Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W4375953669> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 48 of
48
with 100 items per page.
- W4375953669 endingPage "ii" @default.
- W4375953669 startingPage "ii" @default.
- W4375953669 abstract "Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) allow endoscopic resection of early esophageal adenocarcinoma. The choice between the two techniques takes into account the morphology of the lesion, and the experience of the endoscopist. The aim of this study was to compare EMR to ESD for the treatment of early esophageal adenocarcinoma.Patients who underwent an endoscopic resection for esophageal adenocarcinomas between March 2015 and December 2019 were included. ESD was compared to EMR in terms of clinical, procedural, histologic, and oncologic outcomes.85 patients were included: 57 ESD and 28 EMR. The median (IQR) diameter of the lesion was 20(15–25) mm in the ESD group, and 15(8–16) mm in the EMR group, p<0.01. ESD allowed en bloc resection in 100% of cases, and EMR in 39% of cases, p<0.001. The R0 and curative resection rate in the ESD group versus the EMR group were 88% and 67%, respectively, versus 21% and 11%, p<0.001. We recorded one severe adverse event, in the EMR group. After a median (IQR) follow-up of 27.5 (14.5–38.7) months, the local recurrence rate was 23% vs. 18% (p = 0.63), and the overall survival 89% vs. 86% (p = 0.72), in the ESD and EMR groups, respectively.ESD was as safe as EMR and allowed higher en bloc, R0 and curative resection rates. Although these results did not translate into long-term outcomes, these data prompt for a broader adoption of ESD for the resection of esophageal lesions suspected of harboring early esophageal adenocarcinoma." @default.
- W4375953669 created "2023-05-10" @default.
- W4375953669 date "2023-06-01" @default.
- W4375953669 modified "2023-09-24" @default.
- W4375953669 title "Copyright" @default.
- W4375953669 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/s0272-2712(23)00028-8" @default.
- W4375953669 hasPublicationYear "2023" @default.
- W4375953669 type Work @default.
- W4375953669 citedByCount "0" @default.
- W4375953669 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
- W4375953669 hasConcept C121608353 @default.
- W4375953669 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
- W4375953669 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
- W4375953669 hasConcept C159110652 @default.
- W4375953669 hasConcept C2777137803 @default.
- W4375953669 hasConcept C2778866283 @default.
- W4375953669 hasConcept C2781156865 @default.
- W4375953669 hasConcept C2781182431 @default.
- W4375953669 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
- W4375953669 hasConceptScore W4375953669C121608353 @default.
- W4375953669 hasConceptScore W4375953669C126322002 @default.
- W4375953669 hasConceptScore W4375953669C141071460 @default.
- W4375953669 hasConceptScore W4375953669C159110652 @default.
- W4375953669 hasConceptScore W4375953669C2777137803 @default.
- W4375953669 hasConceptScore W4375953669C2778866283 @default.
- W4375953669 hasConceptScore W4375953669C2781156865 @default.
- W4375953669 hasConceptScore W4375953669C2781182431 @default.
- W4375953669 hasConceptScore W4375953669C71924100 @default.
- W4375953669 hasIssue "2" @default.
- W4375953669 hasLocation W43759536691 @default.
- W4375953669 hasOpenAccess W4375953669 @default.
- W4375953669 hasPrimaryLocation W43759536691 @default.
- W4375953669 hasRelatedWork W2110611530 @default.
- W4375953669 hasRelatedWork W2399026463 @default.
- W4375953669 hasRelatedWork W2600674001 @default.
- W4375953669 hasRelatedWork W2604733405 @default.
- W4375953669 hasRelatedWork W2945040090 @default.
- W4375953669 hasRelatedWork W2948854173 @default.
- W4375953669 hasRelatedWork W3169360571 @default.
- W4375953669 hasRelatedWork W3170934059 @default.
- W4375953669 hasRelatedWork W3171178304 @default.
- W4375953669 hasRelatedWork W2095759942 @default.
- W4375953669 hasVolume "43" @default.
- W4375953669 isParatext "false" @default.
- W4375953669 isRetracted "false" @default.
- W4375953669 workType "article" @default.