Dissemin is shutting down on January 1st, 2025

Published in

Wiley, Digestive Endoscopy, 2(34), p. 379-390, 2021

DOI: 10.1111/den.14191

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Clinical usefulness of red dichromatic imaging in hemostatic treatment during endoscopic submucosal dissection: First report from a multicenter, open‐label, randomized controlled trial

This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.

Full text: Unavailable

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

ObjectivesTo verify the efficacy and safety of red dichromatic imaging (RDI) in hemostatic procedures during endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD).MethodsThis is a multicenter randomized controlled trial of 404 patients who underwent ESD of the esophagus, stomach, colorectum. Patients who received hemostatic treatments by RDI during ESD were defined as the RDI group (n = 204), and those who received hemostatic treatments by white light imaging (WLI) were defined as the WLI group (n = 200). The primary endpoint was a shortening of the hemostasis time. The secondary endpoints were a reduction of the psychological stress experienced by the endoscopist during the hemostatic treatment, a shortened treatment time, and a non‐inferior perforation rate, in RDI versus WLI.ResultsThe mean hemostasis time in RDI (n = 860) was not significantly shorter than that in WLI (n = 1049) (62.3 ± 108.1 vs. 56.2 ± 74.6 s; P = 0.921). The median hemostasis time was significantly longer in RDI than in WLI (36.0 [18.0–71.0] vs. 28.0 [14.0–66.0] s; P = 0.001) in a sensitivity analysis. The psychological stress was significantly lower in RDI than in WLI (1.71 ± 0.935 vs. 2.03 ± 1.038; P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the ESD treatment time between RDI (n = 161) and WLI (n = 168) (58.0 [35.0–86.0] vs. 60.0 [38.0–88.5] min; P = 0.855). Four perforations were observed, but none of them took place during the hemostatic treatment.ConclusionsHemostatic treatment using RDI does not shorten the hemostasis time. RDI, however, is safe to use for hemostatic procedures and reduces the psychological stress experienced by endoscopists when they perform hemostatic treatment during ESD.UMIN000025134.