Search

Background and Objective: Endoscopic mucosa-sparing lateral dissection (EMSLD) was developed by our group, and is used to remove gastric submucosal tumor (SMT). This study aims to evaluate the feasibility and safety of this method.Methods: This retrospective study included 25 patients who underwent EMSLDs at an endoscopy center as a national key unit in china from October 2015 to July 2016. The main data collected were the size of the gastric SMT, its location and origin, en bloc resection rate, operating time, intraoperative and postoperative complications, hospitalization expense, hospital days, and follow-up after hospital discharge.Results: The mean (SD) size of the gastric SMTs was 18.3 (5.9) mm; 96% (24/25) of the tumors originated in the muscularis propria; and 64% (16/25) and 28% (7/25) were located in the gastric fundus and gastric body, respectively. The rate of en bloc resection was 96% (24/25), and the rate of intraoperative perforations due to endoscopic full-thickness resection was 48% (12/25). All wounds and perforations were effectively closed using endoscopic clips combined with the retained mucosa. The mean operative time was 74.2 (38.0) min. Delayed bleeding and perforation were not observed.Conclusion: Endoscopic mucosa-sparing lateral dissection is safe and feasible for the removal of gastric SMTs. The wound can be effectively closed using the retained mucosa and endoscopic clips, even if perforation has occurred. EMSLD provides an alternative to the resection of gastric SMTs, especially for tumors with a risk of intraoperative perforation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Magnifying endoscopy with narrow band imaging (ME-NBI) is widely used in gastroscopy, especially in the diagnosis of early gastric cancer. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to compare the diagnostic efficacy of white light imaging (WLI) and that of ME-NBI for early gastric cancer. Methods: PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched to identify studies which met the inclusion criteria. A random-effects model was used to calculate overall sensitivity, specificity, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) to assess the diagnostic efficacy of WLI and ME-NBI in early gastric cancer. Sensitivity analysis was performed to assess the stability of the results. Results: Ten studies met the inclusion criteria, and included 1724 patients and 2153 lesions. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and AUC for the diagnosis of early gastric cancer using WLI were 0.48 [95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.39-0.57; I = 78.6 %], 0.67 (95 % CI 0.62-0.71; I = 81.9 %), and 0.62, respectively. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and AUC using ME-NBI were 0.83 (95 % CI 0.79-0.87; I = 79.8 %), 0.96 (95 % CI 0.95-0.97; I = 89.3 %), and 0.96, respectively. The studies showed a high degree of heterogeneity. Further sensitivity analysis was mainly performed for the studies of small lesions (mean size 10 mm or less) and the studies with a the score of 12 points or greater in the literature quality assessment, and the AUCs for ME-NBI for diagnosis of early gastric cancer were between 0.93 and 0.98, which suggested that the diagnostic value was still high and stable. Conclusion: Compared with WLI, ME-NBI can effectively diagnose early gastric cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) has generated a surge of enthusiasm among researchers by virtue of its challenge to the dogma and potential benefits. However, no data is available in the medical literature about NOTES' acceptance by patients in Asia. The aim of the study is to survey patients' perceptions and attitudes towards NOTES.Methods: It is a questionnaire-based multi-center study on inpatient subjects with various gastrointestinal disorders from 14 hospitals in 12 cities of China. Procedural details with the benefits and risks of NOTES, laparoscopic surgery, and conventional surgery were explained to all registered candidates. They were required to choose and cite reasons for adopting one of the above three surgical techniques as the preferred mode of treatment. The reasons for selection of the surgical treatment were: safety, efficacy, cost, postoperative pain, abdominal wounds, and scarring.Results: There were 1,797 cases, including 976 (54.3%) males and 821 females (45.7%). Based on their comprehension of the procedure, 802 (44.6%) patients opted for NOTES, 757 (42.1%) for laparoscopic surgery, and 238 (13.2%) for conventional surgery. NOTES was mainly selected by the young and educated persons, especially females and by those with past exposure to laparoscopy or conventional surgery. The choice of treatment was significantly correlated with age (P=0.0021), education (P=0.0209), past medical history (laparoscopy, P=0.0134; open surgery, P<0.0001), and department of admission (P=0.0173). The preference for NOTES was based on safety (37.3%), cost (17.6%), elimination of postoperative scars (16.1%), abdominal wounds (16.0%), and efficacy (13.1%).Conclusions: The vast majority of patients prefer mini-invasive surgery to conventional surgery. The potential recipients of NOTES are educated and younger age groups. However, a few consider NOTES as a safe and effective intervention at present. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A letter to the editor about cap/hood-assisted colonoscopy (CAC) is presented.