改良双带结扎辅助内镜下粘膜下切除术及内镜下粘膜剥离术治疗胃肠道间质瘤(≤1.5 cm)的疗效分析。

IF 2.4 2区 医学 Q2 SURGERY
Xiaofei Fan, Xiaohan Cai, Jiao Jiao, Lili Luo, Ayixie Maihemuti, Tao Wang, Xin Chen, Zhongqing Zheng, Wentian Liu
{"title":"改良双带结扎辅助内镜下粘膜下切除术及内镜下粘膜剥离术治疗胃肠道间质瘤(≤1.5 cm)的疗效分析。","authors":"Xiaofei Fan, Xiaohan Cai, Jiao Jiao, Lili Luo, Ayixie Maihemuti, Tao Wang, Xin Chen, Zhongqing Zheng, Wentian Liu","doi":"10.1007/s00464-025-11598-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Recently, the application of double band ligation-assisted endoscopic submucosal resection (ESMR-DL) in the resection of rectal endocrine tumors ≤ 10 mm has shown promising prospects. However, the use of ESMR-DL has not been reported for gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (gGISTs). In this study, we aimed to compare the application of modified ESMR-DL with ESD in gGISTs (≤ 1.5 cm).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data were retrospectively collected from 472 patients who underwent modified ESMR-DL or endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for resection of gGISTs (≤ 1.5 cm). To overcome selection bias, a propensity score matching method was applied using four covariates for 1:1 matching: sex, age, tumor size, and tumor location. Clinical data, surgical status, and postoperative outcomes were compared between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 472 patients, 78 (16.5%) received modified ESMR-DL and 394 (83.5%) received ESD; after matching, there were 78 patients in each group. There was no statistical difference in the baseline characteristics between the two groups after matching (p > 0.05). Compared to ESD, modified ESMR-DL resulted in shorter operation time, time to a liquid diet and postoperative hospitalization time, but had a higher incidence of intraoperative perforation (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the R0 resection rate of tumors, incidence of postoperative complications, and average hospitalization costs between the two groups after matching (p > 0.05). Univariate and multivariate analyses showed that the maximum dimension of the lesion (7 mm increments) and the surgical method were factors affecting procedure time, and the maximum dimension of the lesion (7 mm increments) and operator (novice vs instructor) were factors affecting intraoperative perforation in modified ESMR-DL (P < 0.05). During the follow-up, there were no recurrences or metastases of gGISTs in either group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Modified ESMR-DL is noninferior to ESD with a similar complete resection rate. In addition, modified ESMR-DL had shorter procedure time and hospitalization time.</p>","PeriodicalId":22174,"journal":{"name":"Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques","volume":" ","pages":"2471-2480"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy analysis of modified double band ligation-assisted endoscopic submucosal resection and endoscopic mucosal dissection in the treatment of gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (≤ 1.5 cm).\",\"authors\":\"Xiaofei Fan, Xiaohan Cai, Jiao Jiao, Lili Luo, Ayixie Maihemuti, Tao Wang, Xin Chen, Zhongqing Zheng, Wentian Liu\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00464-025-11598-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Recently, the application of double band ligation-assisted endoscopic submucosal resection (ESMR-DL) in the resection of rectal endocrine tumors ≤ 10 mm has shown promising prospects. However, the use of ESMR-DL has not been reported for gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (gGISTs). In this study, we aimed to compare the application of modified ESMR-DL with ESD in gGISTs (≤ 1.5 cm).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data were retrospectively collected from 472 patients who underwent modified ESMR-DL or endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for resection of gGISTs (≤ 1.5 cm). To overcome selection bias, a propensity score matching method was applied using four covariates for 1:1 matching: sex, age, tumor size, and tumor location. Clinical data, surgical status, and postoperative outcomes were compared between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 472 patients, 78 (16.5%) received modified ESMR-DL and 394 (83.5%) received ESD; after matching, there were 78 patients in each group. There was no statistical difference in the baseline characteristics between the two groups after matching (p > 0.05). Compared to ESD, modified ESMR-DL resulted in shorter operation time, time to a liquid diet and postoperative hospitalization time, but had a higher incidence of intraoperative perforation (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the R0 resection rate of tumors, incidence of postoperative complications, and average hospitalization costs between the two groups after matching (p > 0.05). Univariate and multivariate analyses showed that the maximum dimension of the lesion (7 mm increments) and the surgical method were factors affecting procedure time, and the maximum dimension of the lesion (7 mm increments) and operator (novice vs instructor) were factors affecting intraoperative perforation in modified ESMR-DL (P < 0.05). During the follow-up, there were no recurrences or metastases of gGISTs in either group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Modified ESMR-DL is noninferior to ESD with a similar complete resection rate. In addition, modified ESMR-DL had shorter procedure time and hospitalization time.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22174,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"2471-2480\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-025-11598-4\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/2/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-025-11598-4","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:近年来,双带结扎辅助内镜粘膜下切除术(ESMR-DL)在直肠内分泌肿瘤≤10 mm的切除中显示出良好的应用前景。然而,ESMR-DL在胃肠道间质瘤(ggist)中的应用尚未见报道。在本研究中,我们旨在比较改良ESMR-DL与ESD在ggist(≤1.5 cm)中的应用。方法:回顾性收集472例行改良ESMR-DL或内镜下粘膜下剥离术(ESD)切除ggist(≤1.5 cm)的患者的资料。为了克服选择偏差,采用倾向评分匹配方法,使用四个协变量进行1:1匹配:性别、年龄、肿瘤大小和肿瘤位置。比较两组患者的临床资料、手术情况及术后结果。结果:472例患者中,78例(16.5%)接受了改良ESMR-DL, 394例(83.5%)接受了ESD;配对后,每组患者78例。配对后两组基线特征比较,差异无统计学意义(p < 0.05)。与ESD相比,改良ESMR-DL的手术时间、流质饮食时间和术后住院时间更短,但术中穿孔发生率更高(p < 0.05)。单因素和多因素分析显示,影响手术时间的因素是病变的最大尺寸(7mm增量)和手术方式,而影响改良ESMR-DL术中穿孔的因素是病变的最大尺寸(7mm增量)和操作人员(新手vs教练)(P)。结论:改良ESMR-DL不低于ESD,完全切除率相似。此外,改良ESMR-DL的手术时间和住院时间更短。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Efficacy analysis of modified double band ligation-assisted endoscopic submucosal resection and endoscopic mucosal dissection in the treatment of gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (≤ 1.5 cm).

Background: Recently, the application of double band ligation-assisted endoscopic submucosal resection (ESMR-DL) in the resection of rectal endocrine tumors ≤ 10 mm has shown promising prospects. However, the use of ESMR-DL has not been reported for gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (gGISTs). In this study, we aimed to compare the application of modified ESMR-DL with ESD in gGISTs (≤ 1.5 cm).

Methods: Data were retrospectively collected from 472 patients who underwent modified ESMR-DL or endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for resection of gGISTs (≤ 1.5 cm). To overcome selection bias, a propensity score matching method was applied using four covariates for 1:1 matching: sex, age, tumor size, and tumor location. Clinical data, surgical status, and postoperative outcomes were compared between the two groups.

Results: Of the 472 patients, 78 (16.5%) received modified ESMR-DL and 394 (83.5%) received ESD; after matching, there were 78 patients in each group. There was no statistical difference in the baseline characteristics between the two groups after matching (p > 0.05). Compared to ESD, modified ESMR-DL resulted in shorter operation time, time to a liquid diet and postoperative hospitalization time, but had a higher incidence of intraoperative perforation (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the R0 resection rate of tumors, incidence of postoperative complications, and average hospitalization costs between the two groups after matching (p > 0.05). Univariate and multivariate analyses showed that the maximum dimension of the lesion (7 mm increments) and the surgical method were factors affecting procedure time, and the maximum dimension of the lesion (7 mm increments) and operator (novice vs instructor) were factors affecting intraoperative perforation in modified ESMR-DL (P < 0.05). During the follow-up, there were no recurrences or metastases of gGISTs in either group.

Conclusions: Modified ESMR-DL is noninferior to ESD with a similar complete resection rate. In addition, modified ESMR-DL had shorter procedure time and hospitalization time.

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
6.10
自引率
12.90%
发文量
890
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: Uniquely positioned at the interface between various medical and surgical disciplines, Surgical Endoscopy serves as a focal point for the international surgical community to exchange information on practice, theory, and research. Topics covered in the journal include: -Surgical aspects of: Interventional endoscopy, Ultrasound, Other techniques in the fields of gastroenterology, obstetrics, gynecology, and urology, -Gastroenterologic surgery -Thoracic surgery -Traumatic surgery -Orthopedic surgery -Pediatric surgery
×
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