We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Endoscopic submucosal dissection or transanal endoscopic microsurgery for nonpolypoid rectal high grade dysplasia and submucosa-invading rectal cancer.
Endoscopy 2012 November
BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) has been shown to be highly effective for early rectal cancer, and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been introduced to treat noninvasive colorectal neoplasia. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of ESD and TEM for superficial early rectal cancer.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 63 patients with nonpolypoid rectal high grade dysplasia or submucosa-invading cancer who were treated with ESD or TEM, and compared clinical outcomes and safety between the treatment groups.
RESULTS: 30 patients underwent ESD and 33 underwent TEM. For ESD compared with TEM, en bloc resection rates were 96.7% vs. 100% (P = 0.476) and R0 resection rates were 96.7 % vs. 97.0 % (P = 1.000). There were no cases of local recurrence or distant metastasis in either group. Antibiotics were required in 11 patients (36.7%) in the ESD group and 33 (100%) in the TEM group (P < 0.001). There was no difference in net procedure time although ESD was associated with shorter total procedure time and hospital stay than TEM, with mean (standard deviation [SD]) 84.0 (51.2) vs. 116.4 (58.5) min (P = 0.0023), and 3.6 (1.2) vs. 6.6 (3.5) days (P < 0.001), respectively. There were no significant differences in complications between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Both ESD and TEM are effective and oncologically safe for treating nonpolypoid rectal high grade dysplasia and submucosa-invading cancers. ESD has the additional advantages of minimal invasiveness and avoidance of anesthesia. Therefore, ESD could be recommended as a treatment option for superficial early rectal cancers.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 63 patients with nonpolypoid rectal high grade dysplasia or submucosa-invading cancer who were treated with ESD or TEM, and compared clinical outcomes and safety between the treatment groups.
RESULTS: 30 patients underwent ESD and 33 underwent TEM. For ESD compared with TEM, en bloc resection rates were 96.7% vs. 100% (P = 0.476) and R0 resection rates were 96.7 % vs. 97.0 % (P = 1.000). There were no cases of local recurrence or distant metastasis in either group. Antibiotics were required in 11 patients (36.7%) in the ESD group and 33 (100%) in the TEM group (P < 0.001). There was no difference in net procedure time although ESD was associated with shorter total procedure time and hospital stay than TEM, with mean (standard deviation [SD]) 84.0 (51.2) vs. 116.4 (58.5) min (P = 0.0023), and 3.6 (1.2) vs. 6.6 (3.5) days (P < 0.001), respectively. There were no significant differences in complications between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Both ESD and TEM are effective and oncologically safe for treating nonpolypoid rectal high grade dysplasia and submucosa-invading cancers. ESD has the additional advantages of minimal invasiveness and avoidance of anesthesia. Therefore, ESD could be recommended as a treatment option for superficial early rectal cancers.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app