Cargando…

Internal traction method using a spring-and-loop with clip (S–O clip) allows countertraction in gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection

BACKGROUND: Insufficient countertraction and poor field of vision make endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) difficult. Internal traction method using a spring-and-loop with clip (SLC) allows sufficient traction in any direction and good field of vision. However, the attachment procedure is difficu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Nagata, Mitsuru
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7326859/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32350668
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-020-07590-9
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Insufficient countertraction and poor field of vision make endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) difficult. Internal traction method using a spring-and-loop with clip (SLC) allows sufficient traction in any direction and good field of vision. However, the attachment procedure is difficult and interference with the endoscope can occur in the retroflexed endoscopic position. We have developed a new use of SLC that simplifies the attachment procedure, eliminating interference with the endoscope. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of SLC for gastric ESD. METHODS: We retrospectively recruited 140 patients with gastric neoplasms who underwent ESD between November 2015 and October 2018 at our department. Among them, 51 patients treated using SLC-assisted ESD (SLC-ESD) and 89 patients treated using conventional ESD (C-ESD) were compared. Propensity score matching was performed to compensate for the differences in age, sex, lesion location, lesion position, specimen size, and ulcer findings. The primary outcome was ESD procedure time. RESULTS: Propensity score matching generated 51 matched pairs. The procedure time in the SLC-ESD group was significantly shorter than that in the C-ESD group (median [interquartile], 40.0 [27.0–81.5] minutes versus 69.0 [46.5–113.5] minutes, P = 0.008). The mean SLC attachment time was 2.08 min. There were no significant differences in complete en bloc resection rate between SLC-ESD and C-ESD groups (100% versus 96.1%, P = 0.495). There were not perforation cases in either group. CONCLUSIONS: SLC may offer an efficient method for gastric ESD, with a short attachment procedure time. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00464-020-07590-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.