Literature DB >> 33707637

Differences between two sodium hyaluronate-based submucosal injection materials currently used in Japan based on viscosity analysis.

Ryohei Hirose1,2, Takuma Yoshida3, Yuji Naito3, Naoto Watanabe3, Hikaru Hashimoto3, Satoshi Sugino3, Risa Bandou4, Tomo Daidoji4, Ken Inoue3, Osamu Dohi3, Naohisa Yoshida3, Takaaki Nakaya4, Yoshito Itoh3.   

Abstract

In Japan, two 0.4% sodium hyaluronate (HA)-based submucosal injection materials (SIMs) are currently used in endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD): MucoUp (HA-Mc) and Ksmart (HA-Ks). HA-Mc and HA-Ks have the same concentration and are, thus, construed by most endoscopists to have no difference. Nevertheless, visual observation conveys the impression that HA-Ks have a higher viscosity than HA-Mc, suggesting that HA-Ks performs better than HA-Mc. This study aimed to examine the differences between HA-Mc and HA-Ks. HA-Ks exhibited higher viscosity due to greater weight-average molecular weight compared with HA-Mc. HA-Ks had significantly greater submucosal elevation height (SEH) than HA-Mc; the SEH of HA-Ks-80% (80% dilution of HA-Ks) was the same as that of HA-Mc. The ESD procedure time was significantly shorter with HA-Ks than with HA-Mc (15.2 ± 4.1 vs. 19.5 ± 5.9; P = 0.049). The total injection volume for HA-Ks was significantly lower than that for HA-Mc (10.8 ± 3.6 vs. 14.4 ± 4.6; P = 0.045). However, no significant difference in these items was observed between HA-Mc and HA-Ks-80%. HA-Mc and HA-Ks were considered to be almost the same. Nonetheless, HA-Ks exhibited higher viscosity and SIM performance than HA-Mc. HA-Ks-80% had almost the same performance as HA-Mc. Thus, understanding SIM performance and characteristics requires a focus on the viscosity of SIMs.

Entities:  

Year:  2021        PMID: 33707637      PMCID: PMC7952736          DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-85118-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Rep        ISSN: 2045-2322            Impact factor:   4.379


  32 in total

1.  Improving the accuracy of hyaluronic acid molecular weight estimation by conventional size exclusion chromatography.

Authors:  Sreeja Shanmuga Doss; Nirav Pravinbhai Bhatt; Guhan Jayaraman
Journal:  J Chromatogr B Analyt Technol Biomed Life Sci       Date:  2017-06-08       Impact factor: 3.205

2.  Optimal injection solution for endoscopic submucosal dissection: A randomized controlled trial of Western solutions in a porcine model.

Authors:  Neal Mehta; Andrew T Strong; Matheus Franco; Tyler Stevens; Prabhleen Chahal; Sunguk Jang; Rocio Lopez; Deepa Patil; Seichiiro Abe; Yutaka Saito; Toshio Uraoka; John Vargo; Amit Bhatt
Journal:  Dig Endosc       Date:  2017-12-27       Impact factor: 7.559

Review 3.  Application of hydrogels as submucosal fluid cushions for endoscopic mucosal resection and submucosal dissection.

Authors:  Masayuki Ishihara; Isao Kumano; Hidemi Hattori; Shingo Nakamura
Journal:  J Artif Organs       Date:  2015-05-23       Impact factor: 1.731

4.  Development of Sodium Polyacrylate-Based High-Performance Submucosal Injection Material with Pseudoplastic Fluid Characteristics.

Authors:  Ryohei Hirose; Naohisa Yoshida; Yuji Naito; Takuma Yoshida; Risa Bandou; Tomo Daidoji; Ken Inoue; Osamu Dohi; Hideyuki Konishi; Takaaki Nakaya; Yoshito Itoh
Journal:  ACS Biomater Sci Eng       Date:  2019-11-26

5.  Mechanism of Human Influenza Virus RNA Persistence and Virion Survival in Feces: Mucus Protects Virions From Acid and Digestive Juices.

Authors:  Ryohei Hirose; Takaaki Nakaya; Yuji Naito; Tomo Daidoji; Yohei Watanabe; Hiroaki Yasuda; Hideyuki Konishi; Yoshito Itoh
Journal:  J Infect Dis       Date:  2017-07-01       Impact factor: 5.226

6.  Development of a new ex vivo model for evaluation of endoscopic submucosal injection materials performance.

Authors:  Ryohei Hirose; Takaaki Nakaya; Yuji Naito; Tomo Daidoji; Hiroaki Yasuda; Hideyuki Konishi; Yoshito Itoh
Journal:  J Mech Behav Biomed Mater       Date:  2018-01-05

Review 7.  Size-exclusion chromatography (SEC) of branched polymers and polysaccharides.

Authors:  Marianne Gaborieau; Patrice Castignolles
Journal:  Anal Bioanal Chem       Date:  2010-10-22       Impact factor: 4.142

Review 8.  Normal saline solution versus other viscous solutions for submucosal injection during endoscopic mucosal resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Harathi Yandrapu; Madhav Desai; Sameer Siddique; Prashanth Vennalganti; Sreekar Vennalaganti; Sravanthi Parasa; Tarun Rai; Vijay Kanakadandi; Ajay Bansal; Mohammad Titi; Alessandro Repici; Matthew L Bechtold; Prateek Sharma; Abhishek Choudhary
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2016-12-08       Impact factor: 9.427

Review 9.  Training methods and models for colonoscopic insertion, endoscopic mucosal resection, and endoscopic submucosal dissection.

Authors:  Naohisa Yoshida; Nilesh Fernandopulle; Yutaka Inada; Yuji Naito; Yoshito Itoh
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2014-08-08       Impact factor: 3.199

Review 10.  Endoscopic submucosal dissection of early gastric cancer.

Authors:  Takuji Gotoda; Hironori Yamamoto; Roy M Soetikno
Journal:  J Gastroenterol       Date:  2006-11-09       Impact factor: 6.772

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.