We have located links that may give you full text access.
EVALUATION STUDIES
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Reasonable decision of anesthesia methods in patients who underwent endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial esophageal carcinoma: A retrospective analysis in a single Japanese institution.
Turkish Journal of Gastroenterology : the Official Journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology 2016 March
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Despite being a valuable therapeutic option, it has not yet been reported whether endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for superficial esophageal carcinoma should be performed under general or non-general anesthesia (sedation).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The clinicopathological factors (age, sex, histology, tumor size, tumor location, tumor macroscopic morphology, and adverse events) of 110 superficial esophageal carcinoma lesions (98 patients) treated by ESD at a single Japanese institution from January 2007 to December 2013 were retrospectively reviewed using medical records.
RESULTS: Among 110 lesions, 94 lesions were resected under general anesthesia, and 16 lesions were resected under non-general anesthesia by an experienced endoscopist. Although the number of complications was 12 in the group of general anesthesia and 1 in sedated patients, no significant differences between both groups were found in the incidence of adverse events (total adverse events: 12.2% versus 1.02%, p=0.456; mediastinal emphysema: 11.2% versus 1.02%, p=0.518; pulmonary atelectasis: 1.02% versus 0%, p=0.679). All of the events could be managed conservatively.
CONCLUSION: For ordered management of accidental events during esophageal ESD, general anesthesia might be a crucial option for a better clinical outcome even when administered by non-experienced operators.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The clinicopathological factors (age, sex, histology, tumor size, tumor location, tumor macroscopic morphology, and adverse events) of 110 superficial esophageal carcinoma lesions (98 patients) treated by ESD at a single Japanese institution from January 2007 to December 2013 were retrospectively reviewed using medical records.
RESULTS: Among 110 lesions, 94 lesions were resected under general anesthesia, and 16 lesions were resected under non-general anesthesia by an experienced endoscopist. Although the number of complications was 12 in the group of general anesthesia and 1 in sedated patients, no significant differences between both groups were found in the incidence of adverse events (total adverse events: 12.2% versus 1.02%, p=0.456; mediastinal emphysema: 11.2% versus 1.02%, p=0.518; pulmonary atelectasis: 1.02% versus 0%, p=0.679). All of the events could be managed conservatively.
CONCLUSION: For ordered management of accidental events during esophageal ESD, general anesthesia might be a crucial option for a better clinical outcome even when administered by non-experienced operators.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app