消化内镜切除技术中黏膜下注射液的研究进展

近十几年, 内镜切除技术不断发展普及, 在消化道癌前病变与早期癌变的治疗中应用广泛。内镜切除技术主要包括息肉切除术、内镜黏膜切除术(endoscopic muscosal resection, EMR)、内镜黏膜下剥离术(endoscopic submucosal dissection, ESD)。其中ESD及多数EMR术中都需要黏膜下注射这一重要操作, 通过该操作使病灶与肌层分离, 这对黏膜的完整切除及预防出血穿孔等都非常重要, 同时也促进了内镜技术的推广应用。如何选择合适的黏膜下注射液值得关注, 本文就目前黏膜下注射液的研究现况进行阐述, 并展望了未来黏膜下注射液的发展方向。     

内镜黏膜下剥离术治疗胃肠道肿瘤的护理与配合

内镜黏膜下剥离术（ESD）是由内镜黏膜切除术（EMR）发展而来的一项治疗胃肠道肿瘤的微创切除新技术,可以实现病变的大块和完整切除。国内ESD的开展尚处起步阶段,现将我们进行ESD治疗的护理操作配合情况,报道如下。     

内镜黏膜下剥离术操作医师和助手的配合

内镜黏膜下剥离术（ESD）是由内镜下黏膜切除术（EMR）发展而来的一种新的内镜治疗技术,有选择性地用于直径大于20mm的胃肠道早期肿瘤切除,目前我国已有一些大型医院开展该技术。我院2006年10月至2008年8月共开展ESD 55例,我们体会到ESD是一项对操作熟练程度及操作医师和助手配合要求较高的内镜技术,本文通过回顾该55例ESD治疗资料,将配合经验报道如下。     

内镜全层切除术的研究进展

早期消化道肿瘤内镜治疗技术主要为病变组织切除术和病变组织破坏术。病变组织切除术目前主要包括内镜黏膜切除术（endoscopicmucosalresection,EMR）、内镜黏膜下剥离术（endoscopicsubmucosadissection,ESD）和内镜黏膜下挖除术（endoscopicsubmueosalexcavation,ESE）等;病变组织破坏术主要包括激光治疗、微波治疗、光动力学治疗、氩离子凝固法等。目前,国内外均以EMR和ESD技术作为早期消化道肿瘤的标准内镜治疗方法。     

胃黏膜切除术与黏膜剥离术治疗早期消化道癌和癌前病变的比较分析

目的探讨内镜黏膜切除术（EMR）及内镜黏膜下层剥离术（ESD）治疗早期消化道癌和癌前病变的疗效和安全性。方法选择46例患者行EMR,32例患者行ESD治疗,比较两者在出血、穿孔、狭窄、局部复发、手术操作时间等方面的差异。结果 EMR、ESD作为消化道早期癌和癌前病变一种微创治疗开辟了新的途径,ESD具有一次性切除率高,局部复发率低的优点,同时具有操作技术难和手术风险大等特点。结论根据病灶的大小和来源层次选择合理的治疗方案是成功与否的关键。     

内镜黏膜下剥离术治疗上消化道病变

内镜黏膜下剥离术（ESD）是一种安全有效的内镜下微创治疗新技术。ESD技术具有可完整切除病灶、切除较大病灶、切除溃疡型病灶等优点,为上消化道黏膜病灶尤其是早期肿瘤和黏膜下肿瘤的治疗开辟了新的途径。本文详细介绍了ESD的适应证、禁忌证、操作中所需的特殊器械、具体的操作方法及其并发症的处理,并结合文献资料和临床操作体会,阐述了ESD技术在早期消化道肿瘤和消化道黏膜下肿瘤处理中的应用。     

内镜下黏膜切除术后病变的残留与对策

消化道黏膜病变和广基息肉的内镜下切除方法总体分为内镜下黏膜切除术（EMR）和内镜下黏膜剥脱术（ESD）。我又将EMR分为：非吸引切除术和吸引切除术。由于国内很多实施EMR操作的医生,操作的总例数不多,随访不完善,多依照自己的治疗经验考虑问题,且ESD技术难度相对又较大,因此对普及ESD技术会产生疑问,用EMR可以分片切除的病变为什么要进行ESD治疗,事实上相对于ESD技术,EMR术后病变的残留和复发是我们遇到的主要问题。     

内镜下黏膜剥离术在高风险/高难度病例治疗中的应用

内镜下黏膜剥离术(ESD)已越来越多地应用于消化道早期肿瘤及癌前病变的微创治疗。与内镜下黏膜切除术(EMR)相比,ESD可完整切除病灶,切除较大病灶、平坦型病灶以及溃疡型病灶,从而利于完整的病理学诊断及减少复发,且相对外科手术来说,其安全性高、死亡率低、损伤小、恢复快,具有与外科手术类似的治疗效果,为消化道早期肿瘤的治疗开辟了新的途径。本文就ESD在切除特殊病灶(巨大肿瘤、十二指肠肿瘤、胃黏膜下肿瘤和咽喉癌)及在特殊患者(早期残胃癌、高龄、肝硬化和慢性肾功能衰竭血透患者)中的应用作一概述。     

经内镜大肠黏膜下层剥离术（ESD）-现状和展望

不论病灶大小,经内镜黏膜下层剥离术(ESD)都能一次性整体切除.在日本,ESD已被确认为上消化道(GI)恶性肿瘤内镜切除的标准方法.尽管ESD治疗大肠病变的研究已通过临床验证,但ESD尚未被确认是大肠病变的标准治疗方法,因为大肠癌具有独特的病理学和特异器官的特征,从根本上就不同于食管和胃,大肠内镜比上消化道(GI)内镜的镜下操作和控制更为困难.根据内镜黏膜切除术(EMR)的疗效和大肠癌的临床病理学特征,建议大肠内镜黏膜下层剥离术(ESD)的适应症如下:①用EMR圈套切除术难以整体切除的病变,例如非颗粒状侧向发育型肿瘤((laterally spreading tumor,LST-NG),尤其是假凹陷型(pseudo depressed type),大肠腺管开口形态(pit pattern)表现为VI型病变,怀疑恶性的隆起型病变;②活检或炎症导致的纤维化病变;③慢性炎症导致的散发、局灶性病变,例如溃疡性结肠炎;④EMR术后局部残留癌.目前大肠ESD正处于发展阶段,在不久的将标准方案即将出台.我们希望,依靠放大、光学染色内镜等技术作出精确的术前诊断,适当选择EMR,ESD和手术切除,使大肠肿瘤得到有效的治疗.     

内镜智能分光比色技术定位下EMR及ESD治疗大肠侧向发育型肿瘤的疗效比较

[目的]比较内镜智能分光比色技术(FICE)定位下内镜下黏膜切除术(endoscopic mucosal resection,EMR)及内镜黏膜下剥离术(endoscopic submucasal dissection,ESD)治疗大肠侧向发育型肿瘤(LST)的效果。[方法]63例LST患者在FICE定位下分别行EMR(38例)及ESD(25例)治疗,对比分析EMR和ESD两种方法的切除效果、手术时间及并发症。[结果]对于最大径≤20mm的肿瘤,EMR和ESD两种方法均能整块切除,且无肿瘤残留(P0.05);对于最大径20mm的肿瘤,ESD能整块切除,EMR需分次切除(P0.05),且ESD术后肿瘤残留明显少于EMR(P0.05)。ESD手术时间明显长于EMR(P0.05),但术后出血率和穿孔率,两者比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。[结论]ESD治疗LST安全有效,而EMR操作简便,用时较短,对于≤20mm的LST仍然是一种较好的选择。     

超声内镜联合EMR或ESD在食管表浅隆起性病变诊断和治疗中的作用

目的：探讨超声内镜（EUS）联合内镜下黏膜切除术（EMR）或内镜下黏膜剥离术（ESD）在食管表浅隆起性病变诊断和治疗中的价值。方法对35例经EUS检查拟诊为食管表浅隆起性病变患者进行EMR或ESD治疗的病例资料进行回顾性研究,分析病变部位的EUS图像、病理诊断结果及随访治疗效果。结果35例中21例经EMR治疗,14例经ESD治疗。经病理组织学检查确诊为早期食管癌9例,重度不典型增生5例,良性间质瘤3例,腺瘤性息肉4例,非腺瘤性息肉6例,平滑肌瘤8例。经EUS及病理证实病变均起源于黏膜层、黏膜肌层和黏膜下层。34例分别于术后1、3、6月复查EUS随访,术后1个月后伤口均完全愈合,无出血、食管狭窄及局部复发现象发生。结论联合应用EUS和EMR或ESD技术,不仅可以提高食管表浅隆起性病变早期的确诊率,而且是一种微创、有效、安全、快速的治疗措施。     

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。     

早期胃癌内镜治愈性切除的影响因素

目的分析影响早期胃癌内镜治愈性切除的危险因素,提高内镜治愈性切除早期胃癌的可能性。方法收集2008年10月至2013年3月行内镜切除治疗的早期胃癌（包括高级别上皮内瘤变）患者的临床资料;分析性别、年龄、病灶位置、病灶直径、病灶内镜形态学分型及伴有溃疡形成6个因素对内镜切除术（ER）整块切除及治愈性切除的影响;同时分析非治愈性切除的主要原因。结果纳入早期胃癌共94例包含94个病灶,其中高级别上皮内瘤变病灶20个,黏膜内癌病灶70个,黏膜下浅层浸润癌（距黏膜肌层500斗m以内）病灶4个。其中5个病灶经EMR切除,89个病灶经ESD切除。ER整块切除率为95．7％（90／94）,治愈性切除率为79．8％（75／94）。直径〉3．0cm的病灶治愈性切除率显著低于直径≤2．0em的病灶（P=0．022,OR=0．108,95％C1：0．016—0．721）,伴有溃疡形成的病灶治愈性切除率显著低于不伴有溃疡形成的病灶（P=0．047,OR=0．149,95％CI：0．023～0．971）。非治愈性切除的主要原因是侧缘肿瘤细胞的残留。结论病灶直径〉3．0cm、伴有溃疡形成是影响早期胃癌ER治愈性切除的危险因素。     

Importance of histological evaluation in endoscopic resection of early colorectal cancer

The diagnostic criteria for colonic intraepithelial tumors vary from country to country.While intramucosal adenocarcinoma is recognized in Japan,in Western countries adenocarcinoma is diagnosed only if the tumor invades to the submucosa and accesses the muscularis mucosae.However,endoscopic therapy,including endoscopic mucosal resection(EMR)and endoscopic submucosal dissection(ESD),is used worldwide to treat adenoma and early colorectal cancer.Precise histopathological evaluation is important for the curativeness of these therapies as inappropriate endoscopic therapy causes local recurrence of the tumor that may develop into fatal metastasis.Therefore,colorectal ESD and EMR are not indicated for cancers with massive submucosal invasion.However,diagnosis of cancer with massive submucosal invasion by endoscopy is limited,even when magnifying endoscopy for pit pattern and narrow band imaging and flexible spectral imaging color of enhancement are performed.Therefore,occasional cancers with massive submucosal invasion will be treated by ESD and EMR.Precise histopathological evaluation of these lesions should be performed in order to determine the necessity of additional therapy,including surgical resection.     

Endoscopic submucosal dissection compared to endoscopic mucosal resection for early Barrett esophagus neoplasia

Endoscopic resection has become an invaluable diagnostic and therapeutic tool in the evaluation and management of early Barrett esophagus (BE) neoplasia. While endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is the current standard of care for the resection of nodular early BE neoplasia, endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been recently introduced as part of the armamentarium in the treatment of these lesions. The potential advantages of ESD compared to EMR include higher en-bloc and R0 resection rates, decreased local recurrence, and the procurement of large en-bloc specimens that may facilitate pathologic staging. On the other hand, EMR is less time-consuming and has been traditionally associated with a lower incidence of serious adverse events when compared to ESD. At present, the choice of the endoscopic resection technique hinges on operator’s preferences, patient and lesions characteristics and available local expertise. Future high-quality studies comparing clinical outcomes between ESD and EMR are needed to better define their roles in the management of early BE neoplasia.     

Endoscopic resection of superficial gastrointestinal tumors

Therapeutic endoscopy plays a major role in the management of gastrointestinal （GI） neoplasia. Its indications can be generalized into four broad categories; to remove or obliterate neoplastic lesion, to palliate malignant obstruction, or to treat bleeding. Only endoscopic resection allows complete histological staging of the cancer, which is critical as it allows stratification and refinement for further treatment. Although other endoscopic techniques, such as ablation therapy, may also cure early GI cancer, they can not provide a definitive pathological specimen. Early stage lesions reveal low frequency of lymph node metastasis which allows for less invasive treatments and thereby improving the quality of life when compared to surgery. Endoscopic mucosal resection （EMR） and endoscopic submucosal dissection （ESD） are now accepted worldwide as treatment modalities for early cancers of the GI tract.     

Do we have enough evidence for expanding the indications of ESD for EGC?

Endoscopic submucosal dissection(ESD) is the most advanced and representative technique in the field of therapeutic endoscopy and has been used for the treatment of gastrointestinal neoplasms,including early gastric cancer.The major difference and advantage of ESD compared to existing endoscopic resection techniques,such as endoscopic mucosal resection(EMR) and polypectomy,are the width and depth of the resection.Newly developed cutting devices,distal attachable endoscopic accessories,and an advanced electr...     

Magnifying endoscopy in upper gastroenterology for assessing lesions before completing endoscopic removal

Any prognosis of gastrointestinal (GI) cancer is closely related to the stage of the disease at diagnosis. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and en bloc endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) have been performed as curative treatments for many early-stage GI lesions in recent years. The technologies have been widely accepted in many Asian countries because they are minimally invasive and supply thorough histopathologic evaluation of the specimens. However, before engaging in endoscopic therapy, an accurate diagnosis is a precondition to effecting the complete cure of the underlying malignancy or carcinoma in situ. For the past few years, many new types of endoscopic techniques, including magnifying endoscopy with narrow-band imaging (ME-NBI), have emerged in many countries because these methods provide a strong indication of early lesions and are very useful in determining treatment options before ESD or EMR. However, to date, there is no comparable classification equivalent to "Kudo's Pit Pattern Classification in the colon", for the upper GI, there is still no clear internationally accepted classification system of magnifying endoscopy. Therefore, in order to help unify some viewpoints, here we will review the defining optical imaging characteristics and the current representative classifications of microvascular and microsurface patterns in the upper GI tract under ME-NBI, describe the accurate relationship between them and the pathological diagnosis, and their clinical applications prior to ESD or en bloc EMR. We will also discuss assessing the differentiation and depth of invasion, defying the lateral spread of involvement and targeting biopsy in real time.