors:  Takashi Toyonaga; Eisei Nishino; Mariko Man-I; James E East; Takeshi Azuma
Journal:  Clin Endosc       Date:  2012-11-30

8.  Colorectal lateral spreading tumor subtypes: clinicopathology and outcome of endoscopic submucosal dissection.

Authors:  Mei-Dong Xu; Xiao-Yun Wang; Quan-Lin Li; Ping-Hong Zhou; Yi-Qun Zhang; Yun-Shi Zhong; Wei-Feng Chen; Li-Li Ma; Wen-Zheng Qin; Jian-Wei Hu; Li-Qing Yao
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2012-07-29       Impact factor: 2.571

9.  Risk factors for vertical incomplete resection in endoscopic submucosal dissection as total excisional biopsy for submucosal invasive colorectal carcinoma.

Authors:  Shun-ichiro Ozawa; Shinji Tanaka; Nana Hayashi; Soki Nishiyama; Motomi Terasaki; Koichi Nakadoi; Hiroyuki Kanao; Shiro Oka; Shigeto Yoshida; Kazuaki Chayama
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2013-04-26       Impact factor: 2.571

10.  Technical difficulty according to location, and risk factors for perforation, in endoscopic submucosal dissection of colorectal tumors.

Authors:  Takeshi Mizushima; Mototsugu Kato; Ichiro Iwanaga; Fumiyuki Sato; Kimitoshi Kubo; Nobuyuki Ehira; Minoru Uebayashi; Shouko Ono; Manabu Nakagawa; Katsuhiro Mabe; Yuichi Shimizu; Naoya Sakamoto
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-07-04       Impact factor: 4.584

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.