Outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection in cirrhotic patients: First American cohort

IF 2.5 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY World Journal of Hepatology Pub Date : 2024-05-27 DOI:10.4254/wjh.v16.i5.784
Robert L. Pecha, Fares W. Ayoub, Ankur Patel, Abdullah A. Muftah, Michael W Wright, Mai A Khalaf, Mohamed O Othman
{"title":"Outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection in cirrhotic patients: First American cohort","authors":"Robert L. Pecha, Fares W. Ayoub, Ankur Patel, Abdullah A. Muftah, Michael W Wright, Mai A Khalaf, Mohamed O Othman","doi":"10.4254/wjh.v16.i5.784","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\n Among patients with cirrhosis and pre-malignant or early malignant mucosal lesions, surgical intervention carries a much higher bleeding risk. When such lesions are discovered, endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) may offer curative therapy with lower risks than surgery and improved outcomes compared to traditional endoscopic resection.\n AIM\n To evaluate the outcomes of ESD in patients with cirrhosis.\n METHODS\n Patients with cirrhosis undergoing ESD between July 2015 and August 2022 were retrospectively matched in 1:2 fashion to controls based on lesion location, size, and anticoagulation use. Procedural outcomes were compared between groups.\n RESULTS\n A total of 64 Lesions from 59 patients were included (16 cirrhosis, 43 control). There were no differences in patient or lesion characteristics between groups. En bloc and curative resection was achieved in 84.21%, 78.94% of the cirrhosis group and 88.89%, 68.89% of controls, respectively, with no significant differences. Cirrhotic patients had significantly higher rates of intra-procedural coagulation grasper use for control of bleeding (47.37% vs 20%; P = 0.02). There were otherwise no significant differences in adverse event rates. In the 29 patients with follow up, we found higher rates of recurrence in the cirrhosis group compared to controls (40% vs 5.26%; P = 0.019), however this effect did not persist on multivariable analysis controlling for known confounders.\n CONCLUSION\n ESD may be safe and effective in patients with cirrhosis. Most procedure related outcomes were not significantly different between groups. Intra-procedural bleeding requiring use of the coagulation grasper use was expectedly higher in the cirrhosis group given the known effects of liver disease on hemostasis.","PeriodicalId":23687,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Hepatology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Hepatology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4254/wjh.v16.i5.784","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BACKGROUND Among patients with cirrhosis and pre-malignant or early malignant mucosal lesions, surgical intervention carries a much higher bleeding risk. When such lesions are discovered, endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) may offer curative therapy with lower risks than surgery and improved outcomes compared to traditional endoscopic resection. AIM To evaluate the outcomes of ESD in patients with cirrhosis. METHODS Patients with cirrhosis undergoing ESD between July 2015 and August 2022 were retrospectively matched in 1:2 fashion to controls based on lesion location, size, and anticoagulation use. Procedural outcomes were compared between groups. RESULTS A total of 64 Lesions from 59 patients were included (16 cirrhosis, 43 control). There were no differences in patient or lesion characteristics between groups. En bloc and curative resection was achieved in 84.21%, 78.94% of the cirrhosis group and 88.89%, 68.89% of controls, respectively, with no significant differences. Cirrhotic patients had significantly higher rates of intra-procedural coagulation grasper use for control of bleeding (47.37% vs 20%; P = 0.02). There were otherwise no significant differences in adverse event rates. In the 29 patients with follow up, we found higher rates of recurrence in the cirrhosis group compared to controls (40% vs 5.26%; P = 0.019), however this effect did not persist on multivariable analysis controlling for known confounders. CONCLUSION ESD may be safe and effective in patients with cirrhosis. Most procedure related outcomes were not significantly different between groups. Intra-procedural bleeding requiring use of the coagulation grasper use was expectedly higher in the cirrhosis group given the known effects of liver disease on hemostasis.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
肝硬化患者内镜黏膜下剥离术的疗效:首个美国队列
背景 在肝硬化和恶性前期或早期恶性粘膜病变患者中,手术治疗的出血风险要高得多。当发现此类病变时,内镜粘膜下剥离术(ESD)可提供治愈性治疗,与传统内镜切除术相比,其风险比手术低,疗效更好。目的 评估肝硬化患者接受 ESD 治疗的效果。方法 回顾性地将 2015 年 7 月至 2022 年 8 月间接受 ESD 治疗的肝硬化患者根据病变位置、大小和抗凝药物使用情况与对照组进行 1:2 配对。比较各组的手术结果。结果 共纳入 59 名患者的 64 个病变(肝硬化 16 例,对照组 43 例)。各组患者和病灶特征无差异。肝硬化组和对照组分别有84.21%和78.94%和88.89%的患者实现了根治性切除,无明显差异。肝硬化患者术中使用凝血钳控制出血的比例明显更高(47.37% 对 20%;P = 0.02)。除此之外,不良事件发生率没有明显差异。在 29 名接受随访的患者中,我们发现肝硬化组的复发率高于对照组(40% vs 5.26%; P = 0.019),但在控制已知混杂因素的多变量分析中,这种影响并没有持续存在。结论 ESD 对肝硬化患者可能是安全有效的。大多数与手术相关的结果在组间无明显差异。考虑到肝病对止血的已知影响,肝硬化组患者术中出血需要使用凝血抓钳的比例较高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
World Journal of Hepatology
World Journal of Hepatology GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
4.20%
发文量
172
期刊最新文献
Chronic hepatitis B: Prevent, diagnose, and treat before the point of no return. Complement activation targeted inhibitor C2-FH ameliorates acetaminophen-induced liver injury in mice. Hepatitis B surface antigen-negative but hepatitis B envelope antigen-positive false occult hepatitis B virus infection: A case report. Liver cell cancer surveillance practice in Nigeria: Pitfalls and future prospects. Pathogenesis and research progress of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease/nonalcoholic steatohepatitis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1