治疗直肠神经内分泌肿瘤的传统方法与橡皮筋牵引辅助内镜黏膜下剥离术:一项单中心回顾性研究(附视频)

Jinbang Peng, Jiajia Lin, Lina Fang, Jingjing Zhou, Yaqi Song, Chaoyu Yang, Yu Zhang, Binbin Gu, Ziwei Ji, Yandi Lu, Xinli Mao, Lingling Yan
{"title":"治疗直肠神经内分泌肿瘤的传统方法与橡皮筋牵引辅助内镜黏膜下剥离术:一项单中心回顾性研究(附视频)","authors":"Jinbang Peng, Jiajia Lin, Lina Fang, Jingjing Zhou, Yaqi Song, Chaoyu Yang, Yu Zhang, Binbin Gu, Ziwei Ji, Yandi Lu, Xinli Mao, Lingling Yan","doi":"10.1007/s00464-024-11244-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Background</h3><p>Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a safe and effective technique for the treatment of gastrointestinal tumors, including rectal neuroendocrine tumors (r-NETs). However, the relative advantages of traction-assisted ESD for the treatment of small rectal lesions are still debated.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Aims</h3><p>We conducted a study to compare the efficacy and safety of rubber band traction-assisted ESD (RBT-ESD) to conventional ESD (C-ESD).</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Methods</h3><p>This study retrospectively analyzed consecutive patients with r-NET treated with ESD between October 2021 and October 2023. Our study assessed differences between the groups in the complete resection rate of lesions, muscular layer injury, surgical complications, operation time, resection speed, time to liquid diet, postoperative hospital stay, hospital cost, and recurrence rate.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Results</h3><p>A total of 119 patients with r-NETs participated in this study (RBT-ESD group, <i>n</i> = 27; C-ESD group, <i>n</i> = 92). The operation time in RBT-ESD group was shorter than in C-ESD group, but the difference was not statistically significant (16.0 min [9.0–22.0 min] vs. 18.0 min [13.3–27.0 min], <i>P</i> = 0.056). However, the resection speed was significantly faster in the RBT-ESD group (6.7 vs. 4.1 mm<sup>2</sup>/min, <i>P</i> = 0.005). Furthermore, the RBT-ESD group showed significantly less muscular layer injury (<i>P</i> = 0.047) and faster diet recovery (<i>P</i> = 0.035). No significant differences were observed in the complete resection rate, surgical complications, postoperative hospital stay, hospital cost, or recurrence rate between the two groups.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Conclusion</h3><p>For r-NETs of &lt; 2 cm in size, the RBT method did not significantly shorten the operation time but resulted in faster resection speed, less muscular layer injury, and earlier postoperative recovery to a liquid diet.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Graphical Abstract</h3>\n","PeriodicalId":501625,"journal":{"name":"Surgical Endoscopy","volume":"141 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Conventional versus rubber band traction-assisted endoscopic submucosal dissection for rectal neuroendocrine tumors: a single-center retrospective study (with video)\",\"authors\":\"Jinbang Peng, Jiajia Lin, Lina Fang, Jingjing Zhou, Yaqi Song, Chaoyu Yang, Yu Zhang, Binbin Gu, Ziwei Ji, Yandi Lu, Xinli Mao, Lingling Yan\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00464-024-11244-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Background</h3><p>Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a safe and effective technique for the treatment of gastrointestinal tumors, including rectal neuroendocrine tumors (r-NETs). However, the relative advantages of traction-assisted ESD for the treatment of small rectal lesions are still debated.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Aims</h3><p>We conducted a study to compare the efficacy and safety of rubber band traction-assisted ESD (RBT-ESD) to conventional ESD (C-ESD).</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Methods</h3><p>This study retrospectively analyzed consecutive patients with r-NET treated with ESD between October 2021 and October 2023. Our study assessed differences between the groups in the complete resection rate of lesions, muscular layer injury, surgical complications, operation time, resection speed, time to liquid diet, postoperative hospital stay, hospital cost, and recurrence rate.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Results</h3><p>A total of 119 patients with r-NETs participated in this study (RBT-ESD group, <i>n</i> = 27; C-ESD group, <i>n</i> = 92). The operation time in RBT-ESD group was shorter than in C-ESD group, but the difference was not statistically significant (16.0 min [9.0–22.0 min] vs. 18.0 min [13.3–27.0 min], <i>P</i> = 0.056). However, the resection speed was significantly faster in the RBT-ESD group (6.7 vs. 4.1 mm<sup>2</sup>/min, <i>P</i> = 0.005). Furthermore, the RBT-ESD group showed significantly less muscular layer injury (<i>P</i> = 0.047) and faster diet recovery (<i>P</i> = 0.035). No significant differences were observed in the complete resection rate, surgical complications, postoperative hospital stay, hospital cost, or recurrence rate between the two groups.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Conclusion</h3><p>For r-NETs of &lt; 2 cm in size, the RBT method did not significantly shorten the operation time but resulted in faster resection speed, less muscular layer injury, and earlier postoperative recovery to a liquid diet.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Graphical Abstract</h3>\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":501625,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Surgical Endoscopy\",\"volume\":\"141 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Surgical Endoscopy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-024-11244-5\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgical Endoscopy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-024-11244-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景内镜黏膜下剥离术(ESD)是治疗胃肠道肿瘤(包括直肠神经内分泌肿瘤(r-NET))的一种安全有效的技术。目的我们开展了一项研究,比较橡皮筋牵引辅助ESD(RBT-ESD)与传统ESD(C-ESD)的有效性和安全性。方法本研究回顾性分析了2021年10月至2023年10月期间接受ESD治疗的连续r-NET患者。我们的研究评估了两组患者在病灶完全切除率、肌肉层损伤、手术并发症、手术时间、切除速度、流质饮食时间、术后住院时间、住院费用和复发率等方面的差异。结果共有119例r-NET患者参与了这项研究(RBT-ESD组,n = 27;C-ESD组,n = 92)。RBT-ESD 组的手术时间短于 C-ESD 组,但差异无统计学意义(16.0 分钟 [9.0-22.0 分钟] vs. 18.0 分钟 [13.3-27.0 分钟],P = 0.056)。然而,RBT-ESD 组的切除速度明显更快(6.7 mm2/min 对 4.1 mm2/min,P = 0.005)。此外,RBT-ESD 组的肌肉层损伤明显更少(P = 0.047),饮食恢复更快(P = 0.035)。结论对于 2 厘米大小的 r-NET,RBT 方法没有明显缩短手术时间,但切除速度更快,肌肉层损伤更少,术后更早恢复流质饮食。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
Conventional versus rubber band traction-assisted endoscopic submucosal dissection for rectal neuroendocrine tumors: a single-center retrospective study (with video)

Background

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a safe and effective technique for the treatment of gastrointestinal tumors, including rectal neuroendocrine tumors (r-NETs). However, the relative advantages of traction-assisted ESD for the treatment of small rectal lesions are still debated.

Aims

We conducted a study to compare the efficacy and safety of rubber band traction-assisted ESD (RBT-ESD) to conventional ESD (C-ESD).

Methods

This study retrospectively analyzed consecutive patients with r-NET treated with ESD between October 2021 and October 2023. Our study assessed differences between the groups in the complete resection rate of lesions, muscular layer injury, surgical complications, operation time, resection speed, time to liquid diet, postoperative hospital stay, hospital cost, and recurrence rate.

Results

A total of 119 patients with r-NETs participated in this study (RBT-ESD group, n = 27; C-ESD group, n = 92). The operation time in RBT-ESD group was shorter than in C-ESD group, but the difference was not statistically significant (16.0 min [9.0–22.0 min] vs. 18.0 min [13.3–27.0 min], P = 0.056). However, the resection speed was significantly faster in the RBT-ESD group (6.7 vs. 4.1 mm2/min, P = 0.005). Furthermore, the RBT-ESD group showed significantly less muscular layer injury (P = 0.047) and faster diet recovery (P = 0.035). No significant differences were observed in the complete resection rate, surgical complications, postoperative hospital stay, hospital cost, or recurrence rate between the two groups.

Conclusion

For r-NETs of < 2 cm in size, the RBT method did not significantly shorten the operation time but resulted in faster resection speed, less muscular layer injury, and earlier postoperative recovery to a liquid diet.

Graphical Abstract

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Short-term gut microbiota’s shift after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y vs one anastomosis gastric bypass: results of a multicenter randomized control trial Classifying frailty in the ventral hernia population Retrospective study on endoscopic treatment of recurrent esophageal cancer patients after radiotherapy State of the art medical devices for fluorescence-guided surgery (FGS): technical review and future developments Conquering the common bile duct: outcomes in minimally invasive transcystic common bile duct exploration versus ERCP
×
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