Cargando…
Resection depth and layer of underwater versus conventional endoscopic mucosal resection of intermediate-sized colorectal polyps: A pilot study
Background and study aims Curability of colorectal tumors is associated with resection depth and layer in endoscopic resection. Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) has not undergone sufficient histopathological evaluation. We conducted a pilot study to compare the effectiveness, includin...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
2022
|
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9377830/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35979030 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-1864-6452 |
_version_ | 1784768414173102080 |
---|---|
author | Nomura, Hiroki Tsuji, Shigetsugu Utsunomiya, Manami Kawasaki, Azusa Tsuji, Kunihiro Yoshida, Naohiro Takemura, Kenichi Katayanagi, Kazuyoshi Minato, Hiroshi Doyama, Hisashi |
author_facet | Nomura, Hiroki Tsuji, Shigetsugu Utsunomiya, Manami Kawasaki, Azusa Tsuji, Kunihiro Yoshida, Naohiro Takemura, Kenichi Katayanagi, Kazuyoshi Minato, Hiroshi Doyama, Hisashi |
author_sort | Nomura, Hiroki |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background and study aims Curability of colorectal tumors is associated with resection depth and layer in endoscopic resection. Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) has not undergone sufficient histopathological evaluation. We conducted a pilot study to compare the effectiveness, including resection depth and layer, of UEMR and conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (CEMR). Patients and methods This study was a single-center, retrospective study. Patients with colorectal lesions were treated by UEMR or CEMR between January 2018 and March 2020. Eligible patients were selected from included patients in a 1:1 ratio using propensity score matching. We compared the resection depth and layer and treatment results between the UEMR and CEMR groups. Results We evaluated 55 patients undergoing UEMR and 291 patients undergoing CEMR. Using propensity score matching, we analyzed 54 lesions in each group. The proportion of specimens containing submucosal tissue was 100 % in both groups. The median thickness of the submucosal tissue was significantly greater in the CEMR group than in the UEMR group [1235 µm (95 % confidence interval [CI], 1020–1530 µm) vs. 950 µm (95 % CI, 830–1090 µm), respectively]. However, vertical margins were negative in all lesions in both groups. Conclusions Our findings suggest that the median thickness of submucosal tissue in the UEMR group was about 1,000 μm. Even though the resection depth achieved with UEMR was more superficial than that achieved with CEMR, UEMR may be a treatment option, especially for colorectal lesions ≤ 20 mm in diameter without suspicious findings of submucosal deeply invasive cancer. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9377830 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Georg Thieme Verlag KG |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-93778302022-08-16 Resection depth and layer of underwater versus conventional endoscopic mucosal resection of intermediate-sized colorectal polyps: A pilot study Nomura, Hiroki Tsuji, Shigetsugu Utsunomiya, Manami Kawasaki, Azusa Tsuji, Kunihiro Yoshida, Naohiro Takemura, Kenichi Katayanagi, Kazuyoshi Minato, Hiroshi Doyama, Hisashi Endosc Int Open Background and study aims Curability of colorectal tumors is associated with resection depth and layer in endoscopic resection. Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) has not undergone sufficient histopathological evaluation. We conducted a pilot study to compare the effectiveness, including resection depth and layer, of UEMR and conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (CEMR). Patients and methods This study was a single-center, retrospective study. Patients with colorectal lesions were treated by UEMR or CEMR between January 2018 and March 2020. Eligible patients were selected from included patients in a 1:1 ratio using propensity score matching. We compared the resection depth and layer and treatment results between the UEMR and CEMR groups. Results We evaluated 55 patients undergoing UEMR and 291 patients undergoing CEMR. Using propensity score matching, we analyzed 54 lesions in each group. The proportion of specimens containing submucosal tissue was 100 % in both groups. The median thickness of the submucosal tissue was significantly greater in the CEMR group than in the UEMR group [1235 µm (95 % confidence interval [CI], 1020–1530 µm) vs. 950 µm (95 % CI, 830–1090 µm), respectively]. However, vertical margins were negative in all lesions in both groups. Conclusions Our findings suggest that the median thickness of submucosal tissue in the UEMR group was about 1,000 μm. Even though the resection depth achieved with UEMR was more superficial than that achieved with CEMR, UEMR may be a treatment option, especially for colorectal lesions ≤ 20 mm in diameter without suspicious findings of submucosal deeply invasive cancer. Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2022-08-15 /pmc/articles/PMC9377830/ /pubmed/35979030 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-1864-6452 Text en The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) 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 | Nomura, Hiroki Tsuji, Shigetsugu Utsunomiya, Manami Kawasaki, Azusa Tsuji, Kunihiro Yoshida, Naohiro Takemura, Kenichi Katayanagi, Kazuyoshi Minato, Hiroshi Doyama, Hisashi Resection depth and layer of underwater versus conventional endoscopic mucosal resection of intermediate-sized colorectal polyps: A pilot study |
title | Resection depth and layer of underwater versus conventional endoscopic mucosal resection of intermediate-sized colorectal polyps: A pilot study |
title_full | Resection depth and layer of underwater versus conventional endoscopic mucosal resection of intermediate-sized colorectal polyps: A pilot study |
title_fullStr | Resection depth and layer of underwater versus conventional endoscopic mucosal resection of intermediate-sized colorectal polyps: A pilot study |
title_full_unstemmed | Resection depth and layer of underwater versus conventional endoscopic mucosal resection of intermediate-sized colorectal polyps: A pilot study |
title_short | Resection depth and layer of underwater versus conventional endoscopic mucosal resection of intermediate-sized colorectal polyps: A pilot study |
title_sort | resection depth and layer of underwater versus conventional endoscopic mucosal resection of intermediate-sized colorectal polyps: a pilot study |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9377830/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35979030 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-1864-6452 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT nomurahiroki resectiondepthandlayerofunderwaterversusconventionalendoscopicmucosalresectionofintermediatesizedcolorectalpolypsapilotstudy AT tsujishigetsugu resectiondepthandlayerofunderwaterversusconventionalendoscopicmucosalresectionofintermediatesizedcolorectalpolypsapilotstudy AT utsunomiyamanami resectiondepthandlayerofunderwaterversusconventionalendoscopicmucosalresectionofintermediatesizedcolorectalpolypsapilotstudy AT kawasakiazusa resectiondepthandlayerofunderwaterversusconventionalendoscopicmucosalresectionofintermediatesizedcolorectalpolypsapilotstudy AT tsujikunihiro resectiondepthandlayerofunderwaterversusconventionalendoscopicmucosalresectionofintermediatesizedcolorectalpolypsapilotstudy AT yoshidanaohiro resectiondepthandlayerofunderwaterversusconventionalendoscopicmucosalresectionofintermediatesizedcolorectalpolypsapilotstudy AT takemurakenichi resectiondepthandlayerofunderwaterversusconventionalendoscopicmucosalresectionofintermediatesizedcolorectalpolypsapilotstudy AT katayanagikazuyoshi resectiondepthandlayerofunderwaterversusconventionalendoscopicmucosalresectionofintermediatesizedcolorectalpolypsapilotstudy AT minatohiroshi resectiondepthandlayerofunderwaterversusconventionalendoscopicmucosalresectionofintermediatesizedcolorectalpolypsapilotstudy AT doyamahisashi resectiondepthandlayerofunderwaterversusconventionalendoscopicmucosalresectionofintermediatesizedcolorectalpolypsapilotstudy |