A131 ENDOSCOPIC SUBMUCOSAL DISSECTION OF COLORECTAL ADENOMAS AND EARLY ADENOCARCINOMAS: OUTCOMES FROM BRITISH COLUMBIA
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background Endoscopic resection is the standard of care for the management of colorectal polyps. Larger and more complex polyps require endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). While complications have been low, EMR is often piecemeal, resulting in indeterminant margins and often a higher recurrence rate. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is an advanced endoscopic resection technique with a higher rate of en bloc resection. While more data exist for the resection of gastric lesions with ESD, ESD is becoming more widely used in western countries for the resection of colorectal lesions. Purpose The purpose of this study is to report on the outcomes and rates of complications for colorectal ESD completed in a tertiary centre in British Columbia. Method All colorectal ESD was completed by a senior therapeutic endoscopist who has previously received training in Japan. Retrospective data were collected on all colorectal ESD procedures done in St. Paul’s Hospital from July 11th, 2016, when the procedure first became available, to Aug 30th, 2022. Inclusion criteria were all adults who have undergone ESD for resection of a colorectal lesion. Exclusion criteria were patients younger than 18. Data collected included demographic variables, polyp characteristics, procedural outcomes, and complications. Result(s) A total of 39 ESD procedures were completed. The mean size of the resected lesion was 30.4 mm (range: 5 – 60 mm). Technical success, defined as successful resection of all polypoid tissue, was achieved in 35/39 procedures (89.7%). En-bloc resection was achieved in 27/35 (77.1%) of the completed ESD. The rate of R0 resection was 22/35 (62.9%). Curative resection, defined as technically successful ESD with R0 margin and no lymphovascular invasion, was achieved in 23/39 (59.0%) of the cases and the majority of the patients with non-curative resection that underwent endoscopic surveillance had no recurrence on follow-up. In our cohort, 3/39 (7.7%) patients had adenocarcinoma. None of the ESD resulted in any intra-procedural or delayed perforation. 3/39 (7.7%) patients had clinically significant post-endoscopic resection bleeding. Out of 24 patients that completed follow-up, 4 (16.7%) had recurrence at the resection site that was managed endoscopically. 4/39 (10.3%) of patients required surgery post-ESD. Conclusion(s) In our cohort, ESD is an effective endoscopic resection modality for the management of colorectal adenomas and early adenocarcinoma with a high rate of technical success and low rates of complications. Although the rate of curative resection was low, most were the result of R1 or Rx resection and a majority of the follow-ups in this subgroup demonstrated no further recurrence. The rate of en bloc resection is high, especially given the average size of adenomas in this cohort. Although ESD requires high technical proficiency, its favorable outcomes and low complication rates make ESD highly feasible for the resection of colorectal lesions. Please acknowledge all funding agencies by checking the applicable boxes below None Disclosure of Interest None Declared
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».