Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Cap-assisted EMR versus standard inject and cut EMR for treatment of large colonic laterally spreading tumors: a randomized multicenter study (with videos).
Conio, Massimo; Manta, Raffaele; Filiberti, Rosa Angela; Baron, Todd H; Pasquale, Luigi; Marini, Mario; De Ceglie, Antonella.
Affiliation
  • Conio M; Gastroenterology Department, Santa Corona General Hospital, Savonese, Italy; Polyclinique St George, Nice, France.
  • Manta R; Gastroenterology and Digestive Endoscopy Department, General Hospital, Perugia, Italy.
  • Filiberti RA; Clinical Epidemiology Unit, Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy.
  • Baron TH; Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
  • Pasquale L; Gastroenterology and Digestive Endoscopy Department, O. Frangipane Hospital, Avellino, Italy.
  • Marini M; Gastroenterology and Operative Endoscopy Unit, Santa Maria Alle Scotte Hospital, Siena, Italy.
  • De Ceglie A; Gastroenterology Department, Sanremo General Hospital, Sanremo, Italy.
Gastrointest Endosc ; 96(5): 829-839.e1, 2022 11.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35697127
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Piecemeal EMR of colorectal laterally spreading tumors (LSTs) >20 mm is effective. Experience is limited in the use of cap-assisted EMR (EMR-C) for resection of colonic lesions. We compared the efficacy and the safety of EMR-C for the removal of colonic LSTs ≥30 mm with "inject-and-cut" standard EMR (EMR-S). METHODS: In this randomized trial from 4 Italian centers, 138 patients were treated with EMR-C and 102 with EMR-S. The rates of residual lesions, percentage of recurrence after 12 months, and adverse events were evaluated. RESULTS: One hundred forty-three lesions were resected with EMR-C and 102 with EMR-S. Argon plasma coagulation (APC) was used as adjunctive treatment in 2.9% of EMR-Cs and in 22.5% of EMR-Ss (P < .001). The median time required was 20 minutes for EMR-C and 30 minutes for EMR-S (P < .001). Adverse events (AEs) occurred in 14 EMR-Cs (10.1%; 2 perforations, 11 bleeding events, and 1 stenosis) and in 22 EMR-Ss (21.6%; 1 perforation and 21 bleeding events) (P = .017). Intraprocedural AEs occurred in 3.6% of EMR-Cs and 16.7% of EMR-Ss (P = .001). Overall, residual lesions within 12 months were found to be significantly higher with EMR-S (32 patients, 31.4%) than with EMR-C (8 patients, 5.8%) (P < .001). Recurrence at follow-up colonoscopy in 12 months occurred in 7 EMR-Cs (5.1%) and 17 EMR-Ss (16.7%; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The study demonstrated the feasibility and safety of EMR-C for removing large colorectal LSTs, with higher eradication rates, shorter resection time, and less use of APC when compared with EMR-S. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03498664.).
Subject(s)

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Colorectal Neoplasms / Colonic Neoplasms Type of study: Clinical_trials Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Year: 2022 Document type: Article Affiliation country: France Country of publication: United States

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Colorectal Neoplasms / Colonic Neoplasms Type of study: Clinical_trials Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Year: 2022 Document type: Article Affiliation country: France Country of publication: United States