内镜下粘膜切除术和内镜下粘膜夹层对结肠息肉切除术的影响及复发影响因素。

Binnan Li, Wanqiong Zheng
{"title":"内镜下粘膜切除术和内镜下粘膜夹层对结肠息肉切除术的影响及复发影响因素。","authors":"Binnan Li, Wanqiong Zheng","doi":"10.1097/SLE.0000000000001329","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aims to assess the effectiveness of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the endoscopic resection of colonic polyps and investigate the factors influencing polyp recurrence.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 174 patients with colorectal polyps admitted to the Gastroenterology Department during the same period were included in this prospective randomized controlled study. The patients were randomly allocated to the EMR group and ESD group (72 cases in each group) using a random number table. The clinical efficacy, quality of life, adverse reactions, and 1-year postoperative recurrence rate were compared between the 2 groups. In addition, factors influencing polyp recurrence were analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No significant differences were observed between the EMR and ESD groups in terms of clinical efficacy, postoperative quality of life, and postoperative complications. However, the postoperative recurrence rate in the ESD group was significantly lower than that in the EMR group. Multifactorial logistic regression analysis revealed that the number of polyps ≥3, maximum polyp diameter ≥2 cm, and family history of colorectal cancer were independent risk factors for colonic polyp recurrence.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>ESD and EMR demonstrate similar efficacy and safety in patients with colonic polyps. However, the recurrence rate after ESD is significantly lower than after EMR. Furthermore, multifactorial analysis indicates that a larger polyp diameter, a more significant number of polyps, and a family history of colorectal cancer are independent risk factors for the recurrence of colonic polyps following resection.</p>","PeriodicalId":22092,"journal":{"name":"Surgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques","volume":"34 6","pages":"607-613"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Impact of Endoscopic Mucosal Resection and Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection on Colonic Polyp Resection and Factors Influencing Recurrence.\",\"authors\":\"Binnan Li, Wanqiong Zheng\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/SLE.0000000000001329\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aims to assess the effectiveness of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the endoscopic resection of colonic polyps and investigate the factors influencing polyp recurrence.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 174 patients with colorectal polyps admitted to the Gastroenterology Department during the same period were included in this prospective randomized controlled study. The patients were randomly allocated to the EMR group and ESD group (72 cases in each group) using a random number table. The clinical efficacy, quality of life, adverse reactions, and 1-year postoperative recurrence rate were compared between the 2 groups. In addition, factors influencing polyp recurrence were analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No significant differences were observed between the EMR and ESD groups in terms of clinical efficacy, postoperative quality of life, and postoperative complications. However, the postoperative recurrence rate in the ESD group was significantly lower than that in the EMR group. Multifactorial logistic regression analysis revealed that the number of polyps ≥3, maximum polyp diameter ≥2 cm, and family history of colorectal cancer were independent risk factors for colonic polyp recurrence.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>ESD and EMR demonstrate similar efficacy and safety in patients with colonic polyps. However, the recurrence rate after ESD is significantly lower than after EMR. Furthermore, multifactorial analysis indicates that a larger polyp diameter, a more significant number of polyps, and a family history of colorectal cancer are independent risk factors for the recurrence of colonic polyps following resection.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22092,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Surgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques\",\"volume\":\"34 6\",\"pages\":\"607-613\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Surgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/SLE.0000000000001329\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SLE.0000000000001329","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:评价内镜下粘膜切除术(EMR)和内镜下粘膜剥离术(ESD)在内镜下结肠息肉切除术中的疗效,探讨影响息肉复发的因素。方法:选取同期消化科收治的174例结直肠息肉患者进行前瞻性随机对照研究。采用随机数字表法将患者随机分为EMR组和ESD组(每组72例)。比较两组患者的临床疗效、生活质量、不良反应及术后1年复发率。并对影响息肉复发的因素进行分析。结果:EMR组与ESD组在临床疗效、术后生活质量、术后并发症等方面均无显著差异。但ESD组术后复发率明显低于EMR组。多因素logistic回归分析显示,息肉数≥3个、最大息肉直径≥2 cm、结直肠癌家族史是结肠息肉复发的独立危险因素。结论:ESD与EMR治疗结肠息肉的疗效和安全性相似。而ESD术后复发率明显低于EMR术后。此外,多因素分析表明,息肉直径较大、息肉数量较多、结直肠癌家族史是结肠息肉切除术后复发的独立危险因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The Impact of Endoscopic Mucosal Resection and Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection on Colonic Polyp Resection and Factors Influencing Recurrence.

Objective: This study aims to assess the effectiveness of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the endoscopic resection of colonic polyps and investigate the factors influencing polyp recurrence.

Methods: A total of 174 patients with colorectal polyps admitted to the Gastroenterology Department during the same period were included in this prospective randomized controlled study. The patients were randomly allocated to the EMR group and ESD group (72 cases in each group) using a random number table. The clinical efficacy, quality of life, adverse reactions, and 1-year postoperative recurrence rate were compared between the 2 groups. In addition, factors influencing polyp recurrence were analyzed.

Results: No significant differences were observed between the EMR and ESD groups in terms of clinical efficacy, postoperative quality of life, and postoperative complications. However, the postoperative recurrence rate in the ESD group was significantly lower than that in the EMR group. Multifactorial logistic regression analysis revealed that the number of polyps ≥3, maximum polyp diameter ≥2 cm, and family history of colorectal cancer were independent risk factors for colonic polyp recurrence.

Conclusion: ESD and EMR demonstrate similar efficacy and safety in patients with colonic polyps. However, the recurrence rate after ESD is significantly lower than after EMR. Furthermore, multifactorial analysis indicates that a larger polyp diameter, a more significant number of polyps, and a family history of colorectal cancer are independent risk factors for the recurrence of colonic polyps following resection.

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
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
10.00%
发文量
103
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Surgical Laparoscopy Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques is a primary source for peer-reviewed, original articles on the newest techniques and applications in operative laparoscopy and endoscopy. Its Editorial Board includes many of the surgeons who pioneered the use of these revolutionary techniques. The journal provides complete, timely, accurate, practical coverage of laparoscopic and endoscopic techniques and procedures; current clinical and basic science research; preoperative and postoperative patient management; complications in laparoscopic and endoscopic surgery; and new developments in instrumentation and technology.
期刊最新文献
Rectus Sheath and Transversus Abdominis Plane Blocks for Preaponeurotic Endoscopic Repair: Is the Double Block the Solution for Postoperative Pain Management? The Impact of Intraoperative CO2 Pneumoperitoneum Pressure in Gastrointestinal Surgery: A Systematic Review. Factors Predicting Major Complications and Mortality in Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy: 8 Years of Experience of a Tertiary Surgery Center. Clinical Results of Percutaneous Transhepatic Biliary Drainage With Different Hepatic Access and Methods in the Treatment of Obstructive Jaundice. Rectal Eversion as an Anus-sparing Technique in Laparoscopic Low Anterior Resection With Double Stapling Anastomosis: Long-term Functional Results.
×
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