Literature DB >> 26297870

Preoperative indicators of failure of en bloc resection or perforation in colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: implications for lesion stratification by technical difficulties during stepwise training.

Kenichiro Imai1, Kinichi Hotta1, Yuichiro Yamaguchi1, Naomi Kakushima1, Masaki Tanaka1, Kohei Takizawa1, Noboru Kawata1, Hiroyuki Matsubayashi1, Tadakazu Shimoda2, Keita Mori3, Hiroyuki Ono1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The technical difficulties inherent in endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for colorectal neoplasms may result in the failure of en bloc resection or perforation. The aim of this retrospective study was to assess the predictors of en bloc resection failure or perforation by using preoperatively available factors.
METHODS: Between September 2002 and March 2013, 716 colorectal ESDs in 673 consecutive patients were performed at a tertiary cancer center. Patient characteristics, tumor location, tumor type, colonoscopy-related factors, and endoscopist experience were assessed based on a prospectively recorded institutional ESD database. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify predictors of failure of en bloc resection or perforations, with subgroup analyses of ESDs performed by endoscopists less experienced in colorectal ESD (<40 cases) and for colonic lesions only.
RESULTS: On multivariate analysis, independent predictors of failure of en bloc resection or perforations were the presence of fold convergence (odds ratio [OR] 4.4; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.9-9.9), protruding type (OR 3.6; 95% CI, 1.8-7.1), poor endoscope operability (OR 3.5; 95% CI, 1.8-6.9), right-sided colonic lesions (OR 3.0; 95% CI, 1.5-6.3 vs rectal lesions), left-sided colonic lesions (OR 3.2; 95% CI, 1.7-6.3, vs rectal lesions), the presence of an underlying semilunar fold (OR 2.1; 95% CI, 1.3-3.6), and a less-experienced endoscopist (OR 2.1; 95% CI, 1.3-3.6). Among less-experienced endoscopists, colonic lesions were independent predictors (right-sided colonic lesions 8.1; 95% CI, 2.9-25.1; left-sided colonic lesions 8.1; 95% CI, 2.5-28.3 vs rectal lesions). For colonic lesions, the presence of fold convergence (OR 3.7; 95% CI, 1.6-8.6), poor endoscope operability (OR 3.6; 95% CI, 1.8-7.2), a less-experienced endoscopist (OR 3.0; 95% CI, 1.7-1.8), and the presence of an underlying semilunar fold (OR 2.7; 95% CI, 1.5-4.7) were identified predictors.
CONCLUSION: This study successfully identified predictors of en bloc resection failure or perforation. Understanding these indicators could help to accurately stratify lesions according to technical difficulty and to appropriately select endoscopists.
Copyright © 2016 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26297870     DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2015.08.024

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc        ISSN: 0016-5107            Impact factor:   9.427


  26 in total

1.  Endoscope rotating technique is useful for difficult colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection.

Authors:  Chao-Wen Hsu; Chih-Chien Wu; Min-Hung Lee; Jui-Ho Wang; Yu-Hsun Chen; Min-Chi Chang
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2019-09-03       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Predictors of technical difficulty during endoscopic submucosal dissection of superficial esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Hiromasa Hazama; Masaki Tanaka; Naomi Kakushima; Yohei Yabuuchi; Masao Yoshida; Noboru Kawata; Kohei Takizawa; Sayo Ito; Kenichiro Imai; Kinichi Hotta; Hirotoshi Ishiwatari; Hiroyuki Matsubayashi; Keita Mori; Hiroyuki Ono
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-11-26       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Predictive Factors of Mild and Severe Fibrosis in Colorectal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection.

Authors:  Hideyuki Chiba; Jun Tachikawa; Jun Arimoto; Keiichi Ashikari; Hiroki Kuwabara; Michiko Nakaoka; Toru Goto; Ken Ohata; Atsushi Nakajima
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2019-07-16       Impact factor: 3.199

4.  Efficacy of the pocket-creation method with a traction device in endoscopic submucosal dissection for residual or recurrent colorectal lesions.

Authors:  Daisuke Ide; Tomohiko Richard Ohya; Mitsuaki Ishioka; Yuri Enomoto; Eisuke Nakao; Yuki Mitsuyoshi; Junki Tokura; Keigo Suzuki; Seiichi Yakabi; Chihiro Yasue; Akiko Chino; Masahiro Igarashi; Akio Nakashima; Masayuki Saruta; Shoichi Saito; Junko Fujisaki
Journal:  Clin Endosc       Date:  2022-05-31

5.  Endoscopic submucosal dissection for laterally spreading tumors involving the appendiceal orifice.

Authors:  Tomoaki Tashima; Ken Ohata; Kouichi Nonaka; Eiji Sakai; Yohei Minato; Hajime Horiuchi; Nobuyuki Matsuhashi
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-05-31       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Factors Associated with Fibrosis during Colorectal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection: Does Pretreatment Biopsy Potentially Elicit Submucosal Fibrosis and Affect Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection Outcomes?

Authors:  Masatake Kuroha; Hisashi Shiga; Yoshitake Kanazawa; Hiroshi Nagai; Tomoyuki Handa; Ryo Ichikawa; Motoyuki Onodera; Takeo Naito; Rintaro Moroi; Tomoya Kimura; Katsuya Endo; Yoichi Kakuta; Yoshitaka Kinouchi; Tooru Shimosegawa; Atsushi Masamune
Journal:  Digestion       Date:  2020-08-31       Impact factor: 3.216

7.  Dual Red Imaging Maintains Clear Visibility During Colorectal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection.

Authors:  Hidenori Tanaka; Shiro Oka; Shinji Tanaka; Kenta Matsumoto; Kazuki Boda; Ken Yamashita; Daiki Hirano; Kyoku Sumimoto; Yuzuru Tamaru; Yuki Ninomiya; Nana Hayashi; Kazuaki Chayama
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2018-10-04       Impact factor: 3.199

8.  Feasibility and safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection for lower rectal tumors with hemorrhoids.

Authors:  Shinwa Tanaka; Takashi Toyonaga; Yoshinori Morita; Namiko Hoshi; Tsukasa Ishida; Yoshiko Ohara; Tetsuya Yoshizaki; Fumiaki Kawara; Eiji Umegaki; Takeshi Azuma
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-07-21       Impact factor: 5.742

9.  Colorectal polyps located across a fold are difficult to resect completely using endoscopic mucosal resection: A propensity score analysis.

Authors:  Hiroaki Minamino; Yasuaki Nagami; Masatsugu Shiba; Kappei Hayashi; Taishi Sakai; Masaki Ominami; Shusei Fukunaga; Tsuyoshi Hayakawa; Kazuki Aomatsu; Satoshi Sugimori; Tetsuya Tanigawa; Hirokazu Yamagami; Toshio Watanabe; Yasuhiro Fujiwara
Journal:  United European Gastroenterol J       Date:  2018-08-24       Impact factor: 4.623

10.  Treatment strategy for local recurrences after endoscopic resection of a colorectal neoplasm.

Authors:  Sayo Ito; Kinichi Hotta; Kenichiro Imai; Yuichiro Yamaguchi; Yoshihiro Kishida; Kohei Takizawa; Naomi Kakushima; Noboru Kawata; Masao Yoshida; Hirotoshi Ishiwatari; Hiroyuki Matsubayashi; Hiroyuki Ono
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-07-24       Impact factor: 4.584

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.