procedure time for gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection according to location, considering both mucosal circumferential incision and submucosal dissection
Clicks: 212
ID: 220037
2016
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Steady Performance
30.0
/100
212 views
19 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
SteadyRanked #60 of 188 articles by views in colloids and surfaces a: physicochemical and engineering aspects
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 188 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Background. Previous assessments of technical difficulty and procedure time for endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) of gastric neoplasms did not take into account several critical determinants of these parameters. However, two key phases of ESD determine the total procedure time: the mucosal circumference incision speed (CIS) and submucosal dissection speed (SDS). Methods. We included 302 cases of en bloc and R0 resection of gastric neoplasms performed by 10 operators who had completed the training program at our hospital. Twelve locations were classified based on multiple criteria, such as condition of surrounding mucosa, lesion vascularity, presence of submucosal fat, ulcers, scars, fibrosis, and scope and device maneuverability. Lesions in different locations were classified into three groups based on the length of the procedure: fast, moderate, or late. Results. A significant difference was found in CIS and SDS for each location (p<0.01), which demonstrates the validity of this classification system. In several locations, CIS and SDS were not consistent with each other. Conclusion. CIS and SDS did not correspond to each other even for lesions in the same location. Consideration of ESD procedure time for gastric neoplasms requires a more elaborate classification system than that previously reported.
| Reference Key |
konuma2016gastroenterologyprocedure
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | ;Hironori Konuma;Kenshi Matsumoto;Hiroya Ueyama;Hiroyuki Komori;Yoichi Akazawa;Misuzu Ueyama;Yuta Nakagawa;Takashi Morimoto;Tsutomu Takeda;Kohei Matsumoto;Daisuke Asaoka;Mariko Hojo;Akihito Nagahara;Takashi Yao;Akihisa Miyazaki;Sumio Watanabe |
| Journal | colloids and surfaces a: physicochemical and engineering aspects |
| Year | 2016 |
| DOI |
10.1155/2016/9183793
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.