Efficacy of mucosa-submucosa clip closure method after gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection

Table 1 The characteristics of the complete closure group and failure group

	Complete closure	Failure	P value
Patient
Number	15	7
Male sex, n (%)	12 (80)	6 (85.7)	0.787
Age (years)	71.5 ± 8.75	75.6 ± 13.1	0.392
Use of antithrombotic agent	3	2
Resected specimen
Size	29.3 ± 4.75	34.4 ± 8.68	0.087
Area	6.68 ± 2.39	7.96 ± 4.21	0.37
Location
L/M/U	6/8/1	2/4/1	0.82
A/P/L/G	5/3/3/4	0/5/1/1	0.09
Location score	1.93 ± 0.704	2.71 ± 0.49	0.016
Closure difficulty index	56.8 ± 21.9	95.4 ± 35	0.005
Closure
Procedure time (s)	1005.5 ± 723	608.3 ± 358.9	0.22
Number of clips	11.8 ± 2.17	8.57 ± 3.87	0.018
Adverse event
Perforation during ESD	3	0	0.54
Delayed perforation	0	0	-
Delayed bleeding	0	1	0.69
Length of hospital stay (days)	7.36 ± 0.93	7.86 ± 2.27	0.59

L/M/U: Lower third stomach/middle third stomach/upper third stomach; A/P/L/G: Anterior wall/posterior wall/lessor curvature/greater curvature; ESD: Endoscopic submucosal dissection.

Table 2 High closure difficulty index could predict the failure of complete closure

	Failure	Success
High closure difficulty index (≥ 99)	4	0
Low closure difficulty index (< 99)	3	15