These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Clinical outcomes of EMR for gastric tumors: historical pilot evaluation between endoscopic submucosal dissection and conventional mucosal resection.
    Author: Watanabe K, Ogata S, Kawazoe S, Watanabe K, Koyama T, Kajiwara T, Shimoda Y, Takase Y, Irie K, Mizuguchi M, Tsunada S, Iwakiri R, Fujimoto K.
    Journal: Gastrointest Endosc; 2006 May; 63(6):776-82. PubMed ID: 16650537.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: EMR is currently a standard treatment for mucosal gastric tumors. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been developed for en bloc resection. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the clinical outcomes of ESD compared with conventional EMR. DESIGN: Not applicable. SETTING: A historical control study was performed between EMR and ESD. PATIENTS: EMR of 245 gastric tumors was performed in 229 patients. Lesions were divided into two groups. Conventional EMR was performed in group A from February 1999 to June 2001, and ESD was performed in group B from July 2001 to March 2004. Group B was divided into subgroups: subgroup B-1 underwent ESD from July 2001 to March 2003 and subgroup B-2 from April 2003 to March 2004. INTERVENTIONS: All lesions were resected with conventional EMR or with ESD. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: En bloc resection rate, rate in completeness of resection, required time, remnant ratio, and complications were evaluated. RESULTS: With regard to lesions >10 mm in size, the en bloc resection rate and the rate in completeness of resection of group B was significantly higher than that of group A (p < 0.01). Although the required time was longer in group B than A (p < 0.01), it was shorter in subgroup B-2 compared with B-1 (p < 0.05) with lesions < or =10 mm in size. The remnant ratio and perforation rate were not different between groups. LIMITATIONS: Not applicable. CONCLUSIONS: The en bloc resection rate was better with ESD than with conventional EMR. The required time was longer in ESD, but this disadvantage might be improved with experience.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]