Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesNarrative ReviewEurope PMC

Useful strategies to prevent severe stricture after endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial esophageal neoplasm

Uno K., Iijima K., Koike T., Shimosegawa T.

Narrative Review on Chronic Wound, Scar, published in World J Gastroenterol (2015) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesEvidence level of this study

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Narrative Review
Journal
World J Gastroenterol (2015)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
26109798
PMCID
PMC4476873
DOI
10.3748/wjg.v21.i23.7120
Citations
13

Abstract (original English)

The minimal invasiveness of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) prompted us to apply this technique to large-size early esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and Barrett's adenocarcinoma, despite the limitations in the study population and surveillance duration. A post-ESD ulceration of greater than three-fourths of esophageal circumference was advocated as an important risk factor for refractory strictures that require several sessions of dilation therapy. Most of the preoperative conditions are asymptomatic, but dilatation treatment for dysphagia associated with the stricture has potential risks of severe complications and a worsening of quality of life. Possible mechanisms of dysphasia were demonstrated based on dysmotility and pathological abnormalities at the site: (1) delayed mucosal healing; (2) severe inflammation and disorganized fibrosis with abundant extracellular matrices in the submucosa; and (3) atrophy in the muscularis proper. However, reports on the administration of anti-scarring agents, preventive dilation therapies, and regenerative medicine demonstrated limited success in stricture prevention, and there were discrepancies in the study designs and protocols of these reports. The development and consequent long-term assessments of new prophylactic technologies on the promotion of wound healing and control of the inflammatory/tumor microenvironment will requir

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.

Evidence level

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

How we grade evidence
HumansEsophageal NeoplasmsEsophageal StenosisEsophagoscopyDissectionTreatment OutcomeEsophagectomySeverity of Illness IndexRisk AssessmentRisk Factors

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.

Related research