Endoscopic clips versus overstitch suturing system device for mucosotomy closure after peroral endoscopic pyloromyotomy (G-POEM) : a prospective single-center study

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00023001%3A_____%2F22%3A00083504" target="_blank" >RIV/00023001:_____/22:00083504 - isvavai.cz</a>

Nalezeny alternativní kódy

RIV/61988987:17110/22:A2302JK3 RIV/00216208:11110/22:10467298

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00464-022-09417-1.pdf?pdf=button" target="_blank" >https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00464-022-09417-1.pdf?pdf=button</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-022-09417-1" target="_blank" >10.1007/s00464-022-09417-1</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Endoscopic clips versus overstitch suturing system device for mucosotomy closure after peroral endoscopic pyloromyotomy (G-POEM) : a prospective single-center study

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

Background and aims G-POEM is an emerging method for treatment of severe gastroparesis. Safe mucosal closure is necessary to avoid adverse events. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of two closure methods: clips and endoscopic suturing (ES) after G-POEM. Methods We performed a single center, prospective study. The closure method was assigned at the discretion of an endoscopist prior to the procedure. The main outcome was the proportion of subjects with successful closure. Unsuccessful closure was defined as a need for a rescue method, or a need for an additional intervention or incomplete closure-related adverse events. Secondary outcomes were the easiness of closure (VAS score 1 = very difficult, 10 = easy), closure time, and cost. Results A total of 40 patients [21 female; mean age, range 47.5; (20-74)] were included; 20 received ES and 20 clips [mean number of clips 6; range (4-19)]. All 20 patients with ES (100%, 95% CI 84-100%) and 18 patients with clips (89%, 95% CI 70-97%) had successful closure (p = 0.49). One patient needed a rescue method (KING closure) and the other patient an additional clipping on POD1. Closure with clips was quicker [mean time 9.8 (range 4-20) min vs. 14.1 (5-21) min; p = 0.007] and cheaper [mean cost 807 USD (+/- 402) vs. 2353 USD (+/- 145); p &lt; 0.001]. Endoscopist assessed the easiness of ES and clips as comparable [mean VAS, range 7.5 (3-10) (ES) vs. 6.9 (3-10) (clips); p = 0.3]. Conclusions Both ES and clips are effective methods for mucosal closure in patients undergoing G-POEM. However, centres using clips should have a rescue closure method available as clips may fail in some patients. Closure with ES is more costly than with clips. [GRAPHICS] .

Název v anglickém jazyce

Endoscopic clips versus overstitch suturing system device for mucosotomy closure after peroral endoscopic pyloromyotomy (G-POEM) : a prospective single-center study

Popis výsledku anglicky

Background and aims G-POEM is an emerging method for treatment of severe gastroparesis. Safe mucosal closure is necessary to avoid adverse events. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of two closure methods: clips and endoscopic suturing (ES) after G-POEM. Methods We performed a single center, prospective study. The closure method was assigned at the discretion of an endoscopist prior to the procedure. The main outcome was the proportion of subjects with successful closure. Unsuccessful closure was defined as a need for a rescue method, or a need for an additional intervention or incomplete closure-related adverse events. Secondary outcomes were the easiness of closure (VAS score 1 = very difficult, 10 = easy), closure time, and cost. Results A total of 40 patients [21 female; mean age, range 47.5; (20-74)] were included; 20 received ES and 20 clips [mean number of clips 6; range (4-19)]. All 20 patients with ES (100%, 95% CI 84-100%) and 18 patients with clips (89%, 95% CI 70-97%) had successful closure (p = 0.49). One patient needed a rescue method (KING closure) and the other patient an additional clipping on POD1. Closure with clips was quicker [mean time 9.8 (range 4-20) min vs. 14.1 (5-21) min; p = 0.007] and cheaper [mean cost 807 USD (+/- 402) vs. 2353 USD (+/- 145); p &lt; 0.001]. Endoscopist assessed the easiness of ES and clips as comparable [mean VAS, range 7.5 (3-10) (ES) vs. 6.9 (3-10) (clips); p = 0.3]. Conclusions Both ES and clips are effective methods for mucosal closure in patients undergoing G-POEM. However, centres using clips should have a rescue closure method available as clips may fail in some patients. Closure with ES is more costly than with clips. [GRAPHICS] .

Druh

J_imp - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

30219 - Gastroenterology and hepatology

Projekt

<a href="/cs/project/NV17-28797A" target="_blank" >NV17-28797A: G-POEM v léčbě refrakterní idiopatické a diabetické gastroparézy – randomizovaná a kontrolovaná „sham“ studie</a><br>

Návaznosti

P - Projekt vyzkumu a vyvoje financovany z verejnych zdroju (s odkazem do CEP)

Rok uplatnění

2022

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Surgical endoscopy

ISSN

0930-2794

e-ISSN

1432-2218

Svazek periodika

36

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

12

Stát vydavatele periodika

DE - Spolková republika Německo

Počet stran výsledku

8

Strana od-do

9254-9261

Kód UT WoS článku

000826826200006

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-85134518656