Cargando…

Predictors of technical difficulty with duodenal ESD

Background and study aims  Duodenal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is still considered technically challenging; however, few studies have objectively analyzed predictors of the technical difficulty. Therefore, the aim of the current study was to elucidate predictors of the technical difficul...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kato, Motohiko, Sasaki, Motoki, Mizutani, Mari, Tsutsumi, Koshiro, Kiguchi, Yoshiyuki, Akimoto, Teppei, Mutaguchi, Makoto, Nakayama, Atsushi, Takabayashi, Kaoru, Fujimoto, Ai, Ochiai, Yasutoshi, Maehata, Tadateru, Kanai, Takanori, Yahagi, Naohisa
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: © Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2019
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6904240/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31828213
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-0967-4744
_version_ 1783477969883234304
author Kato, Motohiko
Sasaki, Motoki
Mizutani, Mari
Tsutsumi, Koshiro
Kiguchi, Yoshiyuki
Akimoto, Teppei
Mutaguchi, Makoto
Nakayama, Atsushi
Takabayashi, Kaoru
Fujimoto, Ai
Ochiai, Yasutoshi
Maehata, Tadateru
Kanai, Takanori
Yahagi, Naohisa
author_facet Kato, Motohiko
Sasaki, Motoki
Mizutani, Mari
Tsutsumi, Koshiro
Kiguchi, Yoshiyuki
Akimoto, Teppei
Mutaguchi, Makoto
Nakayama, Atsushi
Takabayashi, Kaoru
Fujimoto, Ai
Ochiai, Yasutoshi
Maehata, Tadateru
Kanai, Takanori
Yahagi, Naohisa
author_sort Kato, Motohiko
collection PubMed
description Background and study aims  Duodenal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is still considered technically challenging; however, few studies have objectively analyzed predictors of the technical difficulty. Therefore, the aim of the current study was to elucidate predictors of the technical difficulty of duodenal ESD. Patients and methods  This was a retrospective observational study. From June 2010 to June 2017, a total of 174 consecutive patients with superficial duodenal epithelial neoplasia who underwent ESD were included in this study. We tried to identify predictors for technical difficulty of ESD by defining technical difficulty as either procedure time > 100 minutes or intraprocedural perforation. Moreover, we constructed a scoring system consisting of factors that were significant in the multivariate analysis. Results  The proportion of patients with technical difficulty was 34.5 %. In the multivariate analysis, lesion location in flexural part [odds ratio (OR), 2.61; 95 % confidence interval (CI), 1.02 – 6.68], larger lesion size (> 40 mm) (OR, 5.26; 95% CI, 2.15 – 12.9), and occupied circumference > 50 % of the duodenum (OR, 5.80; 95 % CI, 1.83 – 18.4) were associated with technical difficulty. Conclusion  A lesion location in flexural part, lesion size >40 mm and occupied circumference > 50 % were risk factors for technical difficulty of duodenal ESD.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6904240
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher © Georg Thieme Verlag KG
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69042402019-12-11 Predictors of technical difficulty with duodenal ESD Kato, Motohiko Sasaki, Motoki Mizutani, Mari Tsutsumi, Koshiro Kiguchi, Yoshiyuki Akimoto, Teppei Mutaguchi, Makoto Nakayama, Atsushi Takabayashi, Kaoru Fujimoto, Ai Ochiai, Yasutoshi Maehata, Tadateru Kanai, Takanori Yahagi, Naohisa Endosc Int Open Background and study aims  Duodenal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is still considered technically challenging; however, few studies have objectively analyzed predictors of the technical difficulty. Therefore, the aim of the current study was to elucidate predictors of the technical difficulty of duodenal ESD. Patients and methods  This was a retrospective observational study. From June 2010 to June 2017, a total of 174 consecutive patients with superficial duodenal epithelial neoplasia who underwent ESD were included in this study. We tried to identify predictors for technical difficulty of ESD by defining technical difficulty as either procedure time > 100 minutes or intraprocedural perforation. Moreover, we constructed a scoring system consisting of factors that were significant in the multivariate analysis. Results  The proportion of patients with technical difficulty was 34.5 %. In the multivariate analysis, lesion location in flexural part [odds ratio (OR), 2.61; 95 % confidence interval (CI), 1.02 – 6.68], larger lesion size (> 40 mm) (OR, 5.26; 95% CI, 2.15 – 12.9), and occupied circumference > 50 % of the duodenum (OR, 5.80; 95 % CI, 1.83 – 18.4) were associated with technical difficulty. Conclusion  A lesion location in flexural part, lesion size >40 mm and occupied circumference > 50 % were risk factors for technical difficulty of duodenal ESD. © Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2019-12 2019-12-10 /pmc/articles/PMC6904240/ /pubmed/31828213 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-0967-4744 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License, which permits unrestricted reproduction and distribution, for non-commercial purposes only; and use and reproduction, but not distribution, of adapted material for non-commercial purposes only, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Kato, Motohiko
Sasaki, Motoki
Mizutani, Mari
Tsutsumi, Koshiro
Kiguchi, Yoshiyuki
Akimoto, Teppei
Mutaguchi, Makoto
Nakayama, Atsushi
Takabayashi, Kaoru
Fujimoto, Ai
Ochiai, Yasutoshi
Maehata, Tadateru
Kanai, Takanori
Yahagi, Naohisa
Predictors of technical difficulty with duodenal ESD
title Predictors of technical difficulty with duodenal ESD
title_full Predictors of technical difficulty with duodenal ESD
title_fullStr Predictors of technical difficulty with duodenal ESD
title_full_unstemmed Predictors of technical difficulty with duodenal ESD
title_short Predictors of technical difficulty with duodenal ESD
title_sort predictors of technical difficulty with duodenal esd
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6904240/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31828213
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-0967-4744
work_keys_str_mv AT katomotohiko predictorsoftechnicaldifficultywithduodenalesd
AT sasakimotoki predictorsoftechnicaldifficultywithduodenalesd
AT mizutanimari predictorsoftechnicaldifficultywithduodenalesd
AT tsutsumikoshiro predictorsoftechnicaldifficultywithduodenalesd
AT kiguchiyoshiyuki predictorsoftechnicaldifficultywithduodenalesd
AT akimototeppei predictorsoftechnicaldifficultywithduodenalesd
AT mutaguchimakoto predictorsoftechnicaldifficultywithduodenalesd
AT nakayamaatsushi predictorsoftechnicaldifficultywithduodenalesd
AT takabayashikaoru predictorsoftechnicaldifficultywithduodenalesd
AT fujimotoai predictorsoftechnicaldifficultywithduodenalesd
AT ochiaiyasutoshi predictorsoftechnicaldifficultywithduodenalesd
AT maehatatadateru predictorsoftechnicaldifficultywithduodenalesd
AT kanaitakanori predictorsoftechnicaldifficultywithduodenalesd
AT yahaginaohisa predictorsoftechnicaldifficultywithduodenalesd