Displaying all 3 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Fulltext Off-label use of 0.4 % sodium hyaluronate teardrops: a safe and effective solution for submucosal injection in gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection
    Aliaga Ramos J, Arantes V, Abdul Rani R, Yoshida N
    Endosc Int Open, 2020 Dec;8(12):E1741-E1747.
    PMID: 33269305 DOI: 10.1055/a-1265-6598
    Background and study aims  Submucosal (SM) injection is a critical step in endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). In Japan, use of viscous solutions such as sodium hyaluronate are recommended; the commercially product available is MucoUp (Seikagaku Co. and Boston Scientific Japan Co., Japan). Nevertheless, MucoUp is expensive and unavailable in many Western countries. For the past 8 years, we have been using low-cost sterile teardrops solution composed of 0.4 % sodium hyaluronate (Adaptis Fresh, Legrand Laboratory, Brazil). This solution is readily available in drugstores with a cost of approximately US$ 10.00 for each 10-cc bottle. The aim of this study was to present the clinical outcome with off-label sodium hyaluronate use for SM injection in gastric ESD. Patients and methods  A single-center retrospective study of collected data investigating consecutive patients that underwent gastric ESD between 2012 and 2019. ESD was performed using 0.4 % sodium hyaluronate teardrop for SM injection and Flush Knife BT 2.5 (Fujifilm Co., Japan). The following data were analyzed: clinical-pathological features, en-bloc, R0 and curative resection rate, procedure duration, adverse events, and clinical outcome. Results  ESD was performed with sodium hyaluronate for submucosal injection in 78 patients. The en-bloc resection rate and R0 resection rate were 96.1 % and 92.3 %, respectively. The curative resection rate for epithelial lesions was 83.8 %. Adverse events occurred in 5 cases (6.3 %): delayed bleeding (3.8 %, 3 cases) and perforation (2.5 %, 2 cases); all managed successfully by clipping and thermal coagulation. The mean volume of sodium hyaluronate solution used per patient was 10 cc (SD: ± 8 cc). During follow-up (mean: 17 months; SD: ± 14.5 months), two patients developed metachronous lesions (2.5 %). Conclusions  Off-label use of teardrops with 0.4 % sodium hyaluronate for submucosal injection was demonstrated to be safe and able to provide an effective submucosal cushion that facilitates SM dissection in gastric ESD procedures.
  2. Erratum: Off-label use of 0.4 % sodium hyaluronate teardrops: a safe and effective solution for submucosal injection in gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection
    Arantes V, Aliaga Ramos J, Abdul Rani R, Yoshida N
    Endosc Int Open, 2020 Dec;8(12):C3.
    PMID: 33304992 DOI: 10.1055/a-1328-0505
    [This corrects the article DOI: 10.1055/a-1265-6598.].
  3. Comparison of LED and LASER Colonoscopy About Linked Color Imaging and Blue Laser/Light Imaging of Colorectal Tumors in a Multinational Study
    Yoshida N, Draganov PV, John S, Neumann H, Rani RA, Hsu WH, et al.
    Dig Dis Sci, 2023 Oct;68(10):3943-3952.
    PMID: 37558800 DOI: 10.1007/s10620-023-08057-2
    INTRODUCTION: In light-emitting diode (LED) and LASER colonoscopy, linked color imaging (LCI) and blue light/laser imaging (BLI) are used for lesion detection and characterization worldwide. We analyzed the difference of LCI and BLI images of colorectal lesions between LED and LASER in a multinational study.

    METHODS: We prospectively observed lesions with white light imaging (WLI), LCI, and BLI using both LED and LASER colonoscopies from January 2020 to August 2021. Images were graded by 27 endoscopists from nine countries using the polyp visibility score: 4 (excellent), 3 (good), 2 (fair), and 1 (poor) and the comparison score (LED better/similar/LASER better) for WLI/LCI/BLI images of each lesion.

    RESULTS: Finally, 32 lesions (polyp size: 20.0 ± 15.2 mm) including 9 serrated lesions, 13 adenomas, and 10 T1 cancers were evaluated. The polyp visibility scores of LCI/WLI for international and Japan-expert endoscopists were 3.17 ± 0.73/3.17 ± 0.79 (p = 0.92) and 3.34 ± 0.78/2.84 ± 1.22 (p 

Related Terms
    Try searching for something
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links