Su Jung Han1, Yunho Jung2, Young Sin Cho1, Il-Kwun Chung1, Jae Yun Kim1, Jun Young Eun1, Seoung Ho Lee1, Gyu Bong Ko1, Tae Hoon Lee1, Sang Hum Park1, Hyun Deuk Cho3, Sun-Joo Kim1. 1. Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Soonchunhyang University College of Medicine, Soonchunhyang University Cheonan Hospital, 23-20 Bongmyung-Dong, Cheonan, Choongnam, 330-721, Republic of Korea. 2. Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Soonchunhyang University College of Medicine, Soonchunhyang University Cheonan Hospital, 23-20 Bongmyung-Dong, Cheonan, Choongnam, 330-721, Republic of Korea. yoonho7575@naver.com. 3. Department of Pathology, Soonchunhyang University College of Medicine, Cheonan Hospital, Cheonan, Republic of Korea.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Submucosal injection with indigo carmine mixed solution can improve the delineation of colorectal neoplasia during endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). Thus, the aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of submucosal injection with indigo carmine mixed solution during EMR of colorectal neoplasia. METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, controlled study of a total of 212 neoplastic colon polyps (5-20 mm) subjected to EMR in a single tertiary university hospital. The patients were randomized into two groups according to whether or not indigo carmine mixed solution was used, and the complete resection rate (CRR) after EMR was evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 212 neoplastic polyps (normal saline group, 115; indigo carmine group, 97) were successfully removed by EMR. There was no significant difference in the CRR (92.8 vs. 89.6%, p = 0.414) or macroscopic delineation (86.0 vs. 93.8%, p = 0.118) between the two groups. In a separate analysis of sessile serrated adenomas/polyps (SSAs/Ps), macroscopic delineation was better in the indigo carmine group than the normal saline group (87.5 vs. 53.8%), albeit not significantly (p = 0.103). In univariate analyses, the CRR was significantly related to polyp location, polyp morphology, macroscopic delineation, and pathologic findings. In a multiple logistic regression analysis, macroscopic delineation (odds ratio (OR), 7.616, p = 0.001) and polyp pathology (OR, 8.621; p < 0.001) were significantly associated with the CRR. CONCLUSIONS:Submucosal injection with indigo carmine mixed solution did not improve the CRR or macroscopic delineation of EMR of colorectal neoplasias.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Submucosal injection with indigo carmine mixed solution can improve the delineation of colorectal neoplasia during endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). Thus, the aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of submucosal injection with indigo carmine mixed solution during EMR of colorectal neoplasia. METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, controlled study of a total of 212 neoplastic colon polyps (5-20 mm) subjected to EMR in a single tertiary university hospital. The patients were randomized into two groups according to whether or not indigo carmine mixed solution was used, and the complete resection rate (CRR) after EMR was evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 212 neoplastic polyps (normal saline group, 115; indigo carmine group, 97) were successfully removed by EMR. There was no significant difference in the CRR (92.8 vs. 89.6%, p = 0.414) or macroscopic delineation (86.0 vs. 93.8%, p = 0.118) between the two groups. In a separate analysis of sessile serrated adenomas/polyps (SSAs/Ps), macroscopic delineation was better in the indigo carmine group than the normal saline group (87.5 vs. 53.8%), albeit not significantly (p = 0.103). In univariate analyses, the CRR was significantly related to polyp location, polyp morphology, macroscopic delineation, and pathologic findings. In a multiple logistic regression analysis, macroscopic delineation (odds ratio (OR), 7.616, p = 0.001) and polyp pathology (OR, 8.621; p < 0.001) were significantly associated with the CRR. CONCLUSIONS: Submucosal injection with indigo carmine mixed solution did not improve the CRR or macroscopic delineation of EMR of colorectal neoplasias.
Authors: Douglas J Robertson; David A Lieberman; Sidney J Winawer; Dennis J Ahnen; John A Baron; Arthur Schatzkin; Amanda J Cross; Ann G Zauber; Timothy R Church; Peter Lance; E Robert Greenberg; María Elena Martínez Journal: Gut Date: 2013-06-21 Impact factor: 23.059
Authors: Bo Kyung Kim; Sung Pil Hong; Hyun Mi Heo; Jin Young Kim; Hyuk Hur; Kang Young Lee; Jae Hee Cheon; Tae Il Kim; Won Ho Kim Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2011-12-09 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Douglas K Rex; Dennis J Ahnen; John A Baron; Kenneth P Batts; Carol A Burke; Randall W Burt; John R Goldblum; José G Guillem; Charles J Kahi; Matthew F Kalady; Michael J O'Brien; Robert D Odze; Shuji Ogino; Susan Parry; Dale C Snover; Emina Emilia Torlakovic; Paul E Wise; Joanne Young; James Church Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2012-06-19 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Alan Moss; Michael J Bourke; Stephen J Williams; Luke F Hourigan; Gregor Brown; William Tam; Rajvinder Singh; Simon Zanati; Robert Y Chen; Karen Byth Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2011-03-08 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Carola Rotermund; Roupen Djinbachian; Mahsa Taghiakbari; Markus D Enderle; Axel Eickhoff; Daniel von Renteln Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2022-08-07 Impact factor: 5.374