Clinical outcomes of EMR for gastric tumors: historical pilot evaluation between endoscopic submucosal dissection and conventional mucosal resection
Clinical outcomes of EMR for gastric tumors: historical pilot evaluation between endoscopic submucosal dissection and conventional mucosal resection
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.gie.2005.08.049
复制
发表时间：
2006-05-01
影响因子：
7.7
通讯作者：
Fujimoto, K
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Watanabe, K;Ogata, S;Fujimoto, K
背景：EMR是目前胃粘膜肿瘤的标准治疗方法。内镜下粘膜夹层（ESD）已发展为整体切除。目的：比较ESD与常规EMR的临床效果。设计：不适用。设定：EMR和ESD之间进行历史对照研究。患者：229例患者行245例胃肿瘤EMR。病变分为两组。A组于1999年2月至2001年6月行常规EMR， B组于2001年7月至2004年3月行ESD。B组分为亚组：亚组B-1于2001年7月至2003年3月接受ESD治疗，亚组B-2于2003年4月至2004年3月接受ESD治疗。干预措施：所有病变均采用常规EMR或ESD切除。主要观察指标：评估整体切除率、完全切除率、所需时间、残余比和并发症。结果：对于bbb10 mm大小的病灶，B组的整体切除率和切除率均显著高于A组(p
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 ill 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