Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ Digestive Endoscopyarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
Digestive Endoscopy
Article . 2018 . Peer-reviewed
License: Wiley Online Library User Agreement
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

Efficacy of traction‐assisted colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection using a clip‐and‐thread technique: A prospective randomized study

Authors: Yasushi Yamasaki; Yoji Takeuchi; Noriya Uedo; Takashi Kanesaka; Minoru Kato; Kenta Hamada; Yusuke Tonai; +7 Authors

Efficacy of traction‐assisted colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection using a clip‐and‐thread technique: A prospective randomized study

Abstract

Background and AimColorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) remains challenging because of technical difficulties, long procedure time, and high risk of adverse events. To facilitate colorectal ESD, we developed traction‐assisted colorectal ESD using a clip and thread (TAC‐ESD) and conducted a randomized controlled trial to evaluate its efficacy.MethodsPatients with superficial colorectal neoplasms (SCN) ≥20 mm were enrolled and randomly assigned to the conventional‐ESD group or to the TAC‐ESD group. SCN ≤50 mm were treated by two intermediates, and SCN >50 mm were treated by two experts. Primary endpoint was procedure time. Secondary endpoints were TAC‐ESD success rate (sustained application of the clip and thread until the end of the procedure), self‐completion rate by the intermediates, and adverse events.ResultsAltogether, 42 SCN were analyzed in each ESD group (conventional and TAC). Procedure time (median [range]) for the TAC‐ESD group was significantly shorter than that for the conventional‐ESD group (40 [11–86] min vs 70 [30–180] min, respectively; P < 0.0001). Success rate of TAC‐ESD was 95% (40/42). The intermediates’ self‐completion rate was significantly higher for the TAC‐ESD group than for the conventional‐ESD group (100% [39/39] vs 90% [36/40], respectively; P = 0.04). Adverse events included one intraoperative perforation in the conventional‐ESD group and one delayed perforation in the TAC‐ESD group.ConclusionTraction‐assisted colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection reduced the procedure time and increased the self‐completion rate by the intermediates (UMIN000018612).

Keywords

Adult, Aged, 80 and over, Male, Endoscopic Mucosal Resection, Operative Time, Colonoscopy, Middle Aged, Prognosis, Surgical Instruments, Hospitals, University, Japan, Predictive Value of Tests, Humans, Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures, Female, Neoplasm Invasiveness, Prospective Studies, Colorectal Neoplasms, Aged, Neoplasm Staging

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    112
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 1%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 1%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 1%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
112
Top 1%
Top 1%
Top 1%
bronze