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: Appropriate selection of endoscopic resection for superficial nonampullary duodenal adenomas in association with recurrence.
    Author: Okimoto K, Maruoka D, Matsumura T, Kanayama K, Akizue N, Ohta Y, Taida T, Saito K, Inaba Y, Kawasaki Y, Kato J, Kato N.
    Journal: Gastrointest Endosc; 2022 May; 95(5):939-947. PubMed ID: 35065947.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The appropriate selection of endoscopic resection for relatively small superficial nonampullary duodenal adenomas (SNADAs) considering recurrence is not completely clarified. Therefore, this study investigated endoscopic resection utility (EMR, underwater EMR [UEMR], and cap-assisted EMR [EMRC]) for SNADAs from the viewpoint of recurrence and short-term outcomes. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed patients with sporadic SNADAs who underwent EMR, UEMR, and EMRC at Chiba University Hospital between May 2004 and March 2020 and were observed for ≥12 months after endoscopic resection (EMR, 34 patients, 36 lesions; UEMR, 54 patients, 55 lesions; and EMRC, 45 patients, 48 lesions). Outcomes were evaluated using weighted logistic regression analysis. The logistic regression analysis was weighted using propensity scores. RESULTS: EMRC showed significantly higher en-bloc and R0 resection rates than EMR. All techniques were equally safe. Only 1 case each of intraoperative perforation and postoperative perforation (in 2 different patients) occurred, which were associated with EMRC. UEMR resulted in higher R0 resection and lower postbleeding rates than EMR. Moreover, patients who underwent UEMR showed no perforation. Median observation period per lesion after endoscopic resection was 84 months (range, 16-199) for patients who underwent EMR, 25 months (range, 12-60) for patients who underwent UEMR, and 63 months (range, 12-180) for patients who underwent EMRC. No significant difference was observed between EMR versus UEMR and between EMR versus EMRC in terms of recurrence (odds ratio, .20 [95% confidence interval, .01-2.86; P = .24] and .78 [95% confidence interval, .09-6.84; P = .82], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Recurrence risk was not different for EMR, UEMR, and EMRC. Therefore, UEMR, a simple and safe procedure, could be the first choice for relatively small SNADAs. With larger prospective studies, UEMR data may turn out to be more robust, corroborating it as the endoscopic modality of choice for certain SNADAs.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]