ISSN: 1859 - 2872
Effectiveness and safety of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) in the treatment of early rectal cancer and precancerous lesions
Main Article Content
Keywords
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) in the management of early rectal cancer and precancerous lesions at the 108 Military Central Hospital. Subject and method: A descriptive study was conducted on 35 patients diagnosed with early rectal cancer or precancerous lesions who underwent EMR procedures at the 108 Military Central Hospital between January 2018 and January 2023. The EMR procedures was performed following a standardized protocol. Outcomes and the safety profile were assessed. Result: The complete resection rate and technical success rates were both 100% (35/35 patients). The mean procedure time was 15.6 minutes (ranging from 12 to 30 minutes). Most patients experienced post-procedural pain, with an incidence of 68.6%. The intraprocedural bleeding rate was 5.7% (2/35 patients). At 1.5 months post-procedure, the majority of lesions had healed (21 patients; 60.0%), while 14 lesions (40.0%) were in the healing process. By 6 months, among 35 cases reviewed during the second follow-up endoscopy, the complete healing rate was 100% (35/35 patients). Conclusion: EMR is an effective and minimally invasive technique for the treatment of early-stage rectal cancer and precancerous lesions. Despite its favorable safety profile, further studies are needed to comprehensively assess the advantages and limitations of this technique. This study highlights the successful application of EMR in Vietnam, providing evidence for its broader adoption in similar settings.
Article Details
References
2. He L, Wang F, Tian H, Xie Y, Xie L, Liu Z (2019) The expression profile of RNA sensors in colorectal cancer and its correlation with cancer stages. Translational Cancer Research 8(4): 1351.
3. Yuan X, Gao H, Liu C, et al (2021) Effectiveness and safety of the different endoscopic resection methods for 10-to 20-mm nonpedunculated colorectal polyps: a systematic review and pooled analysis. Saudi Journal of Gastroenterology 27(6): 331-341.
4. Ferlitsch M, Moss A, Hassan C, et al (2017) Colorectal polypectomy and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR): European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) clinical guideline. Endoscopy 49(03): 270-297.
5. Law R, Das A, Gregory D et al (2016) Endoscopic resection is cost-effective compared with laparoscopicáresection in the management of complex colonápolyps: an economic analysis. Gastrointestinal endoscopy 83(6): 1248-1257.
6. Raju GS, Lum PJ, Ross WA et al (2016) Outcome of EMR as an alternative to surgery in patients with complex colon polyps. Gastrointestinal endoscopy 84(2): 315-325.
7. Fuccio L, Hassan C, Ponchon T et al (2017) Clinical outcomes after endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal neoplasia: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointestinal endoscopy 86(1): 74-86. doi:10.1016/j.gie.2017.02.024
8. Ahmad NA, Kochman ML, Long WB, Furth EE, Ginsberg GG (2002) Efficacy, safety, and clinical outcomes of endoscopic mucosal resection: a study of 101 cases. Gastrointestinal endoscopy 55(3): 390-396.
9. Deprez PH, Bergman J, Meisner S et al (2010) Current practice with endoscopic submucosal dissection in Europe: Position statement from a panel of experts. Endoscopy 42(10): 853-858.
10. He L, Deng T, Luo H (2015) Efficacy and safety of endoscopic resection therapies for rectal carcinoid tumors: a meta-analysis. Yonsei medical journal 56(1): 72-81.
11. Puli SR, Kakugawa Y, Gotoda T, Antillon D, Saito Y, Antillon MR (2009) Meta-analysis and systematic review of colorectal endoscopic mucosal resection. World journal of gastroenterology: WJG 15(34): 4273.
12. Pimentel-Nunes P, Dinis-Ribeiro M, Ponchon T et al (2015) Endoscopic submucosal dissection: European society of gastrointestinal endoscopy (ESGE) guideline. Endoscopy 47(09): 829-854.
Article Sidebar
