钛夹预防结直肠息肉切除术后不良事件疗效的Meta分析

背景钛夹预防性夹闭创面对结直肠息肉切除术后迟发性出血及穿孔等不良事件的作用尚不明确,目前关于钛夹预防作用的有效性尚未达成共识.目的评价钛夹对预防结直肠息肉内镜下切除术后不良事件的疗效.方法计算机检索Pub Med?EMBASE?Cochrane library?万方中关于结直肠息肉术中是否使用钛夹预防术后不良事件的研究,评价纳入研究质量,并用Revman 5.3软件进行统计学分析.结果共有7项RCT纳入标准,共计3777例患者, 1880例患者术中使用钛夹预防性夹闭创面(钛夹组), 1897例患者术中不使用钛夹夹闭创面(非钛夹组). Meta分析结果显示:钛夹组较非钛夹组的术后迟发性出血率低,差异具有统计学意义(2.55%vs 4.48%, P=0.01, 95%CI:0.40-0.80);而钛夹组较非钛夹组的术后穿孔率无明显差异(0.66%vs 1.04%, P=0.42, 95%CI:0.21-1.92).亚组分析显示,钛夹对预防结直肠息肉术后出血的作用,主要体现在大小≥20 mm的息肉上,对20 mm息肉的预防效果不佳(RR=1.18, 95%CI:0.62-2.23, P=0.62; RR=0.47, 95%CI:0.29-0.77, P=0.003);钛夹对近端结肠息肉与远端结肠息肉切除术后的预防迟发性出血作用无明显差异(RR=0.57, 95%CI:0.18-1.80, P=0.34; RR=0.78, 95%CI:0.06-10.33, P=0.85).结论钛夹可预防结直肠息肉切除术后迟发性出血的发生,且主要体现在≥20 mm的病变中,此外钛夹对术后穿孔的预防作用不大.     

内镜黏膜下剥离术和内镜下黏膜切除术治疗早期胃癌的Meta分析

目的评价内镜黏膜下剥离术(ESD)和内镜下黏膜切除术(EMR)治疗早期胃癌(EGC)的疗效和安全性,为EGC内镜下治疗方式的合理选择提供临床依据。方法制定全面检索策略进行检索,结合纳入标准和排除标准获得文献,并进行质量评价,提取相关数据采用Rev Man5.0软件进行Meta分析。结果根据检索策略最初共检出656篇,最终纳入符合入选标准的12篇文献,共纳入5 242个病灶,其中2 692个病灶行ESD治疗,2 550个病灶行EMR治疗。进行Meta分析显示病灶大块切除率(93.11%vs56.71%)、完全切出率(89.05%vs53.21%)及组织治愈性切除率(81.50%vs60.89%)ESD组均高于EMR组;术后复发率ESD组(13/1 737)显著低于EMR组(100/1 888)(OR=0.12,95%CI 0.07~0.22),以上差异均有显著性;但出血发生率ESD组(6.39%)与EMR组(6.32%)基本一致(OR=1.45,95%CI 0.83~2.53);穿孔发生率ESD组(89/2 503)高于EMR组(24/2 500)(OR=3.54,95%CI 2.28~5.50),手术时间ESD组明显长于EMR组(WMD=55.41,95%CI 23.84~86.98),差异均有显著性。结论 ESD治疗EGC的病灶大块切除率、完全切除率、治愈性切除率、复发率等疗效性指标均显著优于EMR组,但安全性指标中ESD组手术时间较长,出血未见改善,且穿孔发生率高,这些均有待技术、设备及操作熟练度的提高和改进。对于老年患者及小病灶,EMR技术仍可酌情选用。     

止血粉预防内镜黏膜下剥离术后迟发性出血的随机对照试验

目的探讨内镜黏膜下剥离术(endoscopic submucosal dissection,ESD)术后创面喷洒止血粉对迟发性出血的预防作用。方法2017年6月至2018年8月,在苏州大学附属第一医院总院、榆林市第二医院接受ESD治疗者作为研究对象,计划纳入试验组、对照组各100例,以随机信封方式在ESD手术开始后进行分组,ESD结束后试验组创面予止血粉喷洒,对照组则不予处理。主要观察试验组止血粉喷洒用时、用量及其不良事件,并对比分析2组的手术时间、迟发性出血(术后30 d内)发生率、早期迟发性出血(术后48 h内)发生率以及术后住院时间。结果初始纳入200例患者,有1例中途退出、3例转外科手术,最终共有196例纳入数据分析,其中试验组97例、对照组99例,2组的基线资料具有可比性(P均>0.05)。试验组止血粉喷洒时间(68.78±19.75)s,用量(2.51±0.93)g,有1例(1.03%)出现止血粉输送管路堵塞,术后随访30 d未发生止血粉相关不良事件。手术时间试验组为(61.92±11.71)min,对照组为(59.76±11.01)min(t=1.330,P=0.185);迟发性出血发生率试验组为1.03%(1/97),对照组为8.08%(8/99)(P=0.035);试验组无早期迟发性出血,对照组发生率为6.06%(6/99)(P=0.029);试验组术后住院时间为(4.57±0.85)d,对照组为(4.86±1.37)d(t=1.778,P=0.077)。结论ESD术后创面喷洒止血粉能有效预防迟发性出血的发生,尤其是对早期迟发性出血的预防作用更为显著,但喷洒装置的效能还有待进一步提高。     

内镜黏膜切除术治疗结直肠息肉金属钛夹夹闭方式对迟发性出血的影响

目的 :探讨内镜黏膜切除术(EMR)治疗结直肠息肉创面金属钛夹夹闭方式对迟发性出血的影响。方法 :回顾性分析金属钛夹直立位夹闭组(n=106)和平行位横断夹闭组(n=97)迟发性出血的发生率。所选择的对象息肉直径≤1.2 cm,创面直径≤0.7 cm,每个创面使用1枚金属钛夹,同一病例夹闭方式一致。比较2种方式的差异性并分析原因。结果:直立位夹闭创面135个,有1个(0.7%)息肉切除后发生迟发性出血,出血时间在术后5 d。平行位横断夹闭创面121个,有7个(5.8%)息肉切除后发生迟发性出血,出血时间在术后3~5 d。直立位夹闭组迟发性出血发生率低于平行位横断夹闭组,差异有统计学意义(P=0.028)。2组出血者急诊内镜检查均见原切除处夹子脱落,溃疡形成,有活动性出血或近期出血征象。夹子未脱落处无溃疡及出血表现。结论:EMR治疗结直肠较小息肉创面金属钛夹夹闭后迟发性出血发生率直立位夹闭较平行位横断夹闭明显降低,值得推荐。金属钛夹夹闭方式对迟发性出血的影响取决于是否发生夹子过早脱落。     

胃窦部内镜黏膜下剥离术后人工创面交替钛夹夹闭术初探（含视频）

随着内镜技术的发展,内镜黏膜下剥离术（endoscopic submucosal dissection,ESD）已逐渐成为消化道早癌、癌前病变和黏膜下肿瘤的首选治疗方法。但对于胃窦病变,ESD术后易出现消化道出血,其发生率大约6％左右,出血的病例都需要再次内镜下止血甚至外科手术处理,给患者带来较多的身体和心理上的损伤。防治胃窦ESD术后出血在临床上显得极为迫切。     

内镜黏膜下剥离术和内镜下黏膜切除术治疗早期食管癌安全有效性的Meta分析

【摘要】目的探讨内镜黏膜下剥离术（ESD）和内镜下黏膜切除术（EMR）在治疗早期食管癌的有效性和安全性方面的差异。方法检索1990年1月至2012年12月Medline、Embase、Cochranelibrary、万方数据库、维普数据库及中国知网数据库上发表的有关早期食管癌ESD和EMR治疗比较研究的所有中英文论文,通过纳入和排除标准筛选后最终纳入文献的效应指标采用Revman5．1软件进行统计分析,以整块切除率、治愈性切除率、局部复发率为有效性效应指标,以穿孔、出血、狭窄和手术时间为安全性效应指标。结果最终纳入8篇非随机对照回顾性队列研究。Meta分析显示,ESD组较EMR组整块切除率[98．36％（360／366）比41．79％（252／603）,P〈0．01]、治愈性切除率[90．81％（168／185）比50．65％（194／383）,P〈0．01]均显著增高,局部复发率[0．55％（2／366）比13．76％（83／603）,P〈0．01]显著降低,穿孔率[4．51％（21／466）比1．25％（8／640）,P=0．03]明显增高,出血率[0．21％（1／466）比0．63％（4／640）,P=0．41]和术后狭窄率[10．48％（39／372）比10．15％（41／404）,P=0．89]差异无统计学意义。结论在早期食管癌的内镜治疗上,ESD的有效性明显优于EMR,安全性则与EMR相似,ESD应作为首选内镜治疗方法。     

结直肠内镜黏膜下剥离术术后迟发性出血的危险因素分析

结直肠癌是消化系统最常见的恶性肿瘤之一,死亡率较高,我国结直肠癌的发病率也逐年增高[1].随着内镜技术的发展及普及,结直肠癌及癌前病变的筛查、诊断及治疗有了明显进展.大多数结直肠癌是由各类腺瘤最终发展为癌,此过程可能持续10年左右,因此早期切除肿瘤前体病变可以有效避免结直肠癌的进展[2].目前内镜下微创治疗的主要方法包...     

内镜下黏膜剥离术后迟发性出血的治疗及危险因素分析

内镜黏膜下剥离术（ESD）以内镜黏膜切除术（EMR）为基础,是一种安全有效的微创治疗早期消化道肿瘤和黏膜下肿瘤的新技术.但与EMR相比,ESD并发症发生率较高,尤其是出血的可能性明显增加[1].虽然ESD术后的迟发性出血并不常见,但迟发性出血可能对患者造成较大的危险,严重者会导致失血性休克,因此预防、诊断和及时治疗术后的迟发性出血非常重要.近年我院内镜中心ESD治疗的1975例患者中18例发生术后迟发性出血,现将其临床诊治资料总结如下,为减少ESD术后并发症的发生提供更多的临床依据.     

胃内镜黏膜下剥离术后迟发性出血的研究进展

目的 内镜黏膜下剥离术(Endoscopic submucosal dissection, ESD)是一种治疗早期胃癌较为安全、微创的方法、近几年ESD治疗胃部病变的疗效逐渐得到认可、逐渐成为胃部癌前病变、早期癌症、间质瘤等的一线疗法。但ESD会引起出血、穿孔、狭窄等术后并发症,术后迟发性出血是ESD主要的不良事件之一,如不能及时发现并治疗,可能引以失血性休克等严重后果,威胁患者生命健康。因此,了解胃ESD术后迟发性出血的相关危险因素、做好预防措施至关重要。本文就胃ESD术后迟发性出血相关危险因素、预防及治疗研究进展做一综述。     

留置金属夹预防结肠小息肉内镜黏膜切除术后迟发性出血的价值研究

目的探讨直径10 mm以下无蒂结直肠息肉行内镜黏膜切除术（endoscopic mucosal resection, EMR）后,留置金属夹对于预防息肉切除术后迟发性出血（delayed post-polypectomy bleeding,DPPB）的价值。方法将2017年1月—2019年12月于黑龙江省医院消化病院因直径10 mm以下无蒂结直肠息肉拟行EMR的患者,根据计算机产生的随机序列表分为术后留置金属夹组(A组)和未留置金属夹组（B组）,对比两组术后迟发性出血的相关情况。结果共纳入1 838例患者,A组912例,B组926例。两组术后迟发性出血发生率分别为1.00%（9/912）和1.10%（10/926）,组间差异无统计学意义（χ2=0.039,P＞0.05）。两组出血息肉个数比例为 0.44%（9/2 029）和0.49%（10/2 025）,组间差异无统计学意义（χ2=0.055,P>0.05）。6~9 mm息肉（OR=11.032,95%CI：2.545~47.821,P＜0.05）是无蒂结直肠息肉EMR术后迟发性出血的独立危险因素。结论10 mm以下无蒂结直肠息肉EMR治疗后,留置金属夹并未显著降低术后迟发性出血的风险。     

Prevention of late complications with coverage agents in endoscopic resection of colorectal lesions: Current landscape in gastrointestinal endoscopy

Endoscopic removal of large (≥ 20 mm) non-pedunculated colorectal lesions (LNPCLs) may result in major adverse events, such as delayed bleeding (DB) and delayed perforation (DP), despite closure of the mucosal defects with clips. Topical application of a coverage agent refers to the creation of a shield with a biocompatible medical device (tissue or hydrogel) with proven bioactive properties. Coverage of the eschar after endoscopic resection provides shielding protection to prevent delayed complications. The aim of the present review was to systematically collect and review the currently available literature regarding the prevention of DB and DP with coverage agents after endoscopic mucosal resection or endoscopic submucosal dissection of LNPCLs.     

Use of water jet instruments in gastrointestinal endoscopy

In recent years, water jet instruments have been used in the field of gastrointestinal endoscopy, mainly in two clinical situations: Investigation and treatment under endoscopic view. Injecting water jet into the gastrointestinal lumen is helpful for maintaining a clear endoscopic view, washing away blood or mucous in the lumen or on the surface of the tip of the endoscope. This contributes to reducing time and discomfort of examination. Water jet technology is an alternative method for dissecting soft tissue; this method does not harm the small vessels or cause mechanical or thermal damage. However, its use in clinical settings has been limited to the transmucosal injection of water into the submucosal layer that elevates the mucosa to prepare for endoscopic mucosal resection or endoscopic submucosal dissection, instead of tissue dissection, which may occur because of the continuous water jet. A preclinical study has been conducted using a pulsed water jet system as an alternative method for submucosal dissection by reducing intraoperative water consumption and maintenance of dissection capability. This review introduces recent studies pertaining to using a water jet in gastrointestinal endoscopy and discusses future prospects.     

内镜下治疗非壶腹部早期十二指肠癌的疗效分析

目的　评估内镜下治疗非壶腹部早期十二指肠癌的临床疗效。方法　以2015年1月—2021年1月在首都医科大学附属北京友谊医院接受内镜下治疗的非壶腹部早期十二指肠癌患者为研究对象,回顾性研究患者基线信息、内镜治疗方式、创面封闭方式、病理分析和并发症的发生与转归等资料。结果　47例患者资料入选并均成功完成内镜下治疗,其中内镜黏膜切除术（endoscopic mucosal resection,EMR）17例,内镜黏膜下剥离术（endoscopic submucosal dissection,ESD）5例,ESD+EMR 7例,因ESD剥离困难转为ESD+EMR 6例,耙状金属夹闭合系统（over?the?scope clip system,OTSC）辅助的全层切除4例,分片内镜黏膜切除术（piecemeal EMR,EPMR）8例。47例早期癌病变中,整块切除率83.0%（39/47）,完全切除率85.1%（40/47）。全组47例中,围手术期发生穿孔并发症4例（8.5%）,均发生于降部,其中2例（4.3%）经内镜治疗后好转,另外2例（4.3%）内镜治疗效果不佳,经外科手术治疗后好转。围手术期未出现术后出血、感染等并发症。结论　内镜下治疗非壶腹部早期十二指肠癌是安全有效的,可根据病灶的位置、大小及个体情况选择有针对性的治疗方案。对于十二指肠降段的操作,要更加警惕穿孔并发症的发生。     

EMR和ESD在消化道肿瘤治疗中的应用

考虑到外科手术的风险和改善患者生活质量等问题,内镜下粘膜切除术(EMR)和内镜下粘膜剥离术(ESD)在日本已成为消化道早期粘膜癌的常规治疗方法,并逐渐被西方等国家认同。现就EMR、ESD在消化道肿瘤治疗中的应用现状和进展作一综述。     

Endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancer: Current and original devices

Compared with endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is easier to perform and requires less time for treatment. However, EMR has been replaced by ESD, because achieving en bloc resection of specimens > 20 mm in diameter is difficult with EMR. The technique of ESD was introduced to resect large specimens of early gastric cancer in a single piece. ESD can provide precise histological diagnosis and can also reduce the rate of recurrence, but has a high level of technical difficulty, and is consequently associated with a high rate of complications, a need for advanced endoscopic techniques, and a lengthy procedure time. To overcome disadvantages in both EMR and ESD, various advances have been made in submucosal injections, knives, other accessories, and in electrocoagulation systems.     

Usefulness of magnifying endoscopy in post-endoscopic resection scar for early gastric neoplasm： A prospective short-term follow-up endoscopy study

AIM： To investigate the relationship between postendoscopic resection （ER） scars on magnifying endoscopy （ME） and the pathological diagnosis in order to validate the clinical significance of ME. METHODS： From January, 2007 to June, 2008, 124 patients with 129 post-ER scar lesions were enrolled. Mucosal pit patterns on ME were compared with conventional endoscopy （CE） findings and histological results obtained from targeted biopsies. RESULTS： CE findings showed nodular scars （53/129）, erythematous scars （85/129）, and ulcerative scars （4/129）. The post-ER scars were classified into four pit patterns of sulci and ridges on ME： （ Ⅰ ） 47 round; （Ⅱ） 54 short rod or tubular; （Ⅲ） 19 branched or gyrus-like;and （Ⅳ） 9 destroyed pits. Sensitivity and specificity were 88.9% and 62.5%, respectively, by the presence of nodularity on CE. Erythematous lesions were high sensitivity （100%）, but specificity was as low as 36.7%. The range of the positive predictive va ue （PPV） on CE was as low as 10.6%-25%. Nine type N pit patterns were diagnosed as tumor lesions, and 120 cases of type Ⅰ-Ⅲ pit patterns revealed non-neoplastic lesions. Thus, the sensitivity, specificity, and the PPV of ME were 100%. CONCLUSION： ME findings can detect the presence of tumor in post-ER scar lesions, and make evident the biopsy target site in short-term follow-up. Further large-scale and long-term studies are needed to determine whether ME can replace endoscopic biopsy.     

内镜黏膜下剥离术和内镜下黏膜切除术治疗早期胃癌的术后出血影响因素分析

目的：分析影响早期胃癌内镜黏膜下剥离术和内镜下黏膜切除术(ESD/EMR)术后出血的可能影响因素,以便降低出血风险,对术后出血高危人群进行特殊关注。方法：回顾性收集2012年6月至2018年5月于北京友谊医院内镜中心因诊断早期胃癌而行ESD/EMR治疗患者的临床资料,包括病人基本信息(年龄、性别、疾病史)、临床特征(病变大小、部位、形态)及术后病理信息(病理类型、浸润深度)等,分析上述因素对ESD/EMR术后发生出血的影响。结果：共有255例早期胃癌患者纳入研究,其中11例发生术后出血(4.3%)。术后出血病例与未出血病例相比,心脑血管疾病史、氯吡格雷服药史、多发病变在两组间分布有统计学差异 (P=0.004, P=0.017及P=0.042)。多因素分析显示心脑血管疾病史(OR=5.151, 95% CI：1.242-21.356, P=0.024)、多发病变(OR=7.245, 95% CI：1.471-35.684, P=0.015)及主要病变≥2cm (OR=4.713, 95%CI：1.011-21.982, P=0.048)是术后发生出血的可能危险因素。生存分析结果显示：有心脑血管疾病史(P<0.001)、多发病变(P=0.013)、主要病变≥2cm的患者(P=0.031),ESD/EMR术后发生出血的风险明显增高。结论：ESD/EMR术后应重点关注具有心脑血管疾病史、病变部位多发、病变较大的患者的出血风险。     

Endoscopic submucosal dissection vs endoscopic mucosal resection for superficial esophageal cancer

AIM:To investigate the effectiveness of endoscopic submucosal dissection(ESD)and endoscopic mucosal resection(EMR)in treating superficial esophageal cancer(SEC).METHODS:Studies investigating the safety and efficacy of ESD and EMR for SEC were searched from the databases of Pubmed,Web of Science,EMBASE and the Cochrane Library.Primary end points included the en bloc resection rate and the curative resection rate.Secondary end points included operative time,rates of perforation,postoperative esophageal stricture,bleeding and local recurrence.The random-effect model and the fixed-effect model were used for statistical analysis.RESULTS:Eight studies were identified and included in the meta-analysis.As shown by the pooled analysis,ESD had significantly higher en bloc and curative resection rates than EMR.Local recurrence rate in the ESD group was remarkably lower than that in the EMR group.However,operative time and perforation rate for ESD were significantly higher than those for EMR.As for the rate of postoperative esophageal stricture and procedure-related bleeding,no significant difference was found between the two techniques.CONCLUSION:ESD seems superior to EMR in the treatment of SEC as evidenced by significantly higher en bloc and curative resection rates and by obviously lower local recurrence rate.     

内镜下黏膜剥离术治疗消化道黏膜增生性病变88例分析

目的探讨内镜下黏膜剥离术(ESD)治疗消化道黏膜增生性病变的临床疗效。方法将宜兴市人民医院收治的消化道黏膜增生性病变患者88例,随机分成内镜下黏膜切除术(EMR)组(44例)和ESD组(44例)。术后随访12个月,观察两组的临床疗效及穿孔、出血等并发症及复发情况。结果与EMR组比较,ESD组的手术时间明显增加,但一次性切除率明显升高(P0.05);术后6个月,ESD组切面愈合率显著高于EMR组(P0.05),ESD组术后12个月的复发率显著低于EMR组(P0.05)。结论与EMR相比,ESD治疗消化道黏膜增生性病变的一次性切除率和术后切面愈合率均较高,且术后12个月的复发率较低。     

Second-look endoscopy with prophylactic hemostasis is still effective after endoscopic submucosal dissection for gastric neoplasm

AIM: The clinical value of second-look endoscopy (SLE) after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been doubted continuously. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of SLE based on the risk of delayed bleeding after ESD.METHODS: A total of 310 lesions of gastric epithelial neoplasms treated by ESD were reviewed. The lesions were divided into two groups based on the risk of post-procedural bleeding estimated by Forrest classification. The high risk of rebleeding group (Forrest Ia, Ib and IIa) required endoscopic treatment, while the low risk of rebleeding group (Forrest IIb, IIc and III) did not. Delayed bleeding after ESD was investigated.RESULTS: Sixty-six lesions were included in the high risk of rebleeding group and 244 lesions in the low risk of rebleeding group. There were no significant differences in delayed bleeding between the high risk group (1/66) and the low risk group (1/244) (P = 0.38). The high risk of rebleeding group tended to be located more often in the mid-third and had higher appearance of flat or depressed shape than the low risk group (P = 0.004 and P = 0.006, respectively).CONCLUSION: SLE with pre-emptive prophylactic endoscopic treatment is still effective in preventing delayed bleeding after ESD.