Predictive factors for complications in endoscopic resection of large colorectal lesions: a multicenter prospective study
Surgical Endoscopy, ISSN: 1432-2218, Vol: 29, Issue: 5, Page: 1216-1222
2015
- 21Citations
- 23Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations21
- Citation Indexes18
- 18
- CrossRef7
- Policy Citations3
- 3
- Captures23
- Readers23
- 23
Article Description
Background and study aims: Conventional endoscopic resection (CER) includes polypectomy and endoscopic mucosal resection. The most common complications related to these techniques are post procedure bleeding and perforation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of CER for colorectal neoplasms ≧20 mm and to clarify predictive factors for complications. Patients and methods: We conducted a multicenter prospective study at 18 specialized institutes. From October 2007 to December 2010, 1,029 CERs were performed at participating institutes. We collected the data prospectively and analyzed gender, age, tumor size, gross appearance, mode of resection, etc. Results: The mean size of polyps resected was 26.4 ± 8.6 mm (range 20–120 mm). The final pathology was Vienna classification category 1 or 2 in 24, category 3 in 502, and category 4 or 5 in 503 lesions. Post procedure bleeding and intra procedure perforation occurred, respectively, in 16 (1.6 %) and 8 cases (0.78 %). The overall complication rate was 2.3 %. Risk factors for bleeding in multivariate analysis were only patients under 60 years of age. Risk factors for perforation in multivariate analysis were en bloc resection and Vienna classification category 4–5. The difference of complication rate was not statistically significant regarding gender, size, tumor location, gross appearance, treatment method, and kind of insufflation. Conclusion: CER is a safe, efficient, and effective minimally invasive therapy for large colorectal lesions. However, care should be taken for post procedure bleeding in patients under 60 years of age and for perforation in cases of Vienna classification category 4–5 or when an en bloc resection is tried.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84938258117&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-3799-9; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25159643; http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00464-014-3799-9; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-3799-9; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00464-014-3799-9
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know