scholarly journals Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection of adenomas and colorectal serrated lesions: a prospective clinical study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pedro Nogueira
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Study ◽  
Endoscopic Mucosal Resection ◽  
Prospective Clinical Study ◽  
Mucosal Resection ◽  
Serrated Lesions

Endoscopic mucosal resection for large serrated lesions in comparison with adenomas: a prospective multicentre study of 2000 lesions

Gut ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 66 (4) ◽  
pp. 644-653 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Pellise ◽  
Nicholas G Burgess ◽  
Nicholas Tutticci ◽  
Luke F Hourigan ◽  
Simon A Zanati ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multicentre Study ◽  
Endoscopic Mucosal Resection ◽  
Mucosal Resection ◽  
Prospective Multicentre Study ◽  
Serrated Lesions

Clinical study ofex vivophotoacoustic imaging in endoscopic mucosal resection tissues

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liang Lim ◽  
Catherine J. Streutker ◽  
Norman Marcon ◽  
Maria Cirocco ◽  
Vladimir V. Iakovlev ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Study ◽  
Endoscopic Mucosal Resection ◽  
Mucosal Resection

scholarly journals Adverse events and residual lesion rate after cold endoscopic mucosal resection of serrated lesions ≥10 mm

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Connor D. McWhinney ◽  
Krishna C. Vemulapalli ◽  
Ahmed El Rahyel ◽  
Noor Abdullah ◽  
Douglas K. Rex
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Endoscopic Mucosal Resection ◽  
Mucosal Resection ◽  
Residual Lesion ◽  
Serrated Lesions

scholarly journals Clinical Study of Early Gastric Cancer Patients Who Underwent Surgical Operation after Endoscopic Mucosal Resection (EMR)

1997 ◽  
Vol 50 (0) ◽  
pp. 160-163
Author(s):  
Koji Fujita ◽  
Yoshihide Otani ◽  
Yoichirou Ishikawa ◽  
Soichirou Isshiki ◽  
Yoshitake Yokoyama ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Clinical Study ◽  
Early Gastric Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Endoscopic Mucosal Resection ◽  
Surgical Operation ◽  
Mucosal Resection ◽  
Gastric Cancer Patients

Mo2017 Clinical Study of Ex Vivo Photoacoustic Imaging in Endoscopic Mucosal Resection Tissues

2015 ◽  
Vol 148 (4) ◽  
pp. S-769-S-770 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liang Lim ◽  
Catherine Streutker ◽  
Norman E. Marcon ◽  
Maria Cirocco ◽  
Vladimir V. Iakovlev ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Study ◽  
Endoscopic Mucosal Resection ◽  
Ex Vivo ◽  
Photoacoustic Imaging ◽  
Mucosal Resection

Piecemeal cold snare polypectomy versus conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for large sessile serrated lesions: a retrospective comparison across two successive periods

Gut ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. gutjnl-2020-321753
Author(s):  
W Arnout van Hattem ◽  
Neal Shahidi ◽  
Sergei Vosko ◽  
Imogen Hartley ◽  
Kaushali Britto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Endoscopic Mucosal Resection ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Technical Success ◽  
Delayed Bleeding ◽  
Historical Comparison ◽  
Mucosal Resection ◽  
Cold Snare Polypectomy ◽  
Serrated Lesions ◽  
Snare Polypectomy

ObjectiveLarge (≥20 mm) sessile serrated lesions (L-SSL) are premalignant lesions that require endoscopic removal. Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is the existing standard of care but carries some risk of adverse events including clinically significant post-EMR bleeding and deep mural injury (DMI). The respective risk-effectiveness ratio of piecemeal cold snare polypectomy (p-CSP) in L-SSL management is not fully known.DesignConsecutive patients referred for L-SSL management were treated by p-CSP from April 2016 to January 2020 or by conventional EMR in the preceding period between July 2008 and March 2016 at four Australian tertiary centres. Surveillance colonoscopies were conducted at 6 months (SC1) and 18 months (SC2). Outcomes on technical success, adverse events and recurrence were documented prospectively and then compared retrospectively between the subsequent time periods.ResultsA total of 562 L-SSL in 474 patients were evaluated of which 156 L-SSL in 121 patients were treated by p-CSP and 406 L-SSL in 353 patients by EMR. Technical success was equal in both periods (100.0% (n=156) vs 99.0% (n=402)). No adverse events occurred in p-CSP, whereas delayed bleeding and DMI were encountered in 5.1% (n=18) and 3.4% (n=12) of L-SSL treated by EMR, respectively. Recurrence rates following p-CSP were similar to EMR at 4.3% (n=4) versus 4.6% (n=14) and 2.0% (n=1) versus 1.2% (n=3) for surveillance colonoscopy (SC)1 and SC2, respectively.ConclusionsIn a historical comparison on the endoscopic management of L-SSL, p-CSP is technically equally efficacious to EMR but virtually eliminates the risk of delayed bleeding and perforation. p-CSP should therefore be considered as the new standard of care for L-SSL treatment.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document