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: |
E-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: |
doi: |
10.1007/s00384-020-03604-z |
---|
funding: |
|
---|---|
Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
PPN (Katalog-ID): |
SPR040157482 |
---|
LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
001 | SPR040157482 | ||
003 | DE-627 | ||
005 | 20230519113108.0 | ||
007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
008 | 201007s2020 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/s00384-020-03604-z |2 doi | |
035 | |a (DE-627)SPR040157482 | ||
035 | |a (SPR)s00384-020-03604-z-e | ||
040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
041 | |a eng | ||
082 | 0 | 4 | |a 610 |q ASE |
084 | |a 44.87 |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 Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
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 |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
650 | 4 | |a Rectum |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
650 | 4 | |a Endoscopic mucosal resection |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
650 | 4 | |a Neoplasm |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
700 | 1 | |a Kim, Jin Yong |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Park, Jae Cheol |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Oh, Eun Hye |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Kim, Jeongseok |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Ham, Nam Seok |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Hwang, Sung Wook |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Park, Sang Hyoung |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Ye, Byong Duk |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Byeon, Jeong-Sik |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Myung, Seung-Jae |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Yang, Suk-Kyun |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Yang, Dong-Hoon |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t International journal of colorectal disease |d Berlin : Springer, 1986 |g 35(2020), 7 vom: 28. Apr., Seite 1283-1290 |w (DE-627)SPR004734459 |w (DE-600)1459217-4 |x 1432-1262 |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 | 0 | |u https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00384-020-03604-z |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
912 | |a GBV_SPRINGER | ||
912 | |a SSG-OLC-PHA | ||
936 | b | k | |a 44.87 |q ASE |
951 | |a AR | ||
952 | |d 35 |j 2020 |e 7 |b 28 |c 04 |h 1283-1290 |