scholarly journals N-acetylcysteine for the prevention of stricture after circumferential endoscopic submucosal dissection of the esophagus: a randomized trial in a porcine model

2012 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maximilien Barret ◽  
Frédéric Batteux ◽  
Frédéric Beuvon ◽  
Luigi Mangialavori ◽  
Ariane Chryssostalis ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
RK Magalhães ◽  
M Dinis-Ribeiro ◽  
MJ Bruno ◽  
R Marcos-Pinto ◽  
C Rolanda ◽  
...  

2012 ◽  
Vol 75 (4) ◽  
pp. AB214-AB215
Author(s):  
Chia-Yuan Liu ◽  
Peng-Jen Chen ◽  
Chien-Chuan Chen ◽  
Ching-Tai Lee ◽  
I-Lin Lee ◽  
...  

BMC Surgery ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryoji Ichijima ◽  
Mitsuru Esaki ◽  
Shun Yamakawa ◽  
Yosuke Minoda ◽  
Sho Suzuki ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for gastrointestinal neoplasms can be technically difficult for trainee endoscopists. Presently, there is no consensus for trainees to select the endo-knife type in ESD. Therefore, we conducted a comparison study of treatment outcomes between scissors-type and needle-type knives in ESD performed by trainees in an ex vivo porcine model. Methods This study was conducted on trainee endoscopists who participated in ESD hands-on seminars held in August 2018 and September 2019. A total of 22 trainees from 13 institutions were divided into two groups according to their endoscopic experience. Under expert supervision, each trainee performed two ESDs in porcine models, namely, scissor-type knife (ESD-S) and needle-type knife (ESD-N). The efficacy and safety, including the procedure time and rates of self-completion, en bloc resection, and complications, were compared between ESD-S and ESD-N. In subgroup analysis, we also investigated the predictors associated with the difficulty of ESD for trainees using multivariate logistic regression analysis. Results Eight trainees had an experience of over 1000 endoscopies (senior trainee: S-Trainee), whereas the others had an experience of less than 1000 endoscopies (junior trainee: J-Trainee). Among the S-Trainees, no significant differences were observed in any treatment outcome between ESD-S and ESD-N. Among the J-Trainees, the total procedure and mucosal incision times were significantly shorter in ESD-S than in ESD-N [total procedure time: 16.5 min (range 10.0–31.0) vs. 22.3 min (range 10.0–38.0), P = 0.018; circumferential incision time: 10.0 min (range 6–16) vs. 17.0 min (range 5.0–31.5); P = 0.019]. Regarding complications, muscular injury occurred in two patients during ESD-N performed by J-Trainees; however, no muscular injury occurred during ESD-S. In subgroup analysis, ESD-N was an independent predictive factor of difficult ESD (odds ratio 5.28, 95% confidence interval 1.25–22.30; P = 0.024). Conclusions This study revealed that trainees, particularly those who have experienced less than 1000 endoscopies, should opt for the scissor-type knife to perform ESD.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document