Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection is superior to conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for medium-sized colorectal sessile polyps: a randomized controlled trial
Abstract The comparison of underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) and conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (CEMR) in the treatment of medium-sized (10 mm ≤ diameter ≤ 20 mm) colorectal sessile polyps is unknown. This randomized controlled trial (RCT) was designed to compare the efficacy...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Nature Portfolio
2024-12-01
|
| Series: | Scientific Reports |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-81817-w |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1850169751174643712 |
|---|---|
| author | Qifeng Deng Zhenhua Wu Jingsen Li Guixia Liang Chenghai Yang |
| author_facet | Qifeng Deng Zhenhua Wu Jingsen Li Guixia Liang Chenghai Yang |
| author_sort | Qifeng Deng |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract The comparison of underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) and conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (CEMR) in the treatment of medium-sized (10 mm ≤ diameter ≤ 20 mm) colorectal sessile polyps is unknown. This randomized controlled trial (RCT) was designed to compare the efficacy and safety of UEMR and CEMR in the treatment of medium-sized colorectal sessile polyps. 200 patients with medium-sized colorectal sessile polyps were randomly divided into UEMR group and CEMR group equally. The resection rates, patient tolerance and complications of the two groups were evaluated. The R0 resection rate (73.3% vs. 56.3%, P = 0.011) and the En bloc resection rate (91.1% vs. 80.6%, P = 0.032) of the UEMR group were significantly higher than those of the CEMR group; The mean abdominal pain score of the UEMR group was significantly lower than that of the CEMR group [(3.2 ± 1.9) vs. (4.1 ± 2.1), P = 0.006]; There was no significant difference in the intraoperative bleeding rate between the two groups (4.0% vs. 6.1%, P = 0.516). There was no delayed bleeding and perforation in both groups. UEMR was effective in the treatment of medium-sized sessile colorectal polyps with few complications, and patient tolerance was good, which is worthy of clinical promotion. The study was registered at the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2400082051) on 19/03/2024 and can be accessed at www.chictr.org.cn . |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-c70d6d0c7cf84fd29400a8ea72aaea41 |
| institution | OA Journals |
| issn | 2045-2322 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2024-12-01 |
| publisher | Nature Portfolio |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Scientific Reports |
| spelling | doaj-art-c70d6d0c7cf84fd29400a8ea72aaea412025-08-20T02:20:38ZengNature PortfolioScientific Reports2045-23222024-12-011411910.1038/s41598-024-81817-wUnderwater endoscopic mucosal resection is superior to conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for medium-sized colorectal sessile polyps: a randomized controlled trialQifeng Deng0Zhenhua Wu1Jingsen Li2Guixia Liang3Chenghai Yang4Department of Gastroenterology, Maoming People’s HospitalDepartment of Gastroenterology, Maoming People’s HospitalDepartment of Gastroenterology, Maoming People’s HospitalDepartment of Gastroenterology, Maoming People’s HospitalDepartment of Gastroenterology, Shenzhen Key Laboratory of Gastrointestinal Microbiota and Disease, Shenzhen Clinical Research Center for Digestive Disease, Shenzhen Hospital, Southern Medical UniversityAbstract The comparison of underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) and conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (CEMR) in the treatment of medium-sized (10 mm ≤ diameter ≤ 20 mm) colorectal sessile polyps is unknown. This randomized controlled trial (RCT) was designed to compare the efficacy and safety of UEMR and CEMR in the treatment of medium-sized colorectal sessile polyps. 200 patients with medium-sized colorectal sessile polyps were randomly divided into UEMR group and CEMR group equally. The resection rates, patient tolerance and complications of the two groups were evaluated. The R0 resection rate (73.3% vs. 56.3%, P = 0.011) and the En bloc resection rate (91.1% vs. 80.6%, P = 0.032) of the UEMR group were significantly higher than those of the CEMR group; The mean abdominal pain score of the UEMR group was significantly lower than that of the CEMR group [(3.2 ± 1.9) vs. (4.1 ± 2.1), P = 0.006]; There was no significant difference in the intraoperative bleeding rate between the two groups (4.0% vs. 6.1%, P = 0.516). There was no delayed bleeding and perforation in both groups. UEMR was effective in the treatment of medium-sized sessile colorectal polyps with few complications, and patient tolerance was good, which is worthy of clinical promotion. The study was registered at the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2400082051) on 19/03/2024 and can be accessed at www.chictr.org.cn .https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-81817-wUnderwaterEndoscopic mucosal resectionSessileColorectalPolyps |
| spellingShingle | Qifeng Deng Zhenhua Wu Jingsen Li Guixia Liang Chenghai Yang Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection is superior to conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for medium-sized colorectal sessile polyps: a randomized controlled trial Scientific Reports Underwater Endoscopic mucosal resection Sessile Colorectal Polyps |
| title | Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection is superior to conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for medium-sized colorectal sessile polyps: a randomized controlled trial |
| title_full | Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection is superior to conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for medium-sized colorectal sessile polyps: a randomized controlled trial |
| title_fullStr | Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection is superior to conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for medium-sized colorectal sessile polyps: a randomized controlled trial |
| title_full_unstemmed | Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection is superior to conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for medium-sized colorectal sessile polyps: a randomized controlled trial |
| title_short | Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection is superior to conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for medium-sized colorectal sessile polyps: a randomized controlled trial |
| title_sort | underwater endoscopic mucosal resection is superior to conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for medium sized colorectal sessile polyps a randomized controlled trial |
| topic | Underwater Endoscopic mucosal resection Sessile Colorectal Polyps |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-81817-w |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT qifengdeng underwaterendoscopicmucosalresectionissuperiortoconventionalendoscopicmucosalresectionformediumsizedcolorectalsessilepolypsarandomizedcontrolledtrial AT zhenhuawu underwaterendoscopicmucosalresectionissuperiortoconventionalendoscopicmucosalresectionformediumsizedcolorectalsessilepolypsarandomizedcontrolledtrial AT jingsenli underwaterendoscopicmucosalresectionissuperiortoconventionalendoscopicmucosalresectionformediumsizedcolorectalsessilepolypsarandomizedcontrolledtrial AT guixialiang underwaterendoscopicmucosalresectionissuperiortoconventionalendoscopicmucosalresectionformediumsizedcolorectalsessilepolypsarandomizedcontrolledtrial AT chenghaiyang underwaterendoscopicmucosalresectionissuperiortoconventionalendoscopicmucosalresectionformediumsizedcolorectalsessilepolypsarandomizedcontrolledtrial |