Copyright
©2013 Baishideng Publishing Group Co.
World J Gastrointest Endosc. Jun 16, 2013; 5(6): 275-280
Published online Jun 16, 2013. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v5.i6.275
Published online Jun 16, 2013. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v5.i6.275
Table 3 Resection results of endoscopic submucosal dissection
| Endoscopist | Margin (min) | Dissection (min) | Total time (min) | Perforation (rate) | En-bloc(rate) |
| 1st | 7.2 ± 2.3 | 16.1 ± 7.0 | 30.5 ± 9.2 | 1/8 (12.5%) | 8/8 (100%) |
| 2nd | 8.3 ± 6.1 | 18.7 ± 12.1 | 33.1 ± 16.6 | 1/8 (12.5%) | 8/8 (100%) |
| 3rd | 5.5 ± 1.9 | 12.9 ± 7.0 | 22.9 ± 10.0 | 0/9 (0%) | 9/9 (100%) |
| Total | 6.9 ± 4.9 | 15.8 ± 9.5 | 28.6 ± 13.9 | 2/25 (8.0%) | 25/25 (100%) |
- Citation: Jung Y, Kato M, Lee J, Gromski MA, Chuttani R, Matthes K. Effectiveness of circumferential endoscopic mucosal resection with a novel tissue-anchoring device. World J Gastrointest Endosc 2013; 5(6): 275-280
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1948-5190/full/v5/i6/275.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4253/wjge.v5.i6.275