Literature DB >> 30227392

Differences in Clinical Course of Intraprocedural and Delayed Perforation Caused by Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Colorectal Neoplasms: A Retrospective Study.

Taro Iwatsubo1, Yoji Takeuchi2, Yasushi Yamasaki1,3, Kentaro Nakagawa1, Masamichi Arao1, Masayasu Ohmori1, Hiroyoshi Iwagami1, Kenshi Matsuno1, Shuntaro Inoue1, Hiroko Nakahira1, Noriko Matsuura1, Satoki Shichijo1, Akira Maekawa1, Takashi Kanesaka1, Sachiko Yamamoto1, Koji Higashino1, Noriya Uedo1, Ryu Ishihara1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although the use of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) as a minimally invasive treatment for large superficial colorectal neoplasms is increasing, colorectal ESD remains technically challenging. As perforation in the colorectum is generally considered to be associated with a higher risk of complications, the aim of this study was to investigate the characteristics of perforation caused by colorectal ESD.
METHODS: This retrospective study included 635 lesions treated with colorectal ESD, between February 2011 and December 2015, in a tertiary cancer center. We evaluated and compared the clinical course and short-term outcomes of the intraprocedural perforation group with those of the delayed perforation and no perforation groups.
RESULTS: Perforation occurred in 45 (7.1%) of the 635 cases. Thirty-six cases were intraprocedural perforation (5.7%), all of which were successfully closed with endoclips during the procedure. Nine cases of delayed perforation occurred (1.4%). No emergency surgery was performed in the intraprocedural perforation group; however, 5 of 9 cases underwent emergency surgery in the delayed perforation group (56%, p < 0.0001). There were statistically significant differences between the intraprocedural and delayed perforation groups with regard to the hospitalization period, fasting period, abdominal pain scale, peak white blood cell (WBC) count, and peak C-reactive protein (CRP), and between the intraprocedural and no perforation groups with regard to the location of the lesion, hospitalization period, fasting period, abdominal pain scale, peak WBC, peak CRP, and en bloc resection rate.
CONCLUSIONS: While intraprocedural perforation due to colorectal ESD can be managed conservatively, delayed perforation can lead to serious adverse events.
© 2018 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Colorectal neoplasms; Complication; Delayed perforation; Endoscopic submucosal dissection; Intraprocedural perforation

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30227392     DOI: 10.1159/000492868

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dig Dis        ISSN: 0257-2753            Impact factor:   2.404


  3 in total

1.  Factors for conversion risk of colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: a multicenter study.

Authors:  Yuki Kamigaichi; Shiro Oka; Shinji Tanaka; Shinji Nagata; Masaki Kunihiro; Toshio Kuwai; Yuko Hiraga; Akira Furudoi; Seiji Onogawa; Hideharu Okanobu; Takeshi Mizumoto; Tomohiro Miwata; Shiro Okamoto; Kenichi Yoshimura; Kazuaki Chayama
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2022-05-17       Impact factor: 3.453

2.  Very Delayed Perforation after Esophageal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection and Intralesional Triamcinolone Injection.

Authors:  Taro Iwatsubo; Toshihisa Takeuchi; Sang-Woong Lee; Shinpei Kawaguchi; Kazuhiro Ota; Yuichi Kojima; Kazuhide Higuchi
Journal:  Case Rep Gastroenterol       Date:  2022-08-16

3.  Risk Stratification of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection in Colon Tumors.

Authors:  Katarzyna Winter; Marcin Włodarczyk; Jakub Włodarczyk; Igor Dąbrowski; Ewa Małecka-Wojciesko; Adam Dziki; Michał Spychalski
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-03-12       Impact factor: 4.241

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.