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 1 Resection results of tissue-anchoring circumferential endoscopic mucosal resection
| Endoscopist | Margin (min) | Dissection (min) | Total time (min) | Perforation (rate) | En-bloc(rate) |
| 1st | 7.3 ± 2.4 | 5.2 ± 3.8 | 17.8 ± 4.7 | 1/9 (11.1%) | 9/9 (100%) |
| 2nd | 9.0 ± 4.5 | 6.0 ± 3.7 | 21.5 ± 6.7 | 0/8 (0%) | 6/8 (75%) |
| 3rd | 5.8 ± 2.2 | 4.1 ± 2.1 | 13.2 ± 3.5 | 1/8 (12.5%) | 6/8 (75%) |
| Total | 7.4 ±3.3 | 5.1 ± 3.3 | 17.5 ± 6.0 | 2/25 (8.0%) | 21/25 (84.0%) |
Table 2 Resection results of forceps precut endoscopic mucosal resection
| Endoscopist | Margin (min) | Dissection (min) | Total time (min) | Perforation (rate) | En-bloc(rate) |
| 1st | 9.6 ± 4.1 | 3.8 ± 2.4 | 19.1 ± 9.2 | 0/8 (0%) | 5/8 (62.5%) |
| 2nd | 8.4 ± 2.9 | 3.6 ± 1.7 | 18.0 ± 3.8 | 0/9 (0%) | 4/9 (44.4%) |
| 3rd | 5.6 ± 2.3 | 3.0 ± 2.1 | 12.6 ± 4.3 | 2/8 (25%) | 6/8 (75%) |
| Total | 7.9 ± 4.0 | 3.5 ± 2.0 | 16.6 ± 6.6 | 2/25 (8.0%) | 15/25 (60.0%) |
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