Back to Search
Start Over
Results of a two-phased clinical study evaluating a new multiband mucosectomy device for early Barrett’s neoplasia: a randomized pre-esophagectomy trial and a pilot therapeutic pilot study
- Source :
- Surgical Endoscopy, Belghazi, K, Schölvinck, D W, van Berge Henegouwen, M I, Gisbertz, S S, Weusten, B L, Meijer, S L, Bergman, J J & Pouw, R E 2019, ' Results of a two-phased clinical study evaluating a new multiband mucosectomy device for early Barrett's neoplasia : a randomized pre-esophagectomy trial and a pilot therapeutic pilot study ', Surgical Endoscopy, vol. 33, no. 9, pp. 2864-2872 . https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6582-5, Surgical endoscopy, 33(9), 2864-2872. Springer New York, Surgical Endoscopy, 33(9), 2864-2872. Springer New York, Surgical endoscopy, 33(9), 2864. Springer New York
- Publication Year :
- 2018
- Publisher :
- Springer Science and Business Media LLC, 2018.
-
Abstract
- BACKGROUND: Multiband mucosectomy (MBM) is the preferred technique for piecemeal resection of early neoplastic lesions in Barrett's esophagus (BE). The currently most widely used device for MBM is the Duette device. Recently, the Captivator EMR device has come available which might have practical advantages over the Duette device.METHODS: Phase I was a randomized pre-esophagectomy trial with a non-inferiority design aiming to compare EMR specimens obtained with the Captivator and the Duette device.PRIMARY OUTCOME: max diameter of the EMR specimens, secondary outcomes: min diameter, max thickness of the EMR specimens and resected submucosal stroma. Phase II were clinical pilot cases aiming to evaluate the feasibility of EMR using the Captivator device. Primary outcome was the successful EMR rate and secondary outcomes included procedure time and adverse events.RESULTS: Phase I: 24 EMR specimens (12 pairs) were obtained from six patients. The median max diameter of EMR specimens obtained with the Captivator device was 16 mm [IQR 12-21] versus 18 mm [IQR 13-23] for the Duette device. Non-inferiority of the max diameter of the Captivator specimens could not be demonstrated (median difference 1 mm, 95% CI - 3.26 to + 5.26). However, when using paired analysis, no significant difference was found (p 0.573). In addition, no statistically significant differences were found in the min diameter, max thickness of EMR specimens, and max thickness of resected submucosal stroma. Phase II: 5 BE patients with early neoplastic lesions were included. Successful EMR was achieved in 100%. Median procedure time was 33 min (IQR 25-39). One patient developed transient dysphagia, without signs of stenosis on endoscopy.CONCLUSIONS: EMR of early Barrett's neoplasia using the Captivator device is comparable to Duette EMR when looking at size of resected specimens. In the first patients, EMR using the Captivator was feasible, resulting in successful resection without acute adverse events.
- Subjects :
- Adult
Male
medicine.medical_specialty
Multiband mucosectomy
Adolescent
Endoscopic Mucosal Resection
medicine.medical_treatment
Pilot Projects
Endoscopic mucosal resection
Article
Endosonography
Barrett Esophagus
Young Adult
03 medical and health sciences
0302 clinical medicine
High-grade dysplasia
health services administration
medicine
Barrett’s esophagus
Early cancer
Humans
Esophagus
health care economics and organizations
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
medicine.diagnostic_test
business.industry
Equipment Design
Middle Aged
medicine.disease
Dysphagia
Endoscopy
Esophagectomy
Stenosis
medicine.anatomical_structure
030220 oncology & carcinogenesis
Barrett's esophagus
Female
030211 gastroenterology & hepatology
Surgery
Esophagoscopy
Radiology
medicine.symptom
Tomography, X-Ray Computed
business
Abdominal surgery
Subjects
Details
- ISSN :
- 14322218 and 09302794
- Volume :
- 33
- Database :
- OpenAIRE
- Journal :
- Surgical Endoscopy
- Accession number :
- edsair.doi.dedup.....f5390b821fba57319b98e0cda2d27147
- Full Text :
- https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6582-5