Copyright
©The Author(s) 2016.
World J Gastrointest Endosc. Feb 10, 2016; 8(3): 173-179
Published online Feb 10, 2016. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v8.i3.173
Published online Feb 10, 2016. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v8.i3.173
Ref. | Year | n | Study design | Bleeding:SLE vs no SLE (%) | Risk factors for delayed bleeding | SLE benefit |
Ryu et al[17] | 2013 | 182 | Prospective, single center | 16.2% vs 11.1% | No risk factors | No |
Mochizuki et al[8] | 2014 | 262 | Prospective, Multicenter center | 5.4% vs 3.8% | Resected specimen size > 40 mm | No |
Kim et al[16] | 2014 | 437 | Prospective, single center | 3.6% vs 2.8% | Large tumor size (> 20 mm) | No |
Park et al[14] | 2015 | 445 | Retrospective | 3.0% vs 2.0% | Tumor in the upper-third of the stomach, resected specimen size > 40 mm | No |
Kim et al[15] | 2015 | 502 | Retrospective | 1.0% vs 2.5% | Large tumor size (> 15 mm) | No |
- Citation: Kim SJ, Choi CW, Kang DH, Kim HW, Park SB. Second-look endoscopy and factors associated with delayed bleeding after endoscopic submucosal dissection. World J Gastrointest Endosc 2016; 8(3): 173-179
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1948-5190/full/v8/i3/173.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4253/wjge.v8.i3.173