Efficacy of partial injection underwater endoscopic mucosal resection for superficial duodenal epithelial tumor: Propensity score-matched study (with video).
EMR
endoscopic mucosal resection
partial injection
superficial duodenal epithelial tumor
underwater EMR
Journal
Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society
ISSN: 1443-1661
Titre abrégé: Dig Endosc
Pays: Australia
ID NLM: 9101419
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Mar 2022
Mar 2022
Historique:
revised:
03
08
2021
received:
11
05
2021
accepted:
07
08
2021
pubmed:
10
8
2021
medline:
17
3
2022
entrez:
9
8
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) has been reported as effective endoscopic treatment for superficial duodenal epithelial tumors (SDETs). However, it has been reported that a notable problem of UEMR for SDETs is that en bloc resection rate is relatively low. Therefore, we proposed a novel technique to improve en bloc resection rate: UEMR combining partial submucosal injection (PI-UEMR). The aim of this study is to evaluate efficacy and safety of PI-UEMR for SDETs by comparing to UEMR. This is a retrospective observational study in a single center. The patients who underwent UEMR or PI-UEMR from June 2010 to August 2020 were included in this study. Eligible patients were selected from included patients in a 1:1 ratio using propensity score matching. The clinical outcomes of endoscopic resection (procedure time, en bloc resection rate, complication rate [immediate perforation, delayed bleeding, delayed perforation]), and histopathological diagnosis (adenoma/cancer) were compared between each group. Two hundred and twenty-eight patients were included in this study. Of included patients, 47 patients were selected in each group by propensity score matching. There were no statistical differences in procedure time (11 ± 1.2 min vs. 9 ± 1.2 min, P = 0.30), complication rate (immediate perforation [0% vs. 2%, P = 0.12], delayed bleeding [0% vs. 2%, P = 0.12], and no delayed perforation) and histopathological diagnosis (adenoma; 100% vs. 96%, P = 0.14) in each group. However, en bloc resection rate of PI-UEMR was significantly higher than UEMR (96% vs. 83%, P < 0.05). Partial submucosal injection UEMR might be superior procedure for en bloc resection in SDETs compare to UEMR.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND AND AIM
OBJECTIVE
Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) has been reported as effective endoscopic treatment for superficial duodenal epithelial tumors (SDETs). However, it has been reported that a notable problem of UEMR for SDETs is that en bloc resection rate is relatively low. Therefore, we proposed a novel technique to improve en bloc resection rate: UEMR combining partial submucosal injection (PI-UEMR). The aim of this study is to evaluate efficacy and safety of PI-UEMR for SDETs by comparing to UEMR.
METHODS
METHODS
This is a retrospective observational study in a single center. The patients who underwent UEMR or PI-UEMR from June 2010 to August 2020 were included in this study. Eligible patients were selected from included patients in a 1:1 ratio using propensity score matching. The clinical outcomes of endoscopic resection (procedure time, en bloc resection rate, complication rate [immediate perforation, delayed bleeding, delayed perforation]), and histopathological diagnosis (adenoma/cancer) were compared between each group.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Two hundred and twenty-eight patients were included in this study. Of included patients, 47 patients were selected in each group by propensity score matching. There were no statistical differences in procedure time (11 ± 1.2 min vs. 9 ± 1.2 min, P = 0.30), complication rate (immediate perforation [0% vs. 2%, P = 0.12], delayed bleeding [0% vs. 2%, P = 0.12], and no delayed perforation) and histopathological diagnosis (adenoma; 100% vs. 96%, P = 0.14) in each group. However, en bloc resection rate of PI-UEMR was significantly higher than UEMR (96% vs. 83%, P < 0.05).
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Partial submucosal injection UEMR might be superior procedure for en bloc resection in SDETs compare to UEMR.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Observational Study
Video-Audio Media
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
535-542Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
© 2021 Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society.
Références
Murray MA, Zimmerman MJ, Ee HC. Sporadic duodenal adenoma is associated with colorectal neoplasia. Gut 2004; 53: 261-5.
Arai T, Murata T, Sawabe M, Takubo K, Esaki Y. Primary adenocarcinoma of the duodenum in the elderly: Clinicopathological and immunohistochemical study of 17 cases. Pathol Int 1999; 49: 23-9.
Abbass R, Rigaux J, Al-Kawas FH. Nonampullary duodenal polyps: Characteristics and endoscopic management. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 71: 754-9.
Jepsen JM, Persson M, Jakobsen NO et al. Prospective study of prevalence and endoscopic and histopathologic characteristics of duodenal polyps in patients submitted to upper endoscopy. Scand J Gastroenterol 1994; 29: 483-7.
Goda K, Kikuchi D, Yamamoto Y et al. Endoscopic diagnosis of superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors in Japan: Multicenter case series. Dig Endosc 2014; 26(Suppl 2): 23-9.
Kakushima N, Ono H, Takao T, Kanemoto H, Sasaki K. Method and timing of resection of superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors. Dig Endosc 2014; 26(Suppl 2): 35-40.
Yamasaki Y, Uedo N, Takeuchi Y, Ishihara R, Okada H, Iishi H. Current status of endoscopic resection for superficial nonampullary duodenal epithelial tumors. Digestion 2018; 97: 45-51.
Yahagi N, Kato M, Ochiai Y et al. Outcomes of endoscopic resection for superficial duodenal epithelial neoplasia. Gastrointest Endosc 2018; 88: 676-82.
Kiguchi Y, Kato M, Nakayama A et al. Feasibility study comparing underwater endoscopic mucosal resection and conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumor < 20 mm. Dig Endosc 2020; 32: 753-60.
Takatori Y, Kato M, Masunaga T et al. Feasibility study of partial submucosal injection technique combining underwater EMR for superficial duodenal epithelial tumors. Dig Dis Sci. Published online: 15 Mar 2021; DOI: 10.1007/s10620-021-06925-3.
Iwagami H, Takeuchi Y, Yamasaki Y et al. Feasibility of underwater endoscopic mucosal resection and management of residues for superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial neoplasms. Dig Endosc 2020; 32: 565-73.
Binmoeller KF, Shah JN, Bhat YM, Kane SD. “Underwater” EMR of sporadic laterally spreading nonampullary duodenal adenomas (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 2013; 78: 496-502.
Khashab M, Eid E, Rusche M, Rex DK. Incidence and predictors of “late” recurrences after endoscopic piecemeal resection of large sessile adenomas. Gastrointest Endosc 2009; 70: 344-9.
Belderbos TD, Leenders M, Moons LM, Siersema PD. Local recurrence after endoscopic mucosal resection of nonpedunculated colorectal lesions: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Endoscopy 2014; 46: 388-402.
Kato M, Tsujii Y, Takehara T. Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection of a duodenal adenoma with biopsy scars. Dig Endosc 2018; 30: 405-6.
Takatori Y, Kato M, Nakayama A, Yahagi N. A case of duodenal tumor adjacent to the diverticulum that was resected by the technique of partial submucosal injection combined with underwater endoscopic mucosal resection. Dig Dis 2021; 39: 70-4.
Hoteya S, Furuhata T, Takahito T et al. Endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection for non-ampullary superficial duodenal tumor. Digestion 2017; 95: 36-42.