A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Diagnostic evaluation of endoscopic ultrasonography with submucosal saline injection for differentiating between T1a and T1b early gastric cancer. | LitMetric

Diagnostic evaluation of endoscopic ultrasonography with submucosal saline injection for differentiating between T1a and T1b early gastric cancer.

World J Gastroenterol

Department of Internal Medicine, Inje University College of Medicine, Sanggye Paik Hospital, Seoul 01757, South Korea.

Published: December 2022


Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Background: Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) has become a reliable method for predicting the invasion depth of early gastric cancer (EGC). However, diagnostic accuracy of EUS is affected by several factors. In particular, it is difficult to differentiate between T1a and T1b EGC through EUS.

Aim: To confirm whether submucosal saline injection (SSI) could improve the accuracy of EUS in distinguishing T1a and T1b lesions in EGC.

Methods: Twenty-four patients with EGC were examined by EUS and subsequently by SSI combined EUS to compare the degree of tumor invasion. Then, they underwent endoscopic or surgical resection within 7 d. The diagnostic accuracy of EUS and SSI combined EUS was evaluated based on the final pathological findings postoperatively. Saline injected into the submucosa acted as an echoic contrast enhancing agent and had the effect of distinguishing the mucosal and submucosal layers clearly.

Results: Of total 24 patients, 23 were diagnosed with EGC (T1 cancer: 13 as T1a, and 10 as T1b). Standard EUS identified 6 of 13 T1a cancer patients and 3 of 10 T1b cancer patients. Whereas, EUS-SSI identified 12 of 13 T1a cancer patients and 6 of 10 T1b cancer patients. In this study, SSI combined EUS was more accurate than EUS alone in diagnosing T1a and T1b lesions of EGC (75.0% and 37.5%, respectively).

Conclusion: SSI improved the diagnostic accuracy of EUS in distinguishing between the T1a and T1b stages in EGC.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9782842PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v28.i46.6564DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

t1a t1b
24
accuracy eus
16
cancer patients
16
diagnostic accuracy
12
ssi combined
12
combined eus
12
eus
11
endoscopic ultrasonography
8
submucosal saline
8
saline injection
8

Similar Publications