Aller au contenu principal
Accès ouvert déclaré 2025 article

Clinicopathological evaluation of the efficacy of endoscopic treatment for sessile serrated lesions comparing endoscopic mucosal resection, cold snare polypectomy, and underwater endoscopic mucosal resection

1Citations signalées, ce qui n’est pas une note de qualité
1Institutions déclarées
1Pays d’affiliation déclarés

Rattachement africain : jp. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.

Le résumé fourni par la source

Abstract Objectives Recently, various endoscopic treatments for colorectal polyps have been reported, including cold snare polypectomy (CSP) and underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR), in addition to EMR. However, a precise treatment strategy for sessile serrated lesions (SSL) has not been established. In this study, we analyzed the clinicopathological features of SSL resected by EMR, CSP, and UEMR to determine the most suitable treatment for SSL. Methods A total of 92 SSL resected via EMR (n = 11), CSP (n = 36), and UEMR (n = 45) were retrospectively enrolled between February 2021 and October 2022. To evaluate pathological findings, we examined SSL samples, which were stretched before formalin fixation and sectioned at 2‐mm intervals. Primary outcomes were the R0 resection rate and thickness of submucosal (SM) tissue specimens for each treatment. In addition, we evaluated SSL with dysplasia (SSLD) and the inverted growth pattern which may affect the vertical margin. Results The R0 resection rate significantly differed among the three groups (EMR, 73%; CSP, 42%; UEMR, 87%, p = 0.001). The median thickness of SM tissue resected by CSP (0 µm) was significantly less than that by EMR (362 µm) and UEMR (325 µm; p < 0.001). All four SSLDs were diagnosed endoscopically. Five SSLs with inverted growth patterns were pathologically diagnosed. Of these, two SSLs with inverted growth patterns could not be diagnosed endoscopically. Conclusions UEMR is considered to be a suitable treatment option for SSL. CSP results were pathologically insufficient. Therefore, surveillance to evaluate local recurrence is important, and the results of further multicenter prospective studies should be referred.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.

Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert

DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.

Titre Crossref
Clinicopathological evaluation of the efficacy of endoscopic treatment for sessile serrated lesions comparing endoscopic mucosal resection, cold snare polypectomy, and underwater endoscopic mucosal resection
Date Crossref
03/01/2025
Éditeur
Wiley
Type
journal-article

Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.

Les institutions déclarées

Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.

Les sujets associés

Gastric Cancer Management and OutcomesGastrointestinal Tumor Research and TreatmentColorectal Cancer Screening and Detection

BNTIC News n’est pas le producteur de ces données. Les publications sont interrogées à la demande dans Crossref, OpenAIRE, DOAJ, Europe PMC, HAL, DataCite, AfricArXiv, ROR et la Banque mondiale, sans clé d’accès. OpenAlex reste optionnel. Aucun service payant n’est nécessaire et aucune donnée externe n’est enregistrée en base. Consulter les sources et leurs limites.