We have located links that may give you full text access.
Efficacy and safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection for gastric epithelial neoplasia in elderly patients aged 80 years and older.
Aging Clinical and Experimental Research 2019 January 30
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been widely used in gastric tumor as a minimally invasive treatment. The efficacy and safety of ESD is still unclear in the elderly who have high frequency comorbidities. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ESD for gastric epithelial neoplasia in patients aged 80 years and older.
METHODS: Between March 2013 and July 2017, a total of 438 gastric epithelial neoplasia patients treated with ESD were analyzed. Clinical outcomes including en bloc and complete resection rates, adverse events (AE) related procedure and sedation were compared between the elderly group and the non-elderly group.
RESULTS: Sex, Body Mass Index, medication history and American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status did not differ between the two groups. Tumor characteristics except size of resected specimen (elderly vs. non-elderly; 36.5 ± 10.5 vs. 32.3 ± 8.7 mm, p < 0.011) did not differ. There were no significant differences in AE-related sedation. En bloc resection (elderly vs. non-elderly; 100% vs. 98.3%, p = 0.454), and complete resection rate (elderly vs. non-elderly; 93.8% vs. 96.3%, p = 0.471) did not differ significantly between the two groups. Procedure time, hospital stay, AE-related procedure and delayed bleeding were also similar between the two groups. However, procedure time of preventive hemostasis (elderly vs. non-elderly; 10.4 ± 7.7 vs. 7.4 ± 5.2 min, p = 0.040) was significantly higher in the elderly group.
CONCLUSIONS: ESD for gastric epithelial neoplasia is effective and safe in elderly patients ≥ 80 years as in non-elderly patients.
METHODS: Between March 2013 and July 2017, a total of 438 gastric epithelial neoplasia patients treated with ESD were analyzed. Clinical outcomes including en bloc and complete resection rates, adverse events (AE) related procedure and sedation were compared between the elderly group and the non-elderly group.
RESULTS: Sex, Body Mass Index, medication history and American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status did not differ between the two groups. Tumor characteristics except size of resected specimen (elderly vs. non-elderly; 36.5 ± 10.5 vs. 32.3 ± 8.7 mm, p < 0.011) did not differ. There were no significant differences in AE-related sedation. En bloc resection (elderly vs. non-elderly; 100% vs. 98.3%, p = 0.454), and complete resection rate (elderly vs. non-elderly; 93.8% vs. 96.3%, p = 0.471) did not differ significantly between the two groups. Procedure time, hospital stay, AE-related procedure and delayed bleeding were also similar between the two groups. However, procedure time of preventive hemostasis (elderly vs. non-elderly; 10.4 ± 7.7 vs. 7.4 ± 5.2 min, p = 0.040) was significantly higher in the elderly group.
CONCLUSIONS: ESD for gastric epithelial neoplasia is effective and safe in elderly patients ≥ 80 years as in non-elderly patients.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
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