Efficacy of dental floss traction-assisted endoscopic submucosal dissection for gastric angle mucosal lesions (with video)
庄惠军,沈许德,陈进忠,姚礼庆,苏红,郑永胜,雷天霞,杨炜琳,吴建海,陈金海,王海星,谢逸林
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.cn321463-20200209-00409
2020-01-01
Abstract:Objective:To study the efficacy of dental floss traction-assisted endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for gastric angle mucosal lesions.Methods:Data of 127 patients with gastric angle mucosal lesions admitted to the endoscopic center of the First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University from January 2015 to December 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. According to the surgical methods, patients were divided into the dental floss traction-assisted ESD group (the traction group, n=51) and the traditional ESD group (the traditional group, n=76). The 41 fibrosis cases were further divided into the traction group (n=23) and the traditional group (n=18). The operation time, en block resection rate, curative resection rate and the incidence of adverse events such as bleeding, muscle layer injury and perforation were compared between the two groups.Results:There was no significant difference in age, sex, lesion size or morphology between the traction group and the traditional group (
P > 0.05). The operation time of the traction group was significantly shorter than that of the traditional group (65.4±36.5 min VS 103.5±43.2 min,
P=0.012). The en block resection rate was higher in the traction group [100.00% (51/51) VS 90.79% (69/76),
P=0.026], and the curative resection rate was higher too [94.12% (48/51) VS 81.58% (62/76),
P=0.042]. The incidences of muscular layer damage [5.88% (3/51) VS 25.00% (19/76),
P=0.010] and intraoperative bleeding [47.06% (24/51)VS 82.89% (63/76),
P=0.010] were lower in the traction group. Perforation occurred in two patients (2.63%) of fibrosis in the traditional group; no perforation occurred in the traction group. There was no significant difference in the perforation incidence (
P=0.243). In the cases of fibrosis, the operation time of the traction group was significantly shorter compared with that of the traditional group (81.4±29.3 min VS 119.3±37.6 min,
P=0.010). The en block resection rate and curative resection rate were also higher in the traction group [100.00% (23/23) VS 72.22% (13/18),
P=0.007; 95.65% (22/23) VS 72.22% (13/18),
P=0.035]. The incidences of muscular layer damage [8.70% (2/23) VS 72.22% (13/18),
P=0.001] and intraoperative bleeding [78.26% (18/23) VS 100.00% (18/18),
P=0.035] were lower in the traction group.
Conclusion:The dental floss traction-assisted ESD is safe and effective for gastric angle mucosal lesions and fibrotic lesions, with shorter operation time, higher curative resection rate and lower incidence of adverse events.