Project description:Tumor bleeding is not a rare complication in patients with inoperable gastric cancer. Endoscopy has important roles in the diagnosis and primary treatment of tumor bleeding, similar to its roles in other non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding cases. Although limited studies have been performed, endoscopic therapy has been highly successful in achieving initial hemostasis. One or a combination of endoscopic therapy modalities, such as injection therapy, mechanical therapy, or ablative therapy, can be used for hemostasis in patients with endoscopic stigmata of recent hemorrhage. However, rebleeding after successful hemostasis with endoscopic therapy frequently occurs. Endoscopic therapy may be a treatment option for successfully controlling this rebleeding. Transarterial embolization or palliative surgery should be considered when endoscopic therapy fails. For primary and secondary prevention of tumor bleeding, proton pump inhibitors can be prescribed, although their effectiveness to prevent bleeding remains to be investigated.
Project description:BACKGROUNDThe incidence of rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) is rapidly increasing because of the frequent use of endoscopic screening for colorectal cancers. However, the clinical outcomes of endoscopic resection for rectal NETs are still unclear. The aim of this study was to assess the rates of histologically complete resection (H-CR) and recurrence after endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for rectal NETs.METHODSA retrospective analysis was performed on patients who underwent EMR for rectal NETs between January 2002 and March 2015 at Seoul National University Hospital. Primary outcomes were H-CR and recurrence rates after endoscopic resection. H-CR was defined as the absence of tumor invasion in the lateral and deep margins of resected specimens.RESULTSAmong 277 patients, 243 (88%) were treated with conventional EMR, 23 (8%) with EMR using a dual-channel endoscope, and 11 (4%) with EMR after precutting. The median tumor size was 4.96 mm (range, 1-22) in diameter, and 264 (95%) lesions were confined to the mucosa and submucosal layer. The en-bloc resection rate was 99% and all patients achieved endoscopically complete resection. The H-CR rates were 75, 74, and 73% for conventional EMR, EMR using a dual-channel endoscope, and EMR after precutting, respectively. Multivariate analysis showed that H-CR was associated with tumor size regardless of endoscopic treatment modalities (p?=?0.023). Of the 277 patients, 183 (66%) underwent at least 1 endoscopic follow-up. Three (2%) of these 183 patients had tumor recurrence, which was diagnosed at a median of 62.5 months (range 19-98) after endoscopic resection. There was 1 case of disease-related death, which occurred 167 months after endoscopic treatment because of bone marrow failure that resulted from tumor metastasis.CONCLUSIONSAlthough the en-bloc resection rate was 99% in rectal NETs, H-CR rates were 72-74% for various EMR procedures. H-CR may be associated with tumor size regardless of endoscopic treatment modalities.
Project description:Background and study aims Delayed bleeding and thrombotic events are uncontrolled adverse events that are hard to balance in patients receiving anticoagulants after endoscopic resection. The present study aims to assess the clinical effect of warfarin, when compared to direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), in terms of delayed bleeding and thrombotic events. Methods A comprehensive electronic literature search was conducted for eligible literature. Pairwise meta-analyses were performed on outcomes of delayed bleeding and thrombotic events. Two networks within the Bayesian framework were established based on the management of anticoagulants and type of DOAC. Results Eight cohort studies with 2,046 patients were eligible for inclusion, including 1,176 patients treated with warfarin and 870 with DOACs. There was no significant difference between warfarin and DOACs, in terms of delayed bleeding (OR = 1.29, 95 % CI [0.99-1.69]) and thromboembolism (OR = 2.0, 95 % CI [0.32-12.39]). In the network meta-analyses for delayed bleeding, the rank probabilities revealed that the safest management was discontinuous warfarin without heparin bridge therapy (HBT). Rank probabilities for the types of DOACs demonstrated that the safest drug was dabigatran. Conclusions There was no significant difference in delayed bleeding and thromboembolism between warfarin and DOACs in patients receiving endoscopic treatment. In terms of delayed bleeding, discontinuous warfarin without HBT was suggested as the best management, and dabigatran was recommended as the best type of DOAC.
Project description:Background and study aimsThe resection strategy for rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NET) < 10 mm is not uniform. We compared the utility of underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) to endoscopic submucosal resection with a ligation device (ESMR-L) to resect rectal NETs.Patients and methodsPatients with rectal NET < 10 mm treated with UEMR or ESMR-L were included. Their medical records were retrospectively reviewed.ResultsThirty-two patients were divided into a UEMR group (n = 7) and an ESMR-L group (n = 25). Histopathological diagnosis of NET by biopsy was known before resection in 43% (3/7) in the UEMR group and 68% (17/25) in the ESMR-L group, (p = 0.379). UEMR was performed on an outpatient basis for all patients, and 92% of ESMR-L (23/25) were performed as inpatient procedures (p < 0.001). The procedure time was significantly shorter in the UEMR group than in the ESMR-L group [median (IQR), min, 6 (5-8) vs. 12 (9-14), p = 0.002]. En bloc resection and R0 resection rates were 100% in both groups. Pathological evaluations were predominantly NET G1 in both groups (UEMR: 7/7, 100% and ESMR-L: 23/25, 92%). Two patients in the ESMR-L group developed delayed bleeding, controlled by endoscopic hemostasis. Device costs were significantly higher in the ESMR-L group than the UEMR group by approximately US$180 [median (IQR), $90.45 (83.64-108.41) vs. $274.73 (265.86-292.45), P < 0.001].ConclusionUEMR results in similar resection quality with shorter procedure time and lower costs compared to ESMR-L. We recommend UEMR for the resection of rectal NET < 10 mm.
Project description:Post-endoscopic sphincterotomy bleeding is a common complication of biliary sphincterotomy, and the incidence varies from 1% to 48%. It can be challenging to localize the bleeder or to administer various interventions through a side-viewing endoscope. This study aimed to evaluate the risk factors of post-endoscopic sphincterotomy bleeding and the outcome of endoscopic intervention therapies. We retrospectively reviewed the records of 513 patients who underwent biliary sphincterotomy in Mackay Memorial Hospital between 2011 and 2016. The blood biochemistry, comorbidities, indication for sphincterotomy, severity of bleeding, endoscopic features of bleeder, and type of endoscopic therapy were analyzed. Post-endoscopic sphincterotomy bleeding occurred in 65 (12.6%) patients. Forty-five patients had immediate bleeding and 20 patients had delayed bleeding. The multivariate analysis of risk factors associated with post-endoscopic sphincterotomy bleeding were liver cirrhosis (P = 0.029), end-stage renal disease (P = 0.038), previous antiplatelet drug use (P<0.001), and duodenal ulcer (P = 0.023). The complications of pancreatitis and cholangitis were higher in the bleeding group, with statistical significance. Delayed bleeding occurred within 1 to 7 days (mean, 2.5 days), and 60% (12/20) of the patients received endoscopic evaluation. In the delayed bleeding group, the successful hemostasis rate was 71.4% (5/7), and 65% (13/20) of the patients had ceased bleeding without endoscopic hemostasis therapy. Comparison of different therapeutic modalities showed that cholangitis was higher in patients who received epinephrine spray (P = 0.042) and pancreatitis was higher in patients who received epinephrine injection and electrocoagulation (P = 0.041 and P = 0.039 respectively). Clinically, post-endoscopic sphincterotomy bleeding and further endoscopic hemostasis therapy increase the complication rate of pancreatitis and cholangitis. Realizing the effectiveness of each therapeutic modalities and appropriate management of different levels bleeding are important.
Project description:ObjectivesEndoscopic resection (ER) is a minimally invasive treatment for early gastric cancer (EGC); however, there is a high occurrence of bleeding. This study aimed to clarify the significance of red blood cell distribution width (RDW) as a predictive risk factor for bleeding after ER for EGC.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective study based on data for patients who underwent ER for EGC from 2019 to 2021. This study included 79 lesions in 54 patients who underwent ER for EGC. The primary outcome was the association between RDW before ER and bleeding within 28 days of treatment. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed, wherein areas under the curve (AUCs) and 95% confidence intervals were calculated to compare the discriminatory power of RDW for predicting bleeding.ResultsEndoscopic submucosal dissection was used as the resection method for 73 lesions, whereas endoscopic mucosal resection was used for six lesions. En bloc resection was performed in all cases. There were no cases of perforation; however, bleeding after ER occurred in five cases (9.3%). ROC curve analysis of bleeding after ER showed that the AUC was 0.843 with a good diagnostic performance. When the cut-off value of RDW was set at 14.4%, sensitivity and specificity were 80% and 85.7%, respectively. There was a bleeding rate of 36.4% (4/11) at an RDW of ≥14.4%, which was significantly higher than that of 2.3% (1/43) at an RDW of <14.4%.ConclusionRDW can be a predictor of bleeding risk after ER for EGC.
Project description:Background and study aims Delayed bleeding (DB) is the most frequent major adverse event after endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs). Evidence-based guidelines for management of DB are lacking. We aimed to evaluate the clinical presentation, treatment and outcome of patients with DB and to determine factors associated with hemostatic therapy. Patients and methods Patients with DB were identified by analyzing all consecutive EMR procedures for LNPCPs (≥ 2 cm) from one academic center (2012-2017) and seven regional hospitals (2015-2017). DB was defined as any postprocedural bleeding necessitating emergency department presentation, hospitalization or reintervention. Outcome of DB was assessed for three clinical scenarios: continued bleeding (CB), spontaneous resolution without recurrent bleeding during 24 hours observation (SR), and recurrent bleeding (RB). Variables associated with hemostatic therapy were analyzed using logistic regression. Results DB occurred after 42/542 (7.7 %) EMR procedures and re-colonoscopy was performed in 30 patients (72 %). Re-colonoscopy and hemostatic therapy rates were 92 % and 75 % for CB (n = 24), 25 % and 8 % for SR (n = 12), and 83 % and 67 % for RB (n = 6), respectively. Frequent hematochezia (≥ hourly) was the only factor significantly associated with hemostatic therapy (RR 2.23, p = 0.01). Re-bleeding after endoscopic hemostatic therapy occurred in 3/22 (13.6 %) patients. Conclusion Ongoing or recurrent hematochezia is associated with a high rate of hemostatic therapy, warranting re-colonoscopy in these patients. A conservative approach is justified when bleeding spontaneously settles, and without recurrent hematochezia during 24 hours observation patients can be safely discharged without endoscopic re-examination.