A135 ENDOSCOPIC SUBMUCOSAL DISSECTION OF GASTRIC ADENOMAS AND EARLY CARCINOMAS
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background Management of gastric adenoma and early gastric cancer requires endoscopic resection. This can often be achieved with endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), which has been shown to be effective with a good safety profile. One disadvantage of EMR is that it is often completed piecemeal, leading to indeterminant margins and higher rates of recurrences that require additional intervention. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a more advanced endoscopic resection technique that has been shown to be more effective than EMR at en-bloc resection. ESD requires high technical proficiency but it is becoming more widely available in western countries. Purpose The purpose of this study is to report on the outcomes and rates of complications of gastric ESD completed in a tertiary centre in British Columbia. Method All gastric ESD was completed by a senior therapeutic endoscopist who has previously received training in Japan. Retrospective data were collected on all gastric ESD procedures done in St. Paul’s Hospital from May 7th, 2015, when the procedure first became available, to Aug 30th, 2022. Inclusion criteria were all adults who have undergone ESD for resection of a gastric lesion. Exclusion criteria were patients younger than 18. Data collected included demographic variables, polyp characteristics, procedural outcomes, and complications. Result(s) A total of 49 ESD procedures were completed. The mean size of the resected lesions was 25.3 mm (range: 5 – 100 mm). Technical success, defined as successful resection of all polypoid tissue, was achieved in 48/49 procedures (98.0%). En bloc resection was achieved in 42/48 (87.5%) completed ESD. The rate of R0 resection was also 42/48 (87.5%). Curative resection, defined as technically successful ESD with an R0 margin and no lymphovascular invasion, was achieved in 41/49 (83.7%) of the cases. In our cohort, 8 patients had adenocarcinoma, 5 of which had a curative resection with no evidence of recurrence. None of the ESD resulted in any intra-procedural or delayed perforation. 5/49 (10.2%) patients had clinically significant post-endoscopic resection bleeding. Out of 37 patients that completed follow-up, 3 (8.1%) had recurrence, and all of them were managed endoscopically. 4/49 (8.2%) of patients required surgery post-ESD. Conclusion(s) In our cohort, ESD is an effective endoscopic resection modality for gastric lesions with a high rate of technical success and curative resection. Despite a deeper plane of resection versus other endoscopic resection modalities, its complication rate remains low. Although ESD requires high technical proficiency, its favorable outcomes along with low rates of complication make ESD highly feasible for the resection of gastric lesions. Further research will be needed to study the implementation and outcomes of ESD in a western setting. 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 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 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 ».