Suture pulley countertraction method reduces procedure time and technical demand of endoscopic submucosal dissection among novice endoscopists learning endoscopic submucosal dissection: a prospective randomized ex vivo study - 19/12/18
Abstract |
Background and Aims |
The lack of reliable countertraction in endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) contributes to its technical demand and increased procedure time. We aimed to prospectively evaluate the efficacy of the suture pulley countertraction method in endoscopists new to both suturing and ESD.
Methods |
Two 30-mm circular lesions were created in an ex vivo porcine stomach model. Endoscopists considered novices for both endoscopic suturing and ESD were randomized to either traditional or suture pulley ESD first and performed ESD using each technique. Procedure time was recorded including time of circumferential incision, suture pulley placement, and submucosal dissection. After completion of each ESD, participants graded the difficulty of the procedure using the National Aeronautical and Space Administration (NASA) Task Load Index.
Results |
Thirteen participants (8 fellows, 5 attendings) completed the study using both methods. Mean total procedure time was shorter using suture pulley ESD compared with traditional ESD (26.7 ± 7.3 vs 59.4 ± 20.4 minutes, P < .001). The suture pulley required a mean 6.2 ± 2.1 minutes to place. Submucosal dissection time was shorter using suture pulley ESD compared with traditional ESD (8.4 ± 2.9 vs 47.2 ± 16.3 minutes, P < .001). All 7 individual indices and total score on the NASA Task Load Index were significantly improved using the suture pulley ESD method (P < .001).
Conclusions |
The suture pulley countertraction method significantly decreases procedure time and technical demand of ESD among endoscopists at all skill levels who are new to ESD. The results of this study have potential implications for ESD training in the United States.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Graphical abstract |
Abbreviations : ESD, NASA
Plan
| DISCLOSURE: The following authors disclosed financial relationships relevant to this publication: C. C. Thompson: Consultant for Boston Scientific, Apollo Endosurgery, and Olympus. H. Aihara: Consultant for Boston Scientific and Olympus. All other authors disclosed no financial relationships relevant to this publication. |
|
| If you would like to chat with an author of this article, you may contact Dr Aihara at haihara@bwh.harvard.edu. |
Vol 89 - N° 1
P. 177-184 - janvier 2019 Retour au numéro
Article précédent
- Index colonoscopy-related risk factors for postcolonoscopy colorectal cancers
- Theodore A. Tollivoro, Christopher D. Jensen, Amy R. Marks, Wei K. Zhao, Joanne E. Schottinger, Virginia P. Quinn, Nirupa R. Ghai, Ann G. Zauber, Chyke A. Doubeni, Theodore R. Levin, Bruce Fireman, Charles P. Quesenberry, Douglas A. Corley
- Gaining traction: pulley-ing your weight during endoscopic submucosal dissection
- Dennis Yang, Peter V. Draganov
Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?