Abbonarsi

A novel submucosal injection solution for endoscopic resection of large colorectal lesions: a randomized, double-blind trial - 15/08/18

Doi : 10.1016/j.gie.2018.04.2363 
Alessandro Repici, MD 1, , Michael Wallace, MD, MPH 2, Prateek Sharma, MD 3, Pradeep Bhandari, MD, PhD 4, Gianluca Lollo, MD 1, Roberta Maselli, MD 1, Cesare Hassan, MD 5, Douglas K. Rex, MD 6
1 Humanitas Research Hospital, Humanitas University, Milan, Italy 
2 Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Mayo Clinic Florida, Jacksonville, Florida, USA 
3 University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, Kansas, USA 
4 Solent Centre for Digestive Diseases, Portsmouth, United Kingdom 
5 Endoscopy Unit, Nuovo Regina Margherita Hospital, Rome, Italy 
6 Indiana University Medical Center, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA 

Reprint requests: Prof. Alessandro Repici, Digestive Endoscopy Unit Humanitas Research Hospital, Humanitas University, Via Manzoni 5620089 Rozzano (Milan) Italy.Digestive Endoscopy Unit Humanitas Research HospitalHumanitas UniversityVia ManzoniRozzano (Milan)5620089Italy

Abstract

Background and Aims

SIC-8000 (Eleview) is a new U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved solution for submucosal injection developed to provide a long-lasting cushion to facilitate endoscopic resection maneuvers. Our aim was to compare the efficacy and safety of SIC-8000 with those of saline solution, when performing EMR of large colorectal lesions.

Methods

In a randomized double-blind trial, patients undergoing EMR for colorectal non-pedunculated lesions ≥20 mm were randomized in a 1:1 ratio between SIC-8000 and saline solution as control solution in 5 tertiary centers. Endoscopists and patients were blinded to the type of submucosal solution used. Total volume to complete EMR and per lesion size and time of resection were primary endpoints; the Sydney Resection Quotient (SRQ), as well as other EMR outcomes, and the rate of adverse events were secondary endpoints. A 30-day telephone follow-up was performed. An alpha level <0.05 was considered as statistically significant.

Results

Of the 327 patients screened, 226 (mean age, 66 ± 10 years; males, 56%) were enrolled in the study and randomized between the 2 submucosal agents. Of these, 211 patients (mean size of the lesions 33 ± 13 mm; Paris class Is, 36%; proximal colon, 74%) were entered in the final analysis (SIC-8000, 102; saline solution, 109). EMR was complete in all cases. The total volume needed for EMR was significantly less in the SIC-8000 arm compared with saline group (16.1 ± 9.8 mL vs 31.6 ± 32.0 mL; P < .001). This corresponded to an average volume per lesion size of 0.5 ± 0.3 mL/mm and 0.9 ± 0.6 mL/mm with SIC-8000 and saline solution, respectively (P < .001). The mean time to completely resect the lesion tended to be lower with SIC-8000 than with saline solution (19.1 ± 16.8 minutes vs 29.7 ± 68.9 minutes; P = .1). The SRQ was significantly higher with SIC-8000 compared with saline solution (10.3 ± 8.1 vs 8.0 ± 5.7; P = .04) with a trend for a lower number of resected pieces (5.7 ± 6.0 vs 6.5 ± 5.04; P = .052) and a higher rate of en bloc resections (19/102, 18.6% vs 12/111, 11.0%; P = .1). The rate of adverse events was similar between the 2 arms (SIC-8000, 18.6%; saline solution, 17%), and none of the serious adverse events (SIC-8000, 8.8%; saline solution, 10.7%) were related to the study treatment.

Conclusions

In a double-blind, randomized clinical trial, a new FDA-approved agent for sub-mucosal injection appeared to be a more effective and equally safe submucosal agent for EMR injection than saline solution. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT02654418.)

Il testo completo di questo articolo è disponibile in PDF.

Abbreviations : ITT, PP, SRQ, SS


Mappa


 DISCLOSURE: All authors disclosed no financial relationships relevant to this publication.
 See CME section; p. 542.
 If you would like to chat with an author of this article, you may contact Professor Repici at alessandro.repici@hunimed.eu.


© 2018  American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Pubblicato da Elsevier Masson SAS. Tutti i diritti riservati.
Aggiungere alla mia biblioteca Togliere dalla mia biblioteca Stampare
Esportazione

    Citazioni Export

  • File

  • Contenuto

Vol 88 - N° 3

P. 527 - settembre 2018 Ritorno al numero
Articolo precedente Articolo precedente
  • Immunohistologic analysis of the duodenal bulb: a new method for celiac disease diagnosis in children
  • Luigina De Leo, Vincenzo Villanacci, Fabiana Ziberna, Serena Vatta, Stefano Martelossi, Grazia Di Leo, Chiara Zanchi, Matteo Bramuzzo, Fabiola Giudici, Alessandro Ventura, Tarcisio Not
| Articolo seguente Articolo seguente
  • Alternative approaches to polyp extraction in colonoscopy: a proof of principle study
  • William Barge, Deepak Kumar, Deborah Giusto, Jason Kramer, Rama Behara, Shriram Jakate, Faraz Bishehsari, John Losurdo, Salina Lee, Shubha Singh, Joshua Melson

Benvenuto su EM|consulte, il riferimento dei professionisti della salute.
L'accesso al testo integrale di questo articolo richiede un abbonamento.

Già abbonato a @@106933@@ rivista ?

@@150455@@ Voir plus

Il mio account


Dichiarazione CNIL

EM-CONSULTE.COM è registrato presso la CNIL, dichiarazione n. 1286925.

Ai sensi della legge n. 78-17 del 6 gennaio 1978 sull'informatica, sui file e sulle libertà, Lei puo' esercitare i diritti di opposizione (art.26 della legge), di accesso (art.34 a 38 Legge), e di rettifica (art.36 della legge) per i dati che La riguardano. Lei puo' cosi chiedere che siano rettificati, compeltati, chiariti, aggiornati o cancellati i suoi dati personali inesati, incompleti, equivoci, obsoleti o la cui raccolta o di uso o di conservazione sono vietati.
Le informazioni relative ai visitatori del nostro sito, compresa la loro identità, sono confidenziali.
Il responsabile del sito si impegna sull'onore a rispettare le condizioni legali di confidenzialità applicabili in Francia e a non divulgare tali informazioni a terzi.


Tutto il contenuto di questo sito: Copyright © 2026 Elsevier, i suoi licenziatari e contributori. Tutti i diritti sono riservati. Inclusi diritti per estrazione di testo e di dati, addestramento dell’intelligenza artificiale, e tecnologie simili. Per tutto il contenuto ‘open access’ sono applicati i termini della licenza Creative Commons.