| Literature DB >> 30835010 |
Keitaro Takahashi1, Mikihiro Fujiya2, Nobuhiro Ueno1, Takeshi Saito1, Yuya Sugiyama1, Yuki Murakami1, Takuya Iwama1, Takahiro Sasaki3, Masami Ijiri1, Kazuyuki Tanaka1, Aki Sakatani1, Katsuyoshi Ando1, Yoshiki Nomura1, Shin Kashima1, Mitsuru Goto4, Kentaro Moriichi1, Toshikatsu Okumura1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Steroid therapy is primarily used to prevent esophageal stricture after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). However, esophageal stricture can still occur after preventive therapy, and the effect of preventive steroid therapy cannot be predicted before stricture formation. This study aimed to clarify the risk factors for esophageal stricture after preventive steroid therapy.Entities:
Keywords: Endoscopic submucosal dissection; Esophageal stricture; Prediction; Prevention; White coat
Year: 2019 PMID: 30835010 PMCID: PMC6592961 DOI: 10.1007/s10388-019-00659-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Esophagus ISSN: 1612-9059 Impact factor: 4.230
Fig. 1The white coats and blood vessels of the artificial ulcers after esophageal ESD. The groups were defined by visually according to the appearance of the artificial ulcer: in the thin white coat group, blood vessels were clearly visible (a); in the moderately thick white coat group, blood vessels that were partially visible (b); in the thick white coat group, no blood vessels were visible (c)
The clinicopathological features of the stricture and non-stricture groups
| Stricture ( | Non-stricture ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, mean ± SD (years) | 67.2 ± 10.4 | 68.2 ± 11.8 | 0.811 |
| Sex | 0.653 | ||
| Male | 8 | 14 | |
| Female | 3 | 3 | |
| Tumor location | 0.121 | ||
| Cervical esophagus | 1 | 0 | |
| Upper thoracic esophagus | 1 | 2 | |
| Mid-thoracic esophagus | 3 | 11 | |
| Lower thoracic esophagus | 6 | 4 | |
| Circumference | 0.076 | ||
| Circumferential defect | 5 | 2 | |
| 3/4 < Circumferential defect | 6 | 15 | |
| Size of tumor, mean ± SD (mm) | 43.2 ± 15.6 | 40.7 ± 17.6 | 0.707 |
| Size of resected specimen, mean ± SD (mm) | 53.0 ± 12.8 | 52.7 ± 11.5 | 0.950 |
| Depth of invasion | 0.353 | ||
| T1b | 3 | 2 | |
| T1a | 8 | 15 | |
| Lymphatic invasion | 0 | 2 | 0.505 |
| Venous invasion | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| 10 | 17 | 0.393 | |
| ESD procedure time, mean ± SD (min) | 151 ± 77 | 143 ± 57 | 0.766 |
| Stricture prevention | 0.653 | ||
| Oral steroid administration | 3 | 3 | |
| Local steroid injection | 8 | 14 | |
| White coat | 0.007 | ||
| Thick | 6 | 1 | |
| Moderately thick | 4 | 7 | |
| Thin | 1 | 9 |
SD Standard deviation
Predictors associated with the esophageal stricture
| Variables | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR (95% CI) |
| OR (95% CI) |
| |
| Age (≥ 65 vs. < 65*) (years) | 0.74 (0.11–5.07) | 1 | ||
| Sex (male vs. female*) | 0.58 (0.06–5.43) | 0.653 | ||
| Tumor location (Ce-Ut vs. Mt-Lt*) | 1.64 (0.10–26.35) | 1 | ||
| Circumference (entire vs. 3/4 < *) | 5.80 (0.71–76.95) | 0.076 | 3.13 (0.34–28.7) | 0.312 |
| Size of tumor (≥ 40 vs. < 40 mm*) | 0.52 (0.08–3.03) | 0.460 | ||
| Size of resected specimen (≥ 50 vs. < 50 mm*) | 0.85 (0.14–5.09) | 1 | ||
| Depth of invasion (pT1b vs. pT1a*) | 2.70 (0.25–38.82) | 0.353 | ||
| time (≥ 150 vs. < 150 min*) | 1.68 (0.29–10.32) | 0.700 | ||
| Stricture prevention (OS vs. LSI*) | 1.71 (0.18–16.12) | 0.653 | ||
| White coat (Thick vs. Thin-Mod*) | 16.86 (1.53–930.07) | 0.007 | 13.70 (1.22–154.00) | 0.034 |
An asterisk was entered in the reference category for each variable to estimate the stricture odds ratio
OR Odds ratios, 95% CI 95% confidence interval, Ce cervical esophagus, Ut upper thoracic esophagus, Mt mid-thoracic esophagus, Lt lower thoracic esophagus, LSI local steroid injection, OS oral steroid, Thin-Mod thin-moderately thick white coats