scholarly journals En Masse Resection of Pancreas, Spleen, Celiac Axis, Stomach, Kidney, Adrenal, and Colon for Invasive Pancreatic Corpus and Tail Tumor

2013 ◽  
Vol 2013 ◽  
pp. 1-4 ◽  
Author(s):  
Koray Kutluturk ◽  
Abdul Hamid Alam ◽  
Cuneyt Kayaalp ◽  
Emrah Otan ◽  
Cemalettin Aydin
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Pancreatic Tumor ◽  
Left Renal Vein ◽  
En Bloc Resection ◽  
Bloc Resection ◽  
Complete Resection ◽  
Celiac Axis ◽  
Left Adrenal Gland ◽  
En Bloc ◽  
Extensive Surgery

Providing a more comfortable life and a longer survival for pancreatic corpus/tail tumors without metastasis depends on the complete resection. Recently, distal pancreatectomy with celiac axis resection was reported as a feasible and favorable method in selected pancreatic corpus/tail tumors which had invaded the celiac axis. Additional organ resections to the celiac axis were rarely required, and when necessary it was included only a single extra organ resection such as adrenal or intestine. Here, we described a distal pancreatic tumor invading most of the neighboring organs—stomach, celiac axis, left renal vein, left adrenal gland, and splenic flexure were treated by en bloc resection of all these organs. The patient was a 60-year-old man without any severe medical comorbidities. Postoperative course of the patient was uneventful, and he was discharged on postoperative day eight without any complication. Histopathology and stage of the tumor were adenocarcinoma and T4 N1 M0, respectively. Preoperative back pain of the patient was completely relieved in the postoperative period. As a result, celiac axis resection for pancreatic cancer is an extensive surgery, and a combined en masse resection of the invaded neighboring organs is a more extensive surgery than the celiac axis resection alone. This more extensive surgery is safe and feasible for selected patients with pancreatic cancer.

scholarly journals Long-Term Clinical Efficacy and Perioperative Safety of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection versus Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for Early Gastric Cancer: An Updated Meta-Analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yajie Zhao ◽  
Chengfeng Wang
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Local Recurrence Rate ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Postoperative Bleeding ◽  
En Bloc Resection ◽  
Bloc Resection ◽  
Complete Resection ◽  
Resection Rate ◽  
En Bloc ◽  
Prolonged Operative Time

Background. To systematically evaluate the safety and efficacy of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) versus endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for early gastric cancer (EGC). Methods. We searched the databases of PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library from January 2000 to April 2017 and included studies that compared the outcomes of ESD with EMR for EGC. These eligible studies that met the inclusion criteria were screened out and were assessed by two independent investigators. Result. In total, 18 retrospective cohort studies were eligible for analysis. Our results indicated that ESD is more beneficial than EMR in increasing the complete resection rate and en bloc resection rate and decreasing the local recurrence rate. However, ESD prolonged operative time and increased incidence of gastric perforation than EMR. No differences were found in postoperative bleeding rate between the two approaches. Conclusion. Compared with EMR, ESD offers higher complete resection rate, higher en bloc resection rate, and lower local recurrence rate but has prolonged operative time and increased incidence of gastric perfusion. There is no statistical difference in the rate of postoperative bleeding between the two groups. However, the above conclusion needs further verification by well-designed, randomized trials with larger samples and long follow-up periods.

Efficacy of precutting endoscopic mucosal resection with full or partial circumferential incision using a snare tip for difficult colorectal lesions

Endoscopy ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 51 (09) ◽  
pp. 871-876 ◽  
Author(s):  
Naohisa Yoshida ◽  
Ken Inoue ◽  
Osamu Dohi ◽  
Ritsu Yasuda ◽  
Ryohei Hirose ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Endoscopic Mucosal Resection ◽  
En Bloc Resection ◽  
Bloc Resection ◽  
Complete Resection ◽  
Benign Lesions ◽  
Resection Rate ◽  
En Bloc ◽  
Mucosal Resection ◽  
Therapeutic Outcomes ◽  
Mucosal Incision

Abstract Background We analyzed the efficacy of precutting endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), which is a method of making a full or partial circumferential mucosal incision around a tumor with a snare tip for en bloc resection. Methods We reviewed cases from 2011 to 2018 in which precutting EMR (n = 167) and standard EMR (n = 557) were performed for lesions of 10 – 30 mm. Precutting EMR was indicated for benign lesions of 20 – 30 mm or lesions of < 20 mm for which standard EMR was difficult. Through propensity score matching of the two groups, the therapeutic outcomes for 35 lesions of ≥ 20 mm and 98 lesions of < 20 mm in each group were analyzed. Results In the two sizes of lesion, there were significant differences between the precutting and standard groups in the en bloc resection rate (≥ 20 mm 88.6 % vs. 48.5 %, P < 0.001; < 20 mm 98.0 % vs. 85.7 %, P = 0.004) and the histological complete resection rate (≥ 20 mm 71.4 % vs. 42.9 %, P = 0.02; < 20 mm 87.8 % vs. 67.3 %, P < 0.001). Conclusion Precutting EMR enabled high en bloc resection rates in cases involving difficult lesions.

scholarly journals Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection of Papillary Gastric Adenocarcinoma; Systematic Review

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. 1465
Author(s):  
Chang Seok Bang ◽  
Jae Jun Lee ◽  
Gwang Ho Baik
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection ◽  
Curative Resection ◽  
En Bloc Resection ◽  
Bloc Resection ◽  
Complete Resection ◽  
Submucosal Invasion ◽  
High Rate ◽  
En Bloc ◽  
Submucosal Dissection

This study evaluated the possibility of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for early gastric cancer with papillary adenocarcinoma (EGC-PAC). PAC, an uncommon pathologic type of stomach cancer, is classified into differentiated-type histology. However, aggressive features, including a high rate of submucosal invasion, lymphovascular invasion (LVI), and lymph node metastasis (LNM), have been reported in studies with surgical specimens. Treatment outcomes of ESD for EGC-PAC have not been precisely demonstrated. Core databases were sought for the following inclusion criteria: studies of endoscopic resection or surgery of EGC-PAC presenting the following therapeutic indicators; en bloc resection, complete resection, curative resection, recurrence, complications associated with procedures, LVI, or LNM that enabled an analysis of ESD possibility. Overall, 15 studies were included for systematic review. Frequent submucosal invasion and high LVI were noted in EGC-PAC. However, PAC was not significantly associated with LNM. Pooled en bloc resection, complete resection, and curative resection rates were 89.7% (95% confidence interval: 55.3%–98.4%), 85.3% (67.7%–94.2%), and 67% (43%–84.5%), respectively. No LNM was observed if EGC-PAC satisfied the curative resection criteria. ESD seems technically feasible, although a high LVI rate results in a lower rate of curative resection.

scholarly journals Disección endoscópica con técnica de bolsillo submucoso. ¿Puede reemplazar a la disección convencional?

2021 ◽  
Vol 51 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Martín Yantorno ◽  
Gustavo Javier Correa ◽  
Sebastián Esteves ◽  
Florencia Giraudo ◽  
Agustina Redondo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
En Bloc Resection ◽  
Conventional Technique ◽  
Bloc Resection ◽  
Complete Resection ◽  
High Rate ◽  
Procedure Time ◽  
Technical Success ◽  
En Bloc

Endoscopic submucosal dissection is a complex technique that allows en bloc resection of large lesions. It is associated with long-term, technically complex procedures and a high risk of complications. The creation of a submucosal pocket is a variant of the conventional technique that reduces these difficulties, generating a high rate of complete resection with a shorter procedure time, a faster dissection speed and a lower rate of adverse events. Even though this variant was initially described in the stomach, its application has been generalized to other areas of the digestive tract. We present two cases where this variant technique was applied to treat large early lesions, with technical success.

The efficacy and safety of underwater endoscopic mucosal resection for ≥10-mm colorectal polyps: systematic review and meta-analysis

Endoscopy ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
De-feng Li ◽  
Ming-Guang Lai ◽  
Mei-feng Yang ◽  
Zhi-yuan Zou ◽  
Jing Xu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Endoscopic Mucosal Resection ◽  
En Bloc Resection ◽  
Bloc Resection ◽  
Colorectal Polyps ◽  
Complete Resection ◽  
R0 Resection ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Resection Rate ◽  
En Bloc ◽  
Mucosal Resection

Abstract Background Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) is a promising strategy for nonpedunculated colorectal polyp removal. However, the efficacy and safety of the technique for the treatment of ≥ 10-mm colorectal polyps remain unclear. We aimed to comprehensively assess the efficacy and safety of UEMR for polyps sized 10–19 mm and ≥ 20 mm. Methods PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched for relevant articles from January 2012 to November 2019. Primary outcomes were the rates of adverse events and residual polyps. Secondary outcomes were the complete resection, en bloc resection, and R0 resection rates. Results 18 articles including 1142 polyps from 1093 patients met our inclusion criteria. The overall adverse event and residual polyp rates were slightly lower for UEMR when removing colorectal polyps of 10–19 mm vs. ≥ 20 mm (3.5 % vs. 4.3 % and 1.2 % vs. 2.6 %, respectively). The UEMR-related complete resection rate was slightly higher for colorectal polyps of 10–19 mm vs. ≥ 20 mm (97.9 % vs. 92.0 %). However, the en bloc and R0 resection rates were dramatically higher for UEMR removal of polyps of 10–19 mm vs. ≥ 20 mm (83.4 % vs. 36.1 % and 73.0 % vs. 40.0 %, respectively). In addition, univariate meta-regression revealed that polyp size was an independent predictor for complete resection rate (P = 0.03) and en bloc resection (P = 0.01). Conclusions UEMR was an effective and safe technique for the removal of ≥ 10-mm nonpedunculated colorectal polyps. However, UEMR exhibited low en bloc and R0 resection rates for the treatment of ≥ 20-mm polyps.

scholarly journals Endoscopic submucosal dissection versus endoscopic mucosal resection for patients with early gastric cancer: a meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (12) ◽  
pp. e025803 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maogen Tao ◽  
Xiaobo Zhou ◽  
Meiqing Hu ◽  
Jun Pan
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Early Gastric Cancer ◽  
Local Recurrence ◽  
Curative Resection ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Operation Time ◽  
En Bloc Resection ◽  
Bloc Resection ◽  
Complete Resection ◽  
En Bloc

ObjectivesTo investigate the treatment effects of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) versus endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for early gastric cancer (EGC).DesignMeta-analysis.MethodsWe systematically searched three electronic databases, including PubMed, EmBase and the Cochrane library for studies published with inception to January 2018. The eligible studies should be evaluated for the efficacy and safety of ESD versus EMR for patients with EGC. The summary ORs and standard mean differences (SMDs) with 95% CIs were employed as effect estimates. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate the impact of single study on overall analysis. Subgroup analyses were performed for investigated outcomes to evaluate the treatment effects of ESD versus EMR for patients with EGC with specific subsets.ResultsEighteen studies, with a total of 6723 patients with EGC, were included in final analysis. The summary ORs indicated that patients with EGC who received ESD were associated with an increased incidence of en bloc resection (OR: 9.00; 95% CI: 6.66 to 12.17; p<0.001), complete resection (OR: 8.43; 95% CI: 5.04 to 14.09; p<0.001) and curative resection (OR: 2.92; 95% CI: 1.85 to 4.61; p<0.001) when compared with EMR. Furthermore, ESD was associated with lower risk of local recurrence (OR: 0.18; 95% CI: 0.09 to 0.34; p<0.001). In addition, there was no significant difference between ESD and EMR for the risk of bleeding (OR: 1.26; 95% CI: 0.88 to 1.80; p=0.203). Though, ESD was correlated with greater risk of perforation (OR: 2.55; 95% CI: 1.48 to 4.39; p=0.001), and longer operation time (SMD: 1.12; 95% CI: 0.13 to 2.10; p=0.026) as compared with EMR. Additionally, several different features observed in included studies and patients could bias the effectiveness of ESD versus EMR in patients with EGC.ConclusionsESD is superior than EMR for en bloc resection, complete resection, curative resection and local recurrence, while it increased perforation risk and longer operation time.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document