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: Effects of steroid use for stenosis prevention after wide endoscopic submucosal dissection for gastric neoplasm.
    Author: Kishida Y, Kakushima N, Takizawa K, Tanaka M, Kawata N, Yoshida M, Ito S, Imai K, Ishiwatari H, Hotta K, Matsubayashi H, Ono H.
    Journal: Surg Endosc; 2018 Feb; 32(2):751-759. PubMed ID: 28733736.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Stenosis is a troublesome complication after wide endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). As steroids are known to prevent post-ESD esophageal stenosis, this study aimed to clarify the gastric effects. METHODS: This was a retrospective single-institution study. Between September 2002 and June 2015, 132 patients with a post-ESD mucosal defect exceeding three-fourths of the circumference were identified. Among them, 107 patients who did not undergo additional surgery for non-curative resection were reviewed. Steroid treatment (local injection and/or systemic) for stenosis prevention was administered to 28 patients within 10 days after ESD (steroid group). The incidence of stenosis and course of therapeutic endoscopic balloon dilation (EBD) were analyzed between the steroid and non-steroid group. RESULTS: Stenosis occurred in 31% (33/107) of patients. Full circumferential defect and defect extending to the pyloric ring were significantly related with stenosis. The proportion of patients with a full circumferential defect was relatively higher in the steroid group (14%) compared to the non-steroid group (5%) (p = 0.111). There was no significant relationship between the incidence of stenosis and the use of steroids (steroid group 39%, non-steroid group 28%, p = 0.260). However, the interval from ESD to stenosis was significantly delayed among steroid-treated patients with a near-circumferential to three-fourth mucosal defect (p = 0.001) and among patients with ESD in the lower stomach (p = 0.002). The number of therapeutic EBDs and treatment duration did not differ significantly between the groups. Steroid treatment did not increase the incidence of ESD- and EBD-related complications. CONCLUSION: Despite the retardation of the occurrence of stenosis in some subgroups, early steroid treatment did not a show a significant effect on stenosis prevention after wide gastric ESD. Further evaluation is needed to determine the dose and timing of steroid treatment for stenosis after wide gastric ESD.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]