巨大结肠息肉的内窥镜治疗:一项意大利回顾性研究

IF 2.1 Q3 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
P. Quitadamo, Sara Isoldi, G. de Nucci, Giulia Muzi, Flora Caruso
{"title":"巨大结肠息肉的内窥镜治疗:一项意大利回顾性研究","authors":"P. Quitadamo, Sara Isoldi, G. de Nucci, Giulia Muzi, Flora Caruso","doi":"10.5946/ce.2023.229","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background/Aims: Polyps greater than 30 mm are classified as “giants”. Their endoscopic removal represents a technical challenge. The choice of the endoscopic removal technique is important because it provides a resection sample for precise histopathological staging. This is pivotal for diagnostic, prognostic, and management purposes. Methods: From a retrospective analysis, we obtained a sample of 38 giant polyps. Eighteen polypectomies were performed using the epinephrine volume reduction (EVR) method, nine polypectomies utilized endo-looping or clipping methods, and 11 patients underwent surgery. Results: We obtained en bloc resection with the EVR method in all cases; histology confirmed the correct indication for endoscopic resection in all cases. Moreover, no early or delayed complications were observed, and no patient required hospitalization. Using en-do-looping or clipping methods, we observed advanced histology in 1/9 (11.1%) cases, while another patient (1/9, 11.1%) had delayed bleeding. Among patients who underwent surgery, 5/11 (45.5%) were deemed overtreated and three had post-surgical complications. Conclusions: We propose EVR as an alternative technique for giant polyp resection due to its safety, effectiveness, cost-efficiency, and the advantage of avoiding the need to postpone polypectomy to a later time. Further prospective studies might help improve this experience and enhance the technique.","PeriodicalId":10351,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Endoscopy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Endoscopic management of giant colonic polyps: a retrospective Italian study\",\"authors\":\"P. Quitadamo, Sara Isoldi, G. de Nucci, Giulia Muzi, Flora Caruso\",\"doi\":\"10.5946/ce.2023.229\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background/Aims: Polyps greater than 30 mm are classified as “giants”. Their endoscopic removal represents a technical challenge. The choice of the endoscopic removal technique is important because it provides a resection sample for precise histopathological staging. This is pivotal for diagnostic, prognostic, and management purposes. Methods: From a retrospective analysis, we obtained a sample of 38 giant polyps. Eighteen polypectomies were performed using the epinephrine volume reduction (EVR) method, nine polypectomies utilized endo-looping or clipping methods, and 11 patients underwent surgery. Results: We obtained en bloc resection with the EVR method in all cases; histology confirmed the correct indication for endoscopic resection in all cases. Moreover, no early or delayed complications were observed, and no patient required hospitalization. Using en-do-looping or clipping methods, we observed advanced histology in 1/9 (11.1%) cases, while another patient (1/9, 11.1%) had delayed bleeding. Among patients who underwent surgery, 5/11 (45.5%) were deemed overtreated and three had post-surgical complications. Conclusions: We propose EVR as an alternative technique for giant polyp resection due to its safety, effectiveness, cost-efficiency, and the advantage of avoiding the need to postpone polypectomy to a later time. Further prospective studies might help improve this experience and enhance the technique.\",\"PeriodicalId\":10351,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Endoscopy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Endoscopy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2023.229\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Endoscopy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2023.229","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景/目的:大于 30 毫米的息肉被归类为 "巨型息肉"。内窥镜下切除息肉是一项技术挑战。选择内窥镜切除技术非常重要,因为它能为精确的组织病理学分期提供切除样本。这对诊断、预后和管理至关重要。方法:通过回顾性分析,我们获得了 38 个巨大息肉样本。其中 18 例息肉切除术采用了肾上腺素体积缩小法(EVR),9 例息肉切除术采用了内环切法或剪切法,11 例患者接受了手术治疗。结果:我们在所有病例中都采用了EVR方法进行了全切;组织学检查证实了所有病例中内镜切除术的正确适应症。此外,没有发现早期或延迟并发症,也没有患者需要住院治疗。在采用内镜下环切或剪切方法的病例中,我们观察到1/9(11.1%)的病例组织学结果为晚期,另一名患者(1/9,11.1%)出现延迟出血。在接受手术的患者中,5/11(45.5%)例被认为治疗过度,3 例出现术后并发症。结论:我们建议将 EVR 作为巨型息肉切除术的替代技术,因为它安全、有效、经济,而且可以避免推迟息肉切除术的时间。进一步的前瞻性研究可能有助于改善这一经验并提高技术水平。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Endoscopic management of giant colonic polyps: a retrospective Italian study
Background/Aims: Polyps greater than 30 mm are classified as “giants”. Their endoscopic removal represents a technical challenge. The choice of the endoscopic removal technique is important because it provides a resection sample for precise histopathological staging. This is pivotal for diagnostic, prognostic, and management purposes. Methods: From a retrospective analysis, we obtained a sample of 38 giant polyps. Eighteen polypectomies were performed using the epinephrine volume reduction (EVR) method, nine polypectomies utilized endo-looping or clipping methods, and 11 patients underwent surgery. Results: We obtained en bloc resection with the EVR method in all cases; histology confirmed the correct indication for endoscopic resection in all cases. Moreover, no early or delayed complications were observed, and no patient required hospitalization. Using en-do-looping or clipping methods, we observed advanced histology in 1/9 (11.1%) cases, while another patient (1/9, 11.1%) had delayed bleeding. Among patients who underwent surgery, 5/11 (45.5%) were deemed overtreated and three had post-surgical complications. Conclusions: We propose EVR as an alternative technique for giant polyp resection due to its safety, effectiveness, cost-efficiency, and the advantage of avoiding the need to postpone polypectomy to a later time. Further prospective studies might help improve this experience and enhance the technique.
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
Clinical Endoscopy
Clinical Endoscopy GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
8.00%
发文量
95
审稿时长
26 weeks
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信