Literature DB >> 25230136

Conventional vs. waterjet-assisted endoscopic submucosal dissection in early gastric cancer: a randomized controlled trial.

Ping-Hong Zhou1, Brigitte Schumacher2, Li-Qing Yao1, Mei-Dong Xu1, Thomas Nordmann2, Ming-Yan Cai1, Jean-Pierre Charton2, Michael Vieth3, Horst Neuhaus2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: A hybrid knife was recently developed to allow waterjet-assisted endoscopic submucosal dissection, which aims to speed up and simplify the procedure. This technique has been shown to be effective and safe for the treatment of early gastric cancer (EGC) but it has not yet been compared with conventional ESD. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this two-center study, patients with an endoscopic and histopathological diagnosis of gastric adenoma or early gastric adenocarcinoma (meeting the extended Japanese criteria for local resection) were randomized to either conventional or waterjet-assisted ESD. The choice of knife was left to the endoscopist in the conventional group whereas the hybrid knife was used in the waterjet group. The primary end point was procedure time, and secondary outcomes included rates of en bloc resection, R0 resection, and complications.
RESULTS: A total of 117 patients (mean age 63.0 ± 10.6 years, 76 men) were randomized to either conventional ESD (n  = 59; control group) or waterjet-assisted ESD (n = 58). There were no significant differences in patient demographics or lesion features between the groups. The mean procedure time was significantly shorter in the waterjet group compared with the conventional group (27.5  ±  30.6 vs. 35.0  ± 22.5 minutes; P = 0.0008), and a change of accessories was less frequently required (mean number of changes 1.4  ±  2.0 vs. 23.0  ±  15.4; P < 0.0001). There was no significant difference between the groups in the size of resected specimen, R0 resection rates, number of perforations, major delayed bleedings, or rates of complete remission of neoplasia after 3 months.
CONCLUSIONS: Waterjet-assisted ESD and conventional ESD are comparably effective and safe techniques for the local treatment of EGC. The waterjet-assisted technique is a faster and simpler procedure and requires fewer accessory changes compared with conventional ESD. © Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25230136     DOI: 10.1055/s-0034-1377580

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


  9 in total

1.  Waterjet submucosal dissection of porcine esophagus with the HybridKnife and ERBEJET 2 system: a pilot study.

Authors:  Daisuke Akutsu; Hideo Suzuki; Toshiaki Narasaka; Masahiko Terasaki; Tsuyoshi Kaneko; Hirofumi Matsui; Yuji Mizokami; Ichinosuke Hyodo
Journal:  Endosc Int Open       Date:  2017-01

Review 2.  Handling and Pathology Reporting of Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Mucosal Resection.

Authors:  Bita Geramizadeh; David A Owen
Journal:  Middle East J Dig Dis       Date:  2017-01

3.  Endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection of upper gastrointestinal submucosal tumors: A comparative study of hook knife vs hybrid knife.

Authors:  Jie-Qiong Zhou; Xiao-Wei Tang; Yu-Tang Ren; Zheng-Jie Wei; Si-Lin Huang; Qiao-Ping Gao; Xiao-Feng Zhang; Jian-Feng Yang; Wei Gong; Bo Jiang
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2017-03-14       Impact factor: 5.742

4.  Implementation of endoscopic submucosal dissection in a country with a low incidence of gastric cancer: Results from a prospective national registry.

Authors:  Gloria Fernández-Esparrach; José-Carlos Marín-Gabriel; Alberto H de Tejada; Eduardo Albéniz; Oscar Nogales; Andres J Del Pozo-García; Pedro J Rosón; Unai Goicotxea; Hugo Uchima; Alvaro Terán; Alvarez Alberto; Rodríguez-Sánchez Joaquín; Rivero-Sánchez Liseth; Santiago José
Journal:  United European Gastroenterol J       Date:  2021-06-02       Impact factor: 4.623

5.  Comparison of O-Type HybridKnife to Conventional Knife in Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Gastric Mucosal Lesions.

Authors:  Rui Huang; Honglin Yan; Gui Ren; Yanglin Pan; Linhui Zhang; Zhiguo Liu; Xuegang Guo; Kaichun Wu
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 1.889

6.  Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection of Early Gastric Cancer: Yes, We Need to Calculate Procedure Times!

Authors:  Arjun D Koch
Journal:  GE Port J Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-04-18

7.  A randomised trial of endoscopic submucosal dissection versus endoscopic mucosal resection for early Barrett's neoplasia.

Authors:  Grischa Terheggen; Eva Maria Horn; Michael Vieth; Helmut Gabbert; Markus Enderle; Alexander Neugebauer; Brigitte Schumacher; Horst Neuhaus
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2016-01-22       Impact factor: 23.059

8.  Electromagnetic assisted endoscopic submucosal dissection is more efficient than water-jet assisted and conventional ESD in experimental model.

Authors:  Joaquín Rodríguez Sánchez; Eduardo Rodríguez Sánchez; Eva de la Santa Belda; Pilar Palomar Olivencia; Rosario Salmoral Luque; Mónica Sánchez Alonso; José Olmedo Camacho; Francisco Javier Redondo Calvo
Journal:  Endosc Int Open       Date:  2018-03-29

9.  Splash M-knife versus Flush Knife BT in the technical outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancer: a propensity score matching analysis.

Authors:  Mitsuru Esaki; Sho Suzuki; Yasuyo Hayashi; Azusa Yokoyama; Shuichi Abe; Taizo Hosokawa; Haruei Ogino; Hirotada Akiho; Eikichi Ihara; Yoshihiro Ogawa
Journal:  BMC Gastroenterol       Date:  2018-02-27       Impact factor: 3.067

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.