lifting sign
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

14
(FIVE YEARS 1)

H-INDEX

2
(FIVE YEARS 0)

2021 ◽  
Vol 59 (04) ◽  
pp. 321-325
Author(s):  
Yang Liu ◽  
Ning Wei ◽  
Rui Hua Shi

Abstract Background Although the problem of whether to perform a biopsy before endoscopic treatment for colorectal laterally spreading tumor (LST) troubles clinicians, about 50 % of lesions still undergo a preceding biopsy. We aimed to explore factors affecting the non-lifting sign in LST and examine the influence of “biopsy-related factors”, such as the number of biopsy specimens and the interval after biopsy on non-lifting sign in cases with a history of biopsy. Methods Clinical data of 159 LSTs regarding age, gender, history of biopsy, tumor location, tumor size, the depth of submucosal invasion, tumor configuration, histologic type, location with respect to the fold, and result of non-lifting sign testing were investigated retrospectively. For patients with a history of biopsy, the period after biopsy and the number of biopsy specimens also were analyzed. Results Among 159 cases of LST, 112 were positive and 47 were negative for lifting signs. Biopsy history (p = 0.008), tumor size (p = 0.010), and location with respect to the fold (p = 0.022) were identified as factors affecting the non-lifting sign in multivariate analyses. In 75 LST cases with a history of biopsy, only the number of biopsies (p = 0.003) was identified as a factor affecting the non-lifting sign in multivariate analyses. Conclusions For LST, lesions with larger size, being across the fold, and biopsy history were predictive factors for non-lifting signs. Reducing the number of biopsies would reduce the occurrence of non-lifting signs when biopsy is necessary. The impact of the interval after the biopsy on the non-lifting sign will require further study.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yan Gao ◽  
Wei Jiang ◽  
Hui-Hong Zhai ◽  
Jianing Xu ◽  
Shanshan Wu ◽  
...  

Abstract Background and Aims: Endoscopic submucosal dissection has become widely accepted as an efficient and well-established option for colorectal neoplastic lesions (CRNs). However, there are still some barriers for endoscopists that hinder the successful ESD. The current study was to evaluate risk factors for the failure of en-bloc resection in the colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD).Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed from patients who underwent ESD for colorectal neoplasms (CRNs) between January 2015 and April 2017. The demographics and colonoscopic reports were analyzed. A meta-analysis was conducted for the risk factors for the failure of en-bloc or R0 resection. Results: 253 ESD cases were completed in en-bloc resection. Ulcerative colitis, previous abdominal surgeries, lesions on the Bauhin’s valve/ dentate line, non-lifting sign and submucosal fibrosis were associated with the failure of en-bloc resection (P<0.05). Meta-analysis showed that laterally spreading tumors, tumor larger than 40mm, Bauhin’s valve/dentate line, flexure, non-lifting sign, and submucosal fibrosis were the factors for the failure of en bloc or R0 resection. The rates of perforation were obviously higher in N-EBR groups compared to EBR groups. No significant results can be observed on the local recurrence based on these studies. Conclusions: Preoperative factors such as laterally spreading tumors, tumor larger than 40mm, Bauhin’s valve/dentate line, flexure and intraoperative factors such as non-lifting sign, submucosal fibrosis should be put more focus to reach better outcomes in CRNs patients.


Author(s):  
Futoshi TANAKA ◽  
Masatsugu HIRAKI ◽  
Kohei YAMADA ◽  
Naoyuki TOMINAGA ◽  
Osamu IKEDA ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 49 ◽  
pp. e108
Author(s):  
G. Andrisani ◽  
M. Pizzicannella ◽  
M. Martino ◽  
R. Rea ◽  
M. Pandolfi ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 78 (1) ◽  
pp. 167-168 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seth Sweetser ◽  
Todd H. Baron
Keyword(s):  

Endoscopy ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 39 (08) ◽  
pp. 701-705 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. Kobayashi ◽  
Y. Saito ◽  
Y. Sano ◽  
N. Uragami ◽  
T. Michita ◽  
...  

2007 ◽  
Vol 65 (5) ◽  
pp. AB263
Author(s):  
Nozomu Kobayashi ◽  
Yutaka Saito ◽  
Yasushi Sano ◽  
Naoyuki Uragami ◽  
Tomoki Michita ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document