Cargando…

A feasibility study comparing gel immersion endoscopic resection and underwater endoscopic mucosal resection for superficial nonampullary duodenal epithelial tumors

Background Although gel immersion endoscopic resection (GIER) is a potential alternative to underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) for superficial nonampullary duodenal epithelial tumors (SNADETs), comparisons between the two are currently insufficient. Methods 40 consecutive procedures perf...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Miyakawa, Akihiro, Kuwai, Toshio, Sakuma, Yukie, Kubota, Manabu, Nakamura, Akira, Itobayashi, Ei, Shimura, Haruhisa, Suzuki, Yoshio, Shimura, Kenji
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2022
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9974333/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35970190
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-1924-4711
_version_ 1784898707996540928
author Miyakawa, Akihiro
Kuwai, Toshio
Sakuma, Yukie
Kubota, Manabu
Nakamura, Akira
Itobayashi, Ei
Shimura, Haruhisa
Suzuki, Yoshio
Shimura, Kenji
author_facet Miyakawa, Akihiro
Kuwai, Toshio
Sakuma, Yukie
Kubota, Manabu
Nakamura, Akira
Itobayashi, Ei
Shimura, Haruhisa
Suzuki, Yoshio
Shimura, Kenji
author_sort Miyakawa, Akihiro
collection PubMed
description Background Although gel immersion endoscopic resection (GIER) is a potential alternative to underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) for superficial nonampullary duodenal epithelial tumors (SNADETs), comparisons between the two are currently insufficient. Methods 40 consecutive procedures performed in 35 patients were retrospectively reviewed; the primary outcome was procedure time, and the secondary outcomes were en bloc and R0 resection rates, tumor and specimen size, and adverse events. Results Lesions were divided into GIER (n = 22) and UEMR groups (n = 18). The median (range) procedure time was significantly shorter in the GIER group than in the UEMR group (2.75 [1–3.5] minutes vs. 3 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 minutes; P  = 0.01). The en bloc resection rate was 100 % in the GIER group, but only 83.3 % in the UEMR group. The R0 resection rate was significantly higher in the GIER group than in the UEMR group (95.5 % vs. 66.7 %; P  = 0.03). The median specimen size was larger in the GIER group than in the UEMR group (14 mm vs. 7.5 mm; P  < 0.001). The tumor size was not significantly different between the groups and no adverse events were observed. Conclusions GIER is efficacious and safe to treat SNADETs, although additional studies are needed.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9974333
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Georg Thieme Verlag KG
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-99743332023-03-01 A feasibility study comparing gel immersion endoscopic resection and underwater endoscopic mucosal resection for superficial nonampullary duodenal epithelial tumors Miyakawa, Akihiro Kuwai, Toshio Sakuma, Yukie Kubota, Manabu Nakamura, Akira Itobayashi, Ei Shimura, Haruhisa Suzuki, Yoshio Shimura, Kenji Endoscopy Background Although gel immersion endoscopic resection (GIER) is a potential alternative to underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) for superficial nonampullary duodenal epithelial tumors (SNADETs), comparisons between the two are currently insufficient. Methods 40 consecutive procedures performed in 35 patients were retrospectively reviewed; the primary outcome was procedure time, and the secondary outcomes were en bloc and R0 resection rates, tumor and specimen size, and adverse events. Results Lesions were divided into GIER (n = 22) and UEMR groups (n = 18). The median (range) procedure time was significantly shorter in the GIER group than in the UEMR group (2.75 [1–3.5] minutes vs. 3 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 minutes; P  = 0.01). The en bloc resection rate was 100 % in the GIER group, but only 83.3 % in the UEMR group. The R0 resection rate was significantly higher in the GIER group than in the UEMR group (95.5 % vs. 66.7 %; P  = 0.03). The median specimen size was larger in the GIER group than in the UEMR group (14 mm vs. 7.5 mm; P  < 0.001). The tumor size was not significantly different between the groups and no adverse events were observed. Conclusions GIER is efficacious and safe to treat SNADETs, although additional studies are needed. Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2022-10-10 /pmc/articles/PMC9974333/ /pubmed/35970190 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-1924-4711 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 Miyakawa, Akihiro
Kuwai, Toshio
Sakuma, Yukie
Kubota, Manabu
Nakamura, Akira
Itobayashi, Ei
Shimura, Haruhisa
Suzuki, Yoshio
Shimura, Kenji
A feasibility study comparing gel immersion endoscopic resection and underwater endoscopic mucosal resection for superficial nonampullary duodenal epithelial tumors
title A feasibility study comparing gel immersion endoscopic resection and underwater endoscopic mucosal resection for superficial nonampullary duodenal epithelial tumors
title_full A feasibility study comparing gel immersion endoscopic resection and underwater endoscopic mucosal resection for superficial nonampullary duodenal epithelial tumors
title_fullStr A feasibility study comparing gel immersion endoscopic resection and underwater endoscopic mucosal resection for superficial nonampullary duodenal epithelial tumors
title_full_unstemmed A feasibility study comparing gel immersion endoscopic resection and underwater endoscopic mucosal resection for superficial nonampullary duodenal epithelial tumors
title_short A feasibility study comparing gel immersion endoscopic resection and underwater endoscopic mucosal resection for superficial nonampullary duodenal epithelial tumors
title_sort feasibility study comparing gel immersion endoscopic resection and underwater endoscopic mucosal resection for superficial nonampullary duodenal epithelial tumors
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9974333/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35970190
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-1924-4711
work_keys_str_mv AT miyakawaakihiro afeasibilitystudycomparinggelimmersionendoscopicresectionandunderwaterendoscopicmucosalresectionforsuperficialnonampullaryduodenalepithelialtumors
AT kuwaitoshio afeasibilitystudycomparinggelimmersionendoscopicresectionandunderwaterendoscopicmucosalresectionforsuperficialnonampullaryduodenalepithelialtumors
AT sakumayukie afeasibilitystudycomparinggelimmersionendoscopicresectionandunderwaterendoscopicmucosalresectionforsuperficialnonampullaryduodenalepithelialtumors
AT kubotamanabu afeasibilitystudycomparinggelimmersionendoscopicresectionandunderwaterendoscopicmucosalresectionforsuperficialnonampullaryduodenalepithelialtumors
AT nakamuraakira afeasibilitystudycomparinggelimmersionendoscopicresectionandunderwaterendoscopicmucosalresectionforsuperficialnonampullaryduodenalepithelialtumors
AT itobayashiei afeasibilitystudycomparinggelimmersionendoscopicresectionandunderwaterendoscopicmucosalresectionforsuperficialnonampullaryduodenalepithelialtumors
AT shimuraharuhisa afeasibilitystudycomparinggelimmersionendoscopicresectionandunderwaterendoscopicmucosalresectionforsuperficialnonampullaryduodenalepithelialtumors
AT suzukiyoshio afeasibilitystudycomparinggelimmersionendoscopicresectionandunderwaterendoscopicmucosalresectionforsuperficialnonampullaryduodenalepithelialtumors
AT shimurakenji afeasibilitystudycomparinggelimmersionendoscopicresectionandunderwaterendoscopicmucosalresectionforsuperficialnonampullaryduodenalepithelialtumors
AT miyakawaakihiro feasibilitystudycomparinggelimmersionendoscopicresectionandunderwaterendoscopicmucosalresectionforsuperficialnonampullaryduodenalepithelialtumors
AT kuwaitoshio feasibilitystudycomparinggelimmersionendoscopicresectionandunderwaterendoscopicmucosalresectionforsuperficialnonampullaryduodenalepithelialtumors
AT sakumayukie feasibilitystudycomparinggelimmersionendoscopicresectionandunderwaterendoscopicmucosalresectionforsuperficialnonampullaryduodenalepithelialtumors
AT kubotamanabu feasibilitystudycomparinggelimmersionendoscopicresectionandunderwaterendoscopicmucosalresectionforsuperficialnonampullaryduodenalepithelialtumors
AT nakamuraakira feasibilitystudycomparinggelimmersionendoscopicresectionandunderwaterendoscopicmucosalresectionforsuperficialnonampullaryduodenalepithelialtumors
AT itobayashiei feasibilitystudycomparinggelimmersionendoscopicresectionandunderwaterendoscopicmucosalresectionforsuperficialnonampullaryduodenalepithelialtumors
AT shimuraharuhisa feasibilitystudycomparinggelimmersionendoscopicresectionandunderwaterendoscopicmucosalresectionforsuperficialnonampullaryduodenalepithelialtumors
AT suzukiyoshio feasibilitystudycomparinggelimmersionendoscopicresectionandunderwaterendoscopicmucosalresectionforsuperficialnonampullaryduodenalepithelialtumors
AT shimurakenji feasibilitystudycomparinggelimmersionendoscopicresectionandunderwaterendoscopicmucosalresectionforsuperficialnonampullaryduodenalepithelialtumors