A comparison of two endoscopic closures: over-the-scope clip (OTSC) versus KING closure (endoloop + clips) in a randomized long-term experimental study
Language English Country Germany Media print-electronic
Document type Comparative Study, Journal Article
PubMed
26956361
DOI
10.1007/s00464-016-4831-z
PII: 10.1007/s00464-016-4831-z
Knihovny.cz E-resources
- Keywords
- Endoscopic closure, KING closure, NOTES, Over-the-scope clip (OTSC),
- MeSH
- Surgical Wound pathology MeSH
- Surgical Instruments * MeSH
- Colon, Sigmoid pathology surgery MeSH
- Endoscopy MeSH
- Wound Healing * MeSH
- Longitudinal Studies MeSH
- Swine, Miniature MeSH
- Random Allocation MeSH
- Swine MeSH
- Sigmoidoscopy methods MeSH
- Sus scrofa MeSH
- Wound Closure Techniques * MeSH
- Animals MeSH
- Check Tag
- Animals MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Comparative Study MeSH
BACKGROUND: Both over-the-scope clip (OTSC) and KING (endoloop + clips) closures provide reliable and safe full-thickness endoscopic closure. Nevertheless, OTSC clip demonstrated significantly inferior histological healing in the short-term follow-up. AIM: To compare OTSC versus KING closure of a perforation with regard to long-term effectiveness and macroscopic and histological quality of healing. METHODS: We performed a randomized experimental study with 16 mini-pigs (mean weight 43.2 ± 11.2 kg). A standardized perforation was performed on the anterior sigmoid wall. KING closure (n = 8) was attained by approximation of an endoloop fixed to the margins of a perforation with endoclips. OTSC closure (n = 8) was performed by deploying OTSC (OVESCO) over the defect. Pigs underwent a control sigmoidoscopy 8 months after the closure to assess the macroscopic quality of healing. Then, autopsy was performed and the rectosigmoid was sent for histopathological assessment. RESULTS: All closures were completed successfully without air leaks. The duration of closure was similar in both techniques (OTSC 17.8 ± 7.6 min vs. KING 19.6 ± 8.8 min). At autopsy, all KING closures (100 %) were healed with a flat scar without signs of leakage. Microscopically, no inflammatory changes were observed after KING closure. In the OTSC group, microscopic ulcers were present in two pigs (25 %), cryptal abscesses in three pigs (38 %) and significant neutrophil accumulation in all eight pigs (P < 0.01). Giant cell granulomas, dysplasia or abundant scarification was not observed in either group. CONCLUSIONS: Both OTSC and KING closures offer a long-term reliable seal of a gastrointestinal perforation without stenosis or fistulas. KING closure provides long-term histologically superior healing.
Department of Clinical Studies Faculty of Medicine University of Ostrava Ostrava Czech Republic
Department of Pathology Institute for Clinical and Experimental Medicine Prague Czech Republic
Institute of Animal Physiology and Genetics AS CR v v i Libechov Czech Republic
Surgery Department Horovice Hospital Horovice Czech Republic
See more in PubMed
Endoscopy. 2008 Jul;40(7):584-8 PubMed
Endoscopy. 2014 Aug;46(8):693-711 PubMed
Endoscopy. 2009 Feb;41(2):149-53 PubMed
J Am Coll Surg. 2010 Apr;210(4):480-90 PubMed
BMC Gastroenterol. 2015 Jan 22;15:5 PubMed
Gastrointest Endosc. 2015 Oct;82(4):618-28.e5 PubMed
Surg Endosc. 2012 Jul;26(7):1952-62 PubMed
Gastrointest Endosc. 2010 Apr;71(4):806-11 PubMed
Surg Endosc. 1999 May;13(5):484-7 PubMed
Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol. 2012 Jul;21(4):249-58 PubMed
Endoscopy. 2009 Jun;41(6):493-7 PubMed
World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2015 Jul 10;7(8):777-89 PubMed
Surg Endosc. 2013 Apr;27(4):1203-10 PubMed
Biomed Tech (Berl). 2008 Apr;53(2):45-51 PubMed
Surg Endosc. 2013 Jul;27(7):2258-74 PubMed
Surg Endosc. 2011 Sep;25(9):2901-5 PubMed
Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne. 2012 Dec;7(4):233-9 PubMed
Endoscopy. 2009 Dec;41(12):1056-61 PubMed
Gastrointest Endosc. 2009 Dec;70(6):1225-30 PubMed
