Clinical Application and Outcomes of Over the Scope Clip Device: Initial US Experience in Humans.

Diagnostic and Therapeutic Endoscopy Pub Date : 2013-01-01 Epub Date: 2013-07-14 DOI:10.1155/2013/381873
Vijay Jayaraman, Christoper Hammerle, Simon K Lo, Laith Jamil, Kapil Gupta
{"title":"Clinical Application and Outcomes of Over the Scope Clip Device: Initial US Experience in Humans.","authors":"Vijay Jayaraman,&nbsp;Christoper Hammerle,&nbsp;Simon K Lo,&nbsp;Laith Jamil,&nbsp;Kapil Gupta","doi":"10.1155/2013/381873","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Background. OTSCs are now available in the US for various indications. Methods. Retrospective review of OTSCs used from January 2011 to April 2012. Results. Twenty-four patients underwent placement of 28 OTSCs. Indications included postsurgical fistula, perforations, anastomotic leak, prophylactic closure after EMR, postpolypectomy bleeding, tracheoesophageal fistula, and jejunostomy site leak. Instruments used to grasp the tissue were dedicated (bidirectional forceps or tripronged device) and nondedicated devices (rat/alligator forceps or suction). Success was higher with nondedicated devices (12.5% versus 86.5%, P = 0.0004). Overall, OTSC was effective in 15/27 procedures. Defect closure was complete in 12/21. Mean followup was 2.9 months (1-8 m). Mean defect size was 10 mm (5-25 mm). A trend towards higher success was noted in defects <10 mm compared to defects >10 mm (90% versus 60%; P = 0.36). No difference was noted in closure of fresh (<72 hrs) versus chronic defects (>1 month) (75% versus 67%). There were no complications. Conclusion. The OTSC provides a safe alternative to manage fistula, perforation, and bleeding. No significant difference was seen for closure of early fistula or perforations as compared to chronic fistula. Rat-tooth forceps or suction was superior to the dedicated devices. </p>","PeriodicalId":11288,"journal":{"name":"Diagnostic and Therapeutic Endoscopy","volume":"2013 ","pages":"381873"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2013/381873","citationCount":"29","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diagnostic and Therapeutic Endoscopy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/381873","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2013/7/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 29

Abstract

Background. OTSCs are now available in the US for various indications. Methods. Retrospective review of OTSCs used from January 2011 to April 2012. Results. Twenty-four patients underwent placement of 28 OTSCs. Indications included postsurgical fistula, perforations, anastomotic leak, prophylactic closure after EMR, postpolypectomy bleeding, tracheoesophageal fistula, and jejunostomy site leak. Instruments used to grasp the tissue were dedicated (bidirectional forceps or tripronged device) and nondedicated devices (rat/alligator forceps or suction). Success was higher with nondedicated devices (12.5% versus 86.5%, P = 0.0004). Overall, OTSC was effective in 15/27 procedures. Defect closure was complete in 12/21. Mean followup was 2.9 months (1-8 m). Mean defect size was 10 mm (5-25 mm). A trend towards higher success was noted in defects <10 mm compared to defects >10 mm (90% versus 60%; P = 0.36). No difference was noted in closure of fresh (<72 hrs) versus chronic defects (>1 month) (75% versus 67%). There were no complications. Conclusion. The OTSC provides a safe alternative to manage fistula, perforation, and bleeding. No significant difference was seen for closure of early fistula or perforations as compared to chronic fistula. Rat-tooth forceps or suction was superior to the dedicated devices.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
超过范围夹装置的临床应用和结果:美国在人类中的初步经验。
背景。OTSCs目前在美国可用于各种适应症。方法。2011年1月至2012年4月使用的OTSCs回顾性分析。结果。24例患者接受了28个OTSCs的植入。适应症包括术后瘘、穿孔、吻合口漏、EMR后预防性封闭、息肉切除后出血、气管食管瘘、空肠造口部位漏。用于抓取组织的器械有专用的(双向钳或三叉钳)和非专用的(大鼠钳或鳄鱼钳或吸引器)。非专用设备的成功率更高(12.5%对86.5%,P = 0.0004)。总体而言,OTSC在15/27个程序中有效。缺陷闭合于12/21完成。平均随访2.9个月(1 ~ 8个月)。平均缺陷尺寸为10毫米(5-25毫米)。10毫米缺陷的成功率更高(90% vs 60%;P = 0.36)。在关闭新鲜(1个月)方面没有差异(75%对67%)。没有并发症。结论。OTSC为治疗瘘、穿孔和出血提供了一种安全的选择。与慢性瘘管相比,早期瘘管闭合或穿孔无显著差异。鼠牙钳或吸引器优于专用装置。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Retracted: Comparison of Two Entry Methods for Laparoscopic Port Entry: Technical Point of View Endoscopic Ultrasound Elastography for Evaluation of Lymph Nodes: A Single Center Experience. Unsuspected Small-Bowel Crohn's Disease in Elderly Patients Diagnosed by Video Capsule Endoscopy. Use of 4-Fr versus 6-Fr Nasobiliary Catheter for Biliary Drainage: A Prospective, Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled Study. Comparison of the Diagnostic Yield of EUS Needles for Liver Biopsy: Ex Vivo Study.
×
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