Hybrid endoscopic approaches for complex colorectal polyps with a non-lifting sign: the Greek experience.

IF 2.1 Q3 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Annals of Gastroenterology Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-14 DOI:10.20524/aog.2024.0887
Georgios Tribonias, Magdalini Velegraki, Maria Tzouvala, Maria Fragaki, Pinelopi Nikolaou, Nikolaos Leontidis, Despoina Arna, Andreas Psistakis, Georgia Mpellou, Maria Palatianou, Ioannis Psaroudakis, Antonios Neokleous, Gregorios Paspatis
{"title":"Hybrid endoscopic approaches for complex colorectal polyps with a non-lifting sign: the Greek experience.","authors":"Georgios Tribonias, Magdalini Velegraki, Maria Tzouvala, Maria Fragaki, Pinelopi Nikolaou, Nikolaos Leontidis, Despoina Arna, Andreas Psistakis, Georgia Mpellou, Maria Palatianou, Ioannis Psaroudakis, Antonios Neokleous, Gregorios Paspatis","doi":"10.20524/aog.2024.0887","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Hybrid approaches combining endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) with conventional techniques (endoscopic mucosal resection [EMR], endoscopic submucosal dissection [ESD]) have enabled the resection of difficult fibrotic colorectal adenomas exhibiting a \"non-lifting\" sign, and polyps in difficult positions. We present our cohort treated with either EMR+EFTR or ESD+EFTR as salvage hybrid endoscopic approaches for complex colorectal polyps not amenable to conventional techniques.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Retrospective analysis included technical success, histological confirmation of margin-free resection, assessment of adverse events and follow up with histological assessment. All patients underwent follow-up endoscopy at least 6 and 12 months post-resection.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fourteen patients underwent hybrid EFTR procedures (11 EMR+EFTR and 3 ESD+EFTR). Technical success was achieved in all cases where the full-thickness resection device (FTRD) was advanced to the site of the resection (100%). In 2 cases, the FTRD system could not be passed through the sigmoid colon because of severe chronic diverticulitis, subsequent fibrosis and stiffness. The mean lesion size in the EMR+EFTR group (41.7 mm; range 20-50 mm) was larger than the ESD+EFTR group (31.7 mm; range 30-35 mm). Six patients (42.9%) were histologically diagnosed with T1 carcinoma. The mean duration of hospitalization was 1.4 days. Follow-up endoscopy was available in all patients and no recurrence was observed with histological confirmation during a mean follow-up period of 15.4 months.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Hybrid procedures appear to be safe and effective treatments for complex colorectal lesions not amenable to EMR, ESD or EFTR alone, because of the lesion size, positive non-lifting sign, and difficult positions.</p>","PeriodicalId":7978,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Gastroenterology","volume":"37 4","pages":"476-484"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11226737/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20524/aog.2024.0887","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Hybrid approaches combining endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) with conventional techniques (endoscopic mucosal resection [EMR], endoscopic submucosal dissection [ESD]) have enabled the resection of difficult fibrotic colorectal adenomas exhibiting a "non-lifting" sign, and polyps in difficult positions. We present our cohort treated with either EMR+EFTR or ESD+EFTR as salvage hybrid endoscopic approaches for complex colorectal polyps not amenable to conventional techniques.

Methods: Retrospective analysis included technical success, histological confirmation of margin-free resection, assessment of adverse events and follow up with histological assessment. All patients underwent follow-up endoscopy at least 6 and 12 months post-resection.

Results: Fourteen patients underwent hybrid EFTR procedures (11 EMR+EFTR and 3 ESD+EFTR). Technical success was achieved in all cases where the full-thickness resection device (FTRD) was advanced to the site of the resection (100%). In 2 cases, the FTRD system could not be passed through the sigmoid colon because of severe chronic diverticulitis, subsequent fibrosis and stiffness. The mean lesion size in the EMR+EFTR group (41.7 mm; range 20-50 mm) was larger than the ESD+EFTR group (31.7 mm; range 30-35 mm). Six patients (42.9%) were histologically diagnosed with T1 carcinoma. The mean duration of hospitalization was 1.4 days. Follow-up endoscopy was available in all patients and no recurrence was observed with histological confirmation during a mean follow-up period of 15.4 months.

Conclusion: Hybrid procedures appear to be safe and effective treatments for complex colorectal lesions not amenable to EMR, ESD or EFTR alone, because of the lesion size, positive non-lifting sign, and difficult positions.

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
采用混合内窥镜方法治疗无移位征象的复杂结直肠息肉:希腊的经验。
背景:内镜下全层切除术(EFTR)与传统技术(内镜下粘膜切除术[EMR]、内镜下粘膜下剥离术[ESD])相结合的混合方法能够切除表现为 "不移位 "征象的疑难纤维化结直肠腺瘤和位置困难的息肉。我们介绍了采用EMR+EFTR或ESD+EFTR作为挽救性混合内镜方法治疗传统技术无法治愈的复杂结直肠息肉的病例:回顾性分析包括技术成功率、无边缘切除的组织学确认、不良事件评估以及随访和组织学评估。所有患者均在切除术后至少 6 个月和 12 个月接受了随访内镜检查:14名患者接受了混合EFTR手术(11例EMR+EFTR和3例ESD+EFTR)。所有将全厚切除装置(FTRD)推进到切除部位的病例均取得了技术成功(100%)。在 2 个病例中,由于严重的慢性憩室炎、随后的纤维化和僵硬,FTRD 系统无法通过乙状结肠。EMR+EFTR组的平均病灶大小(41.7毫米;范围20-50毫米)大于ESD+EFTR组(31.7毫米;范围30-35毫米)。六名患者(42.9%)经组织学诊断为 T1 癌。平均住院时间为 1.4 天。所有患者都接受了随访内镜检查,在平均15.4个月的随访期间,经组织学确认未发现复发:结论:混合手术似乎是一种安全有效的治疗方法,适用于因病变大小、不移位征阳性和体位困难而无法单独使用EMR、ESD或EFTR的复杂结直肠病变。
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
Annals of Gastroenterology
Annals of Gastroenterology GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
58
期刊最新文献
Laparoscopic Heller myotomy versus peroral endoscopic myotomy in children with esophageal achalasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Paraduodenal pancreatitis as diagnostic challenge: clinical and morphological features of patients with pancreatic pathology involving the pancreatic groove. Prognosis after curative resection of non-metastatic pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: a retrospective tertiary center study. Real-world outcomes of collaborative surgery for gastrointestinal tumors by endoscopists and surgeons: a single-center retrospective analysis of 131 patients. Technical success and adverse event rates after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography using deep sedation with propofol.
×
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