Tip-in versus conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for flat colorectal neoplasia 10 mm or larger in size
Purpose A modified endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) technique, Tip-in EMR, was recently introduced to enhance the complete resection of colorectal neoplasia (CRN). We aimed to evaluate the feasibility of Tip-in EMR for flat CRNs. Methods From January to September 2018, conventional or Tip-in EMR was consecutively performed for 112 flat CRNs ≥ 10 mm in diameter. Tip-in EMR was performed when en bloc snaring was impossible with conventional EMR or when a lesion was inadequately lifted owing to a previous forceps biopsy. We retrospectively collected the clinical, procedural, and histologic data of the conventional and Tip-in EMR groups and compared the en bloc resection rate, complete resection rate, and complications between the two groups. Results Among 112 flat CRNs of 80 patients, conventional EMR and Tip-in EMR were performed for 74 and 38 lesions, respectively. The median lesion size was 12 (10–27) mm. Tip-in EMR was superior to conventional EMR in terms of en bloc resection (94.7% vs. 77.0%, p = 0.018) and histologic complete resection (76.3% vs. 54.1%, p = 0.022). There was no difference in postprocedural bleeding between the two groups; however, overall adverse events, including bleeding and postpolypectomy electrocoagulation syndrome, were more frequent in the Tip-in EMR group. Conclusions Tip-in EMR is a feasible technique for flat colorectal lesions ≥ 10 mm and is superior to conventional EMR with respect to en bloc and complete resection rates. The safety profiles of Tip-in EMR and conventional EMR should be compared via large-scale prospective studies..
| Medienart: |
Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2020 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2020 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:35 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
International journal of colorectal disease - 35(2020), 7 vom: 28. Apr., Seite 1283-1290 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Noh, Soo Min [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
Volltext [lizenzpflichtig] |
|---|
| BKL: | |
|---|---|
| Themen: |
| RVK: |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2020 |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1007/s00384-020-03604-z |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
OLC2058699300 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | OLC2058699300 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230519080528.0 | ||
| 007 | tu | ||
| 008 | 200820s2020 xx ||||| 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/s00384-020-03604-z |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)OLC2058699300 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-He213)s00384-020-03604-z-p | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 610 |q VZ |
| 084 | |a XA 50991 |q VZ |2 rvk | ||
| 084 | |a 44.00 |2 bkl | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Noh, Soo Min |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Tip-in versus conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for flat colorectal neoplasia 10 mm or larger in size |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2020 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen |b n |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Band |b nc |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a © Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2020 | ||
| 520 | |a Purpose A modified endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) technique, Tip-in EMR, was recently introduced to enhance the complete resection of colorectal neoplasia (CRN). We aimed to evaluate the feasibility of Tip-in EMR for flat CRNs. Methods From January to September 2018, conventional or Tip-in EMR was consecutively performed for 112 flat CRNs ≥ 10 mm in diameter. Tip-in EMR was performed when en bloc snaring was impossible with conventional EMR or when a lesion was inadequately lifted owing to a previous forceps biopsy. We retrospectively collected the clinical, procedural, and histologic data of the conventional and Tip-in EMR groups and compared the en bloc resection rate, complete resection rate, and complications between the two groups. Results Among 112 flat CRNs of 80 patients, conventional EMR and Tip-in EMR were performed for 74 and 38 lesions, respectively. The median lesion size was 12 (10–27) mm. Tip-in EMR was superior to conventional EMR in terms of en bloc resection (94.7% vs. 77.0%, p = 0.018) and histologic complete resection (76.3% vs. 54.1%, p = 0.022). There was no difference in postprocedural bleeding between the two groups; however, overall adverse events, including bleeding and postpolypectomy electrocoagulation syndrome, were more frequent in the Tip-in EMR group. Conclusions Tip-in EMR is a feasible technique for flat colorectal lesions ≥ 10 mm and is superior to conventional EMR with respect to en bloc and complete resection rates. The safety profiles of Tip-in EMR and conventional EMR should be compared via large-scale prospective studies. | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Colon | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Rectum | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Endoscopic mucosal resection | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Neoplasm | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Kim, Jin Yong |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Park, Jae Cheol |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Oh, Eun Hye |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Kim, Jeongseok |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Ham, Nam Seok |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Hwang, Sung Wook |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Park, Sang Hyoung |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Ye, Byong Duk |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Byeon, Jeong-Sik |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Myung, Seung-Jae |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Yang, Suk-Kyun |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Yang, Dong-Hoon |0 (orcid)0000-0001-7756-2704 |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t International journal of colorectal disease |d Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1986 |g 35(2020), 7 vom: 28. Apr., Seite 1283-1290 |w (DE-627)129275409 |w (DE-600)84975-3 |w (DE-576)014464365 |x 0179-1958 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:35 |g year:2020 |g number:7 |g day:28 |g month:04 |g pages:1283-1290 |
| 856 | 4 | 1 | |u https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-020-03604-z |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_OLC | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-DE-84 | ||
| 936 | r | v | |a XA 50991 |
| 936 | b | k | |a 44.00 |q VZ |
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 35 |j 2020 |e 7 |b 28 |c 04 |h 1283-1290 | ||