Detail
Článek
Článek online
FT
Medvik - BMČ
  • Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Endoscopic full-thickness resection versus endoscopic submucosal dissection in the treatment of colonic neoplastic lesions ≤ 30 mm-a single-center experience

P. Falt, J. Zapletalová, O. Urban

. 2022 ; 36 (3) : 2062-2069. [pub] 20210415

Jazyk angličtina Země Německo

Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, práce podpořená grantem

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc22010921
E-zdroje Online Plný text

NLK ProQuest Central od 2000-01-01 do Před 1 rokem
Nursing & Allied Health Database (ProQuest) od 2000-01-01 do Před 1 rokem
Health & Medicine (ProQuest) od 2000-01-01 do Před 1 rokem

Endoscopic full-thickness resection (FTR) is a novel technique of endoscopic treatment of colorectal neoplastic lesions not suitable for endoscopic polypectomy or mucosal resection. FTR appears to be a reasonable alternative to technically demanding endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for lesions ≤ 30 mm. However, comparison between FTR and ESD has not been published yet and their mutual positioning in the treatment algorithm is still unclear. The purpose of the analysis was to evaluate efficacy and safety of FTR in the treatment of colorectal lesions ≤ 30 mm by comparing prospectively followed FTR cohort to retrospective ESD cohort in the setting of single tertiary endoscopy center. Primary outcomes were technical success rate, R0 resection and curative resection rate, and complication rate. A total of 52 patients in FTR and 50 patients in ESD group were treated between 2015 and 2018. Technical success rate was significantly higher in FTR group (92 vs. 74%, P = 0.01) as well as R0 resection rate (85 vs. 62%, P = 0.01) and curative resection rate (75 vs. 56%, P = 0.01). Complications occurred more frequently in ESD group (40 vs. 13%, P = 0.002), mainly due to high incidence of electrocoagulation syndrome (24 vs. 0%). Total procedure time was substantially shorter in FTR group (26.4 ± 11.0 min vs. estimated 90-240 min). Local residual neoplastic lesions were detected numerically more often in FTR group (12 vs. 5%, P = 0.12). No patient died during follow-up. Compared to ESD, FTR proved significantly higher technical success rate, higher R0 and curative resection rate, and shorter procedure time. In the FTR group, there were significantly less complications but higher incidence of local residual neoplasia. Further research including randomized trials is needed to compare both resection techniques.

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc22010921
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20220506130206.0
007      
ta
008      
220425s2022 gw f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1007/s00464-021-08492-0 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)33860350
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a gw
100    1_
$a Falt, Přemysl $u University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine, 2nd Department of Internal Medicine, Gastroenterology and Geriatrics, Palacký University, Olomouc, Czech Republic
245    10
$a Endoscopic full-thickness resection versus endoscopic submucosal dissection in the treatment of colonic neoplastic lesions ≤ 30 mm-a single-center experience / $c P. Falt, J. Zapletalová, O. Urban
520    9_
$a Endoscopic full-thickness resection (FTR) is a novel technique of endoscopic treatment of colorectal neoplastic lesions not suitable for endoscopic polypectomy or mucosal resection. FTR appears to be a reasonable alternative to technically demanding endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for lesions ≤ 30 mm. However, comparison between FTR and ESD has not been published yet and their mutual positioning in the treatment algorithm is still unclear. The purpose of the analysis was to evaluate efficacy and safety of FTR in the treatment of colorectal lesions ≤ 30 mm by comparing prospectively followed FTR cohort to retrospective ESD cohort in the setting of single tertiary endoscopy center. Primary outcomes were technical success rate, R0 resection and curative resection rate, and complication rate. A total of 52 patients in FTR and 50 patients in ESD group were treated between 2015 and 2018. Technical success rate was significantly higher in FTR group (92 vs. 74%, P = 0.01) as well as R0 resection rate (85 vs. 62%, P = 0.01) and curative resection rate (75 vs. 56%, P = 0.01). Complications occurred more frequently in ESD group (40 vs. 13%, P = 0.002), mainly due to high incidence of electrocoagulation syndrome (24 vs. 0%). Total procedure time was substantially shorter in FTR group (26.4 ± 11.0 min vs. estimated 90-240 min). Local residual neoplastic lesions were detected numerically more often in FTR group (12 vs. 5%, P = 0.12). No patient died during follow-up. Compared to ESD, FTR proved significantly higher technical success rate, higher R0 and curative resection rate, and shorter procedure time. In the FTR group, there were significantly less complications but higher incidence of local residual neoplasia. Further research including randomized trials is needed to compare both resection techniques.
650    12
$a kolorektální nádory $x chirurgie $7 D015179
650    12
$a endoskopická mukózní resekce $x škodlivé účinky $x metody $7 D000069916
650    _2
$a gastrointestinální endoskopie $7 D016099
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    _2
$a lokální recidiva nádoru $x chirurgie $7 D009364
650    _2
$a retrospektivní studie $7 D012189
650    _2
$a výsledek terapie $7 D016896
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
655    _2
$a práce podpořená grantem $7 D013485
700    1_
$a Zapletalová, Jana $u Department of Medical Biophysics, Faculty of Medicine, Palacký University, Olomouc, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Urban, Ondřej $u University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine, 2nd Department of Internal Medicine, Gastroenterology and Geriatrics, Palacký University, Olomouc, Czech Republic. ondrej.urban@fnol.cz
773    0_
$w MED00004464 $t Surgical endoscopy $x 1432-2218 $g Roč. 36, č. 3 (2022), s. 2062-2069
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33860350 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y p $z 0
990    __
$a 20220425 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20220506130159 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1788844 $s 1162119
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2022 $b 36 $c 3 $d 2062-2069 $e 20210415 $i 1432-2218 $m Surgical endoscopy $n Surg Endosc $x MED00004464
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20220425

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Nahrávání dat ...

Možnosti archivace

Nahrávání dat ...