Risk of electrocoagulation syndrome after endoscopic submucosal dissection in the colon and rectum

Dahyun Jung, Young Hoon Youn, Jaehoon Jahng, Jie-Hyun Kim, HyoJin Park

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

24 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background and study aims: The risk of post endoscopic submucosal dissection electrocoagulation syndrome (PEECS) is unknown. We aimed to investigate the incidence and clinicopathologic risk factors associated with PEECS after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). Patients and methods: All patients treated with colorectal ESD between 2009 and 2011 by a single expert ESD endoscopist at Gangnam Severance Hospital, Seoul, Koreawere included in this retrospective study. Patients who had fever, regional rebound tenderness, or marked leukocytosis after ESD were defined as having PEECS. Results: 89 patientswere treated during the study period. Six patients with microperforation and one patient with overt perforationwere excluded. Thus, 82 cases without perforation were analyzed. The risk of PEECS was 40.2 %. In the PEECS group, the mean size of resected specimens was larger and mean procedure time was longer than in the patients without PEECS.The risk of PEECS was significantly lower for patients with carcinoid tumors, and for ESD in the rectosigmoid area. Piecemeal resection was significantly associated with the development of PEECS.In multivariate analysis, lesion size larger than 3cm (odds ratio [OR] 5.0, 95% confidence interval [95%CI] 1.2- 21.7) and site other than rectosigmoid (OR 7.6, 95%CI 2.1-27.9) were independent risk factors for PEECS. Conclusions: Large tumor size and tumor site other than rectosigmoid were independent risk factors related to PEECS.Patients with tumors larger than 3cm, in colon areas other than the rectosigmoid, should be observed carefully after colorectal ESD.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)714-717
Number of pages4
JournalEndoscopy
Volume45
Issue number9
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2013 Sep 17

Fingerprint

Electrocoagulation
Rectum
Colon
Odds Ratio
Confidence Intervals
Neoplasms
Endoscopic Mucosal Resection
Leukocytosis
Carcinoid Tumor
Fever
Multivariate Analysis
Retrospective Studies
Incidence

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Gastroenterology

Cite this

Jung, Dahyun ; Youn, Young Hoon ; Jahng, Jaehoon ; Kim, Jie-Hyun ; Park, HyoJin. / Risk of electrocoagulation syndrome after endoscopic submucosal dissection in the colon and rectum. In: Endoscopy. 2013 ; Vol. 45, No. 9. pp. 714-717.
@article{817d3104536b4a76943b3f55fbe9a284,
title = "Risk of electrocoagulation syndrome after endoscopic submucosal dissection in the colon and rectum",
abstract = "Background and study aims: The risk of post endoscopic submucosal dissection electrocoagulation syndrome (PEECS) is unknown. We aimed to investigate the incidence and clinicopathologic risk factors associated with PEECS after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). Patients and methods: All patients treated with colorectal ESD between 2009 and 2011 by a single expert ESD endoscopist at Gangnam Severance Hospital, Seoul, Koreawere included in this retrospective study. Patients who had fever, regional rebound tenderness, or marked leukocytosis after ESD were defined as having PEECS. Results: 89 patientswere treated during the study period. Six patients with microperforation and one patient with overt perforationwere excluded. Thus, 82 cases without perforation were analyzed. The risk of PEECS was 40.2 {\%}. In the PEECS group, the mean size of resected specimens was larger and mean procedure time was longer than in the patients without PEECS.The risk of PEECS was significantly lower for patients with carcinoid tumors, and for ESD in the rectosigmoid area. Piecemeal resection was significantly associated with the development of PEECS.In multivariate analysis, lesion size larger than 3cm (odds ratio [OR] 5.0, 95{\%} confidence interval [95{\%}CI] 1.2- 21.7) and site other than rectosigmoid (OR 7.6, 95{\%}CI 2.1-27.9) were independent risk factors for PEECS. Conclusions: Large tumor size and tumor site other than rectosigmoid were independent risk factors related to PEECS.Patients with tumors larger than 3cm, in colon areas other than the rectosigmoid, should be observed carefully after colorectal ESD.",
author = "Dahyun Jung and Youn, {Young Hoon} and Jaehoon Jahng and Jie-Hyun Kim and HyoJin Park",
year = "2013",
month = "9",
day = "17",
doi = "10.1055/s-0033-1344555",
language = "English",
volume = "45",
pages = "714--717",
journal = "Endoscopy",
issn = "0013-726X",
publisher = "Georg Thieme Verlag",
number = "9",

}

Risk of electrocoagulation syndrome after endoscopic submucosal dissection in the colon and rectum. / Jung, Dahyun; Youn, Young Hoon; Jahng, Jaehoon; Kim, Jie-Hyun; Park, HyoJin.

In: Endoscopy, Vol. 45, No. 9, 17.09.2013, p. 714-717.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Risk of electrocoagulation syndrome after endoscopic submucosal dissection in the colon and rectum

AU - Jung, Dahyun

AU - Youn, Young Hoon

AU - Jahng, Jaehoon

AU - Kim, Jie-Hyun

AU - Park, HyoJin

PY - 2013/9/17

Y1 - 2013/9/17

N2 - Background and study aims: The risk of post endoscopic submucosal dissection electrocoagulation syndrome (PEECS) is unknown. We aimed to investigate the incidence and clinicopathologic risk factors associated with PEECS after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). Patients and methods: All patients treated with colorectal ESD between 2009 and 2011 by a single expert ESD endoscopist at Gangnam Severance Hospital, Seoul, Koreawere included in this retrospective study. Patients who had fever, regional rebound tenderness, or marked leukocytosis after ESD were defined as having PEECS. Results: 89 patientswere treated during the study period. Six patients with microperforation and one patient with overt perforationwere excluded. Thus, 82 cases without perforation were analyzed. The risk of PEECS was 40.2 %. In the PEECS group, the mean size of resected specimens was larger and mean procedure time was longer than in the patients without PEECS.The risk of PEECS was significantly lower for patients with carcinoid tumors, and for ESD in the rectosigmoid area. Piecemeal resection was significantly associated with the development of PEECS.In multivariate analysis, lesion size larger than 3cm (odds ratio [OR] 5.0, 95% confidence interval [95%CI] 1.2- 21.7) and site other than rectosigmoid (OR 7.6, 95%CI 2.1-27.9) were independent risk factors for PEECS. Conclusions: Large tumor size and tumor site other than rectosigmoid were independent risk factors related to PEECS.Patients with tumors larger than 3cm, in colon areas other than the rectosigmoid, should be observed carefully after colorectal ESD.

AB - Background and study aims: The risk of post endoscopic submucosal dissection electrocoagulation syndrome (PEECS) is unknown. We aimed to investigate the incidence and clinicopathologic risk factors associated with PEECS after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). Patients and methods: All patients treated with colorectal ESD between 2009 and 2011 by a single expert ESD endoscopist at Gangnam Severance Hospital, Seoul, Koreawere included in this retrospective study. Patients who had fever, regional rebound tenderness, or marked leukocytosis after ESD were defined as having PEECS. Results: 89 patientswere treated during the study period. Six patients with microperforation and one patient with overt perforationwere excluded. Thus, 82 cases without perforation were analyzed. The risk of PEECS was 40.2 %. In the PEECS group, the mean size of resected specimens was larger and mean procedure time was longer than in the patients without PEECS.The risk of PEECS was significantly lower for patients with carcinoid tumors, and for ESD in the rectosigmoid area. Piecemeal resection was significantly associated with the development of PEECS.In multivariate analysis, lesion size larger than 3cm (odds ratio [OR] 5.0, 95% confidence interval [95%CI] 1.2- 21.7) and site other than rectosigmoid (OR 7.6, 95%CI 2.1-27.9) were independent risk factors for PEECS. Conclusions: Large tumor size and tumor site other than rectosigmoid were independent risk factors related to PEECS.Patients with tumors larger than 3cm, in colon areas other than the rectosigmoid, should be observed carefully after colorectal ESD.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84883789790&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84883789790&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1055/s-0033-1344555

DO - 10.1055/s-0033-1344555

M3 - Article

C2 - 23990482

AN - SCOPUS:84883789790

VL - 45

SP - 714

EP - 717

JO - Endoscopy

JF - Endoscopy

SN - 0013-726X

IS - 9

ER -