Back to Search
Start Over
The ENKI-2 water-jet system versus Dual Knife for endoscopic submucosal dissection of colorectal lesions: a randomized comparative animal study.
- Source :
-
Endoscopy [Endoscopy] 2014 Feb; Vol. 46 (2), pp. 139-43. Date of Electronic Publication: 2013 Oct 25. - Publication Year :
- 2014
-
Abstract
- Background and Study Aims: The ENKI-2 water-jet system for endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) combines submucosal saline pressure injection with dissection. The aim of this study was to compare ENKI-2 with a standard device in terms of procedure time and perforation rate during colorectal ESD.<br />Methods: In this randomized comparative study, 10 30-mm-diameter lesions were created in the colon and rectum of 10 healthy adult pigs. The ESD procedure time and perforation rates were recorded for the ENKI-2 system and a standard Dual Knife method. Each pig had half the lesions dissected by ENKI-2 and half dissected by Dual Knife. One experienced and one inexperienced endoscopist took part in the study.<br />Results: A total of 95 lesions were dissected (47 by ENKI-2 and 48 by Dual Knife). The experienced endoscopist was able to excise comparably sized 30-mm lesions using both techniques. The dissection time was shorter for ENKI-2 (18.9 vs. 25.6 minutes; P = 0.034) and the perforation rate was lower compared with the Dual Knife (one perforation [4 %] vs. nine perforations [36 %]; P = 0.011). The inexperienced endoscopist performed significantly larger dissections using the ENKI-2 (934 ± 405 mm2 vs. 673 ± 312 mm2; P = 0.021) despite pre-marking similarly sized artificial lesions. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that for all lesions the dissection time was significantly longer for lesions in the proximal colon (P = 0.001) and the distal colon (P < 0.0001) and shorter for the experienced operator (P < 0.0001). ENKI-2 shortened the dissection time, but not significantly (P = 0.093).<br />Conclusions: In experienced hands, the ENKI-2 system shortens dissection time and reduces the perforation rate. This effect was not statistically significant for an inexperienced operator. Dissection was faster in the rectum than the colon.<br /> (© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.)
- Subjects :
- Animals
Colonic Diseases epidemiology
Colonic Diseases etiology
Dissection adverse effects
Dissection methods
Equipment Design
Intestinal Perforation epidemiology
Intestinal Perforation etiology
Linear Models
Operative Time
Random Allocation
Rectal Diseases epidemiology
Rectal Diseases etiology
Swine
Colon surgery
Dissection instrumentation
Intestinal Mucosa surgery
Rectum surgery
Subjects
Details
- Language :
- English
- ISSN :
- 1438-8812
- Volume :
- 46
- Issue :
- 2
- Database :
- MEDLINE
- Journal :
- Endoscopy
- Publication Type :
- Academic Journal
- Accession number :
- 24163191
- Full Text :
- https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0033-1344892