...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Surgical Endoscopy >Effectiveness and safety of endoscopic aspiration mucosectomy and endoscopic submucosal dissection in patients with superficial esophageal squamous-cell carcinoma
【24h】

Effectiveness and safety of endoscopic aspiration mucosectomy and endoscopic submucosal dissection in patients with superficial esophageal squamous-cell carcinoma

机译：具有浅表食管鳞状细胞癌患者内镜吸入粘膜切除术和内镜粘膜切除术的效力和安全性

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Background Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been performed in a high proportion of patients with superficial esophageal squamous-cell carcinoma. Endoscopic aspiration mucosectomy (EAM) is a more straightforward technique that is easier to perform. We retrospectively evaluated the safety and efficacy of EAM and ESD to clarify the advantages and disadvantages of each procedure. Methods A total of 374 patients (423 lesions) who underwent endoscopic resection were retrospectively studied. The following variables were evaluated (1) procedure time and adverse events as safety, and (2) en bloc complete resection rate, local recurrence rate, lymph node recurrence rate, overall survival rate, and cause-specific survival rate as efficacy. Results EAM was performed in 134 patients (149 lesions), and ESD was performed in 240 patients (274 lesions). The procedure times of EAM and ESD were 31.0 ± 22.4 and 85.7 ± 46.5 min (p < 0.001), respectively. The perforation rates were 0 and 6.2% (p = 0.002), respectively. The en bloc complete resection rates were 48.3 and 91.6% (p< 0.001), respectively. The local recurrence rates were 5.5 and 0% (p< 0.001), respectively. For lesions measuring less than 15 mm in diameter, EAM had a relatively good en bloc complete resection rate (EAM, 76.1% vs. ESD, 100%) and a significantly short procedure time (EAM, 25.2 ± 15.2 min vs. ESD, 62.7 ± 35.2 min; p < 0.001). Conclusions ESD has a higher en bloc complete resection rate and a better local control rate than EAM. For lesions measuring less than 15 mm in diameter, EAM may be a treatment option.
机译：背景技术内窥镜粘膜粘膜释放（ESD）已经以高比例的浅表食管鳞状细胞癌患者进行。内窥镜吸入粘膜切除术（EAM）是更简单的技术，其更容易执行。我们回顾性地评估了EAM和ESD的安全性和功效，以阐明每个程序的优缺点。方法回顾性研究了患有内窥镜切除的374名患者（423个病变）。评估以下变量（1）术时和不良事件作为安全性，（2）en Bloc完全切除率，局部复发率，淋巴结复发率，总存活率，以及造成特异性的存活率作为功效。结果在134名患者（149例）中进行了EAM，在240名患者中进行ESD（274例病变）。 EAM和ESD的过程时间分别为31.0±22.4和85.7±46.5分钟（P <0.001）。穿孔率分别为0和6.2％（p = 0.002）。 en Bloc完全切除率分别为48.3和91.6％（p <0.001）。局部复发率分别为5.5和0％（P <0.001）。对于直径小于15mm的病变，EAM具有相对较好的en Bloc完全切除率（EAM，76.1％与ESD，100％）和显着短的程序时间（EAM，25.2±15.2 min Vs. ESD，62.7 ±35.2分钟; p <0.001）。结论ESD具有较高的EN BLOC完全切除率和比EAM更好的局部控制率。对于直径小于15mm的病变，EAM可以是治疗选择。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号