English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Background and study aims Sessile serrated lesions (SSL) are major precursor lesions of serrated pathway cancers, and appropriate treatment may prevent interval colorectal cancer. Studies have reported the outcomes of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for SSL; however, there are insufficient reports on endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). We examined the characteristics and outcomes of SSL and compared them to those of non-SSL in ESD.  Patients and methods We reviewed 370 consecutive cases in 322 patients who underwent colorectal ESD between January 2016 and March 2020 at our hospital. There were 267 0-IIa lesions that were stratified into 41 SSL and 226 non-SSL (intramucosal cancer, adenoma) cases. We used propensity matching to adjust for the variances in the factors affecting treatment between the SSL and non-SSL groups.  Results In the baseline cases, young women and proximal colon tumor location were significantly more common in the SSL group. There were no statistically significant differences between the SSL and non-SSL groups in terms of en bloc resection rate (97.6 % vs. 99.6 %; P = 0.28), R0 resection rate (92.7 % vs. 93.4 %; P = 0.74), perforation (0 % vs. 0.9 %; P &gt; 0.99), and postoperative bleeding (2.4 % vs. 1.8 %; P = 0.56). Thirty-eight pairs were matched using propensity score, and the median dissection speed (12 vs. 7.7 cm2/h; P = 0.0095) was significantly faster in the SSL than in the non-SSL group.  Conclusions ESD for SSL was safely performed, and SSL was smoother to remove than non-SSL. ESD might be an acceptable endoscopic treatment option for SSL.

Acceptability of endoscopic submucosal dissection for sessile serrated lesions: comparison with non-sessile serrated lesions