首页> 外文期刊>Gastrointestinal Endoscopy >A blinded comparison of the safety and efficacy of hot biopsy forceps electrocauterization and conventional snare polypectomy for diminutive colonic polypectomy in a porcine model
【24h】

A blinded comparison of the safety and efficacy of hot biopsy forceps electrocauterization and conventional snare polypectomy for diminutive colonic polypectomy in a porcine model

机译:猪模型中热活检钳电钳和常规脉冲骨膜切除术的安全性和疗效的盲声比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Background: Although linked with perforation, serositis, delayed bleeding, and incomplete resection, hot biopsy forceps electrocauterization (HBF) is still widely used for diminutive colonic polypectomy. Objective: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of HBF in comparison with conventional snare polypectomy (CSP). Design: Randomized, blinded, controlled trial. Setting: Academic endoscopy unit. Subjects: Ten swine. Intervention: Eighty-two paired polypectomies (41 HBF, 41 CSP) of small, minimally elevated, artificial lesions. Standardized technique using coagulating current at 25 W. HBF: the tissue was avulsed after 1 to 2 seconds of current caused blanching of the artificial pedicle. CSP: the polyp was removed by snare diathermy. Main Outcome Measurements: Histopathology of resected specimens and polypectomy sites in colectomy specimens at necropsy (lateral mucosal and depth of ulceration, necrosis and inflammation). Results: Some (21%) of the HBF specimens were ablated and uninterpretable. All CSP specimens yielded interpretable specimens. Mucosal necrosis adjacent to HBF resection sites varied widely, between 1.5 and 9 mm (mean 5.7 mm, standard deviation ± 2). There was visible mucosa under the HBF ulcer in 14% of cases. The depth of necrosis in the colon wall was significantly different between the two techniques, with partial muscularis propria (MP) necrosis in 14 of 41 lesions (34%) with HBF, compared with 1 of 41 (2%) of CSP (P <.001), and full-thickness MP necrosis in 9 of 41 lesions (22%) with HBF, compared with 1 of 41 (2%) of CSP (P =.014). There was full-thickness MP inflammation in 13 of 41 lesions (32%) with HBF compared with 5 of 41 (12%) of CSP (P =.06). Transmural subserosal inflammation was seen in 13 of 41 lesions (32%) with HBF compared with 4 of 41 (10%) of CSP (P =.027). There was no relationship between visible lateral mucosal injury and depth of injury (rs = -0.07). Limitations: Animal study. Conclusion: Despite use of the standardized HBF technique, there is a wide range of lateral mucosal and deep thermal injury as well as residual target mucosa. HBF also results in a significantly greater depth of tissue injury, with a high proportion of transmural necrosis. Ensuring minimal blanching of the mucosa during the procedure does not protect from deep injury. In comparison to conventional snare polypectomy, HBF is imprecise, potentially ineffective, and hazardous.
机译:背景:虽然与穿孔,浆膜,延迟出血和切除不完全切除,但热活检钳电耦合(HBF)仍然广泛用于小型结肠肌瘤切除术。目的:评价HBF与常规脉冲栓塞术(CSP)相比的安全性和有效性。设计:随机,盲,受控试验。设置:学术内窥镜检查。主题:十猪。干预:八十二手膜切除术(41 HBF,41 CSP)小,最小升高,人工病变。标准化技术使用25w的凝固电流。HBF:在1至2秒的电流发生后的刺穿后撕开人工椎弓集。 CSP:息肉被圈套透气脱落去除。主要结果测量:尸检标本的切除标本和核切除术网站的组织病理学(尸体肌瘤(溃疡和溃疡深度,坏死和炎症)。结果:一些(21%)的HBF标本被烧蚀和不可诠释。所有CSP标本都产生了可解释的标本。粘膜坏死与HBF切除部位相邻,广泛变化,1.5和9毫米(平均5.7mm,标准差±2)。在14%的病例中,HBF溃疡下有可见的粘膜。结肠壁的坏死深度在两种技术之间具有显着差异,部分肌肉脑袋(MP)在41个病变中的14个(34%)中的鼠李坏死与HBF相比,与41(2%)的CSP(P <)(P <) .001),与HBF的41个病变(22%)的全厚度MP坏死与41(2%)CSP(P = .014)相比。在41个病变(32%)中有全厚度的MP炎症,HBF与41(12%)CSP(P = .06)相比。在41个病变(32%)中,HBF的13个中可以看到透息美体炎症,而41(10%)CSP(P = .027)。可见的外侧粘膜损伤和损伤深度之间没有关系(Rs = -0.07)。局限性:动物研究。结论:尽管采用了标准化的HBF技术,但存在广泛的外侧粘膜和深度热损伤以及残留靶粘膜。 HBF还会导致组织损伤的显着深度,透射坏死比例高。在程序期间确保粘膜的最小烫伤并不能免受深度伤害。与常规的圈套膜切除术相比,HBF不精确,可能无效和危险。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Gastrointestinal Endoscopy》 |2013年第3期|共7页
  • 作者单位

    Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Westmead Hospital 151-155 Hawkesbury Road Westmead;

    Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Westmead Hospital 151-155 Hawkesbury Road Westmead;

    Department of Anatomical Pathology Westmead Hospital Sydney Australia;

    Department of Anatomical Pathology Westmead Hospital Sydney Australia;

    Department of Animal Care Westmead Hospital Sydney Australia;

    Department of Surgery Westmead Hospital Sydney Australia;

    Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Westmead Hospital 151-155 Hawkesbury Road Westmead;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 消化系及腹部疾病;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号