Endoscopic full-thickness resection of colorectal lesions with the full-thickness resection device: clinical experience from two referral centers in Greece.
Colorectal adenoma
colorectal adenocarcinoma
endoscopic full-thickness resection
full-thickness resection device
Journal
Annals of gastroenterology
ISSN: 1108-7471
Titre abrégé: Ann Gastroenterol
Pays: Greece
ID NLM: 101121847
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Historique:
received:
18
02
2019
accepted:
22
05
2019
entrez:
3
9
2019
pubmed:
3
9
2019
medline:
3
9
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) using the full-thickness resection device (FTRD We conducted a retrospective analysis of 17 consecutive patients treated with the FTRD Technical success and R0 resection were achieved in 82.3% procedures (14/17) and in 87.5% of those with difficult adenomas (8 patients). In the subgroup with carcinomas (n=3), the rate of technical success and R0 resection was 66.6%, while in the subgroup with subepithelial tumors (n=6) the rate was 83.3%. Technical success and R0 resection were significantly lower for lesions >20 mm vs. ≤20 mm (P=0.0429). In the 17 patients a total of 3 adverse events occurred (17.6%) and one of the patients underwent laparoscopic appendectomy because of EFTR around the appendix. Our study showed favorable results concerning EFTR feasibility, efficacy and safety, especially for lesions ≤20 mm, non-lifting adenomas, and subepithelial tumors. Technical success, R0 resection, and adverse events rates were comparable with previously published data. Larger randomized studies are needed to better define the clinical benefit and long-term outcomes of EFTR in selected patients.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) using the full-thickness resection device (FTRD
METHODS
METHODS
We conducted a retrospective analysis of 17 consecutive patients treated with the FTRD
RESULTS
RESULTS
Technical success and R0 resection were achieved in 82.3% procedures (14/17) and in 87.5% of those with difficult adenomas (8 patients). In the subgroup with carcinomas (n=3), the rate of technical success and R0 resection was 66.6%, while in the subgroup with subepithelial tumors (n=6) the rate was 83.3%. Technical success and R0 resection were significantly lower for lesions >20 mm vs. ≤20 mm (P=0.0429). In the 17 patients a total of 3 adverse events occurred (17.6%) and one of the patients underwent laparoscopic appendectomy because of EFTR around the appendix.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Our study showed favorable results concerning EFTR feasibility, efficacy and safety, especially for lesions ≤20 mm, non-lifting adenomas, and subepithelial tumors. Technical success, R0 resection, and adverse events rates were comparable with previously published data. Larger randomized studies are needed to better define the clinical benefit and long-term outcomes of EFTR in selected patients.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31474795
doi: 10.20524/aog.2019.0392
pii: AnnGastroenterol-32-482
pmc: PMC6686092
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
482-488Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflict of Interest: None
Références
Surg Endosc. 2010 Feb;24(2):445-9
pubmed: 19565297
Endoscopy. 2009 Aug;41(8):679-83
pubmed: 19670135
Gastrointest Endosc. 2010 Mar;71(3):446-54
pubmed: 20189503
Surg Endosc. 2011 Jan;25(1):255-60
pubmed: 20559661
Gastrointest Endosc. 2010 Dec;72(6):1217-25
pubmed: 21030017
J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010 Nov;25(11):1747-53
pubmed: 21039836
Ann Oncol. 2013 Oct;24 Suppl 6:vi64-72
pubmed: 24078664
Colorectal Dis. 2014 Jan;16(1):2-14
pubmed: 24330432
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2014 Sep;12(9):1525-33
pubmed: 24480678
Gut. 2015 Jan;64(1):57-65
pubmed: 24986245
Endoscopy. 2014 Oct;46(10):862-70
pubmed: 25208032
Dis Colon Rectum. 2015 Jan;58(1):122-40
pubmed: 25489704
Endoscopy. 2015 Aug;47(8):719-25
pubmed: 25763833
Am J Gastroenterol. 2015 May;110(5):697-707
pubmed: 25848926
Dig Endosc. 2016 Apr;28(3):324-9
pubmed: 26076802
Dig Endosc. 2016 Apr;28(3):296-305
pubmed: 26212579
Chirurg. 2016 Apr;87(4):316-25
pubmed: 26438202
Dig Endosc. 2016 Apr;28(3):330-41
pubmed: 26718885
Gastrointest Endosc. 2016 Aug;84(2):315-25
pubmed: 26859866
Endoscopy. 2017 Mar;49(3):222-232
pubmed: 27842423
Ann Surg. 2018 May;267(5):910-916
pubmed: 28252517
Am J Gastroenterol. 2017 May;112(5):785-796
pubmed: 28323275
Dig Liver Dis. 2017 Sep;49(9):1009-1013
pubmed: 28539229
Surg Endosc. 2018 Jan;32(1):289-299
pubmed: 28664442
Gut. 2018 Jul;67(7):1280-1289
pubmed: 28798042
Endosc Int Open. 2018 Jan;6(1):E98-E103
pubmed: 29344569
United European Gastroenterol J. 2018 Apr;6(3):463-470
pubmed: 29774161
Endosc Int Open. 2018 Oct;6(10):E1227-E1234
pubmed: 30302380
Dig Liver Dis. 2019 Mar;51(3):375-381
pubmed: 30377063
Gastrointest Endosc. 2019 Jun;89(6):1180-1189.e1
pubmed: 30653939
Endoscopy. 2019 Mar;51(3):266-277
pubmed: 30722071