Unknown

Dataset Information

0

Gel Immersion Endoscopic Mucosal Resection (EMR) for Superficial Nonampullary Duodenal Epithelial Tumors May Reduce Procedure Time Compared with Underwater EMR (with Video).


ABSTRACT:

Materials and methods

This was a retrospective cohort study conducted in two municipal hospitals. We identified 24 patients with SNADETs of 3-18 mm in diameter who underwent UEMR or GIEMR. One lesion was excluded from the analysis because it was found to be in the stomach after surgery. The primary outcome was procedure time.

Results

GIEMR significantly reduced the procedure time compared with UEMR (5 min vs. 10 min, P = 0.016). There was no significant difference between the UEMR and GIEMR groups for en bloc resection rate (93% vs. 100%, P = 1.0) and R0 resection rate (57% vs. 80%, P = 0.39). No serious complications were observed in either group.

Conclusions

GIEMR of SNADET has the potential to reduce procedure time compared with UEMR and may be particularly effective in areas where immersion in water is difficult.

SUBMITTER: Yamashina T 

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9217606 | biostudies-literature | 2022

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

altmetric image

Publications

Gel Immersion Endoscopic Mucosal Resection (EMR) for Superficial Nonampullary Duodenal Epithelial Tumors May Reduce Procedure Time Compared with Underwater EMR (with Video).

Yamashina Takeshi T   Shimatani Masaaki M   Takahashi Yu Y   Takeo Masahiro M   Saito Natsuko N   Matsumoto Hironao H   Kasai Takeshi T   Kano Masataka M   Sumimoto Kimi K   Mitsuyama Toshiyuki T   Marusawa Hiroyuki H   Nishio Akiyoshi A   Yuba Takafumi T   Seki Toshihito T   Naganuma Makoto M  

Gastroenterology research and practice 20220615


<h4>Materials and methods</h4>This was a retrospective cohort study conducted in two municipal hospitals. We identified 24 patients with SNADETs of 3-18 mm in diameter who underwent UEMR or GIEMR. One lesion was excluded from the analysis because it was found to be in the stomach after surgery. The primary outcome was procedure time.<h4>Results</h4>GIEMR significantly reduced the procedure time compared with UEMR (5 min vs. 10 min, <i>P</i> = 0.016). There was no significant difference between t  ...[more]

Similar Datasets

| S-EPMC6004020 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC8573376 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC10861840 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC6831944 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC11360841 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC11231858 | biostudies-literature