関口 裕美

INTRODUCTION: Gel immersion endoscopy (GIE) is a technique used to maintain a clear view during gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection. We aimed to identify cases most likely to benefit from GIE for ESD bleeding by reviewing our clinical experience and determining the associated factors. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 470 lesions in 380 patients who underwent gastric ESD between October 2020 and March 2023. The patients were divided into conventional method (n = 433) and GIE groups (n = 37). We compared the clinical and pathological characteristics between the groups. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to identify factors associated with GIE use. Among the GIE group, hemostasis times under gas, water, and gel conditions were compared using the Kruskal-Wallis test. RESULTS: Multivariate analysis revealed that dialysis (odds ratio [OR]: 15.3), concurrent antiplatelet and anticoagulant use (OR: 9.5), and tumor location in the middle third (OR: 3.5), upper third (OR: 5.7), or remnant stomach (OR: 9.3) were independently associated with GIE use. No significant differences in overall hemostasis time were observed between gas, water, or gel. Of the nine bleeding events exceeding 300 s under gas immersion, seven achieved successful hemostasis by switching to GIE, with a median of 32 s to locate the source and 140 s to complete hemostasis. CONCLUSION: Dialysis, combined antithrombotic use, and certain tumor locations were key factors influencing GIE for ESD bleeding. Although the overall hemostasis times did not differ, GIE may be particularly beneficial in high-risk scenarios.

OBJECTIVES: Early gastric cancers (EGCs) of the elevated type or with submucosal invasion are easily found by routine endoscopy. However, most early cancers are challenging to detect because of subtle morphological or color differences from surrounding atrophic mucosa and intestinal metaplasia. Linked color imaging (LCI) enhances mucosal color difference, making it easier to detect EGCs. The aim of this study is to clarify the advantages and possible disadvantages of LCI for screening for obscure EGC. METHODS: A total of 665 malignant gastric lesions resected using endoscopic submucosal dissection between January 2015 and April 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Obviously detectable lesions were not included in the main analysis when determining the target lesion. White light imaging (WLI)/LCI images of 508 endoscopically obscure malignant lesions were included in the final analysis and evaluated by three non-expert and three expert endoscopists using visibility scores for detection and extent. RESULTS: The detection visibility scores using LCI were significantly higher than those using WLI regardless of lesion characteristics including location, size, histological type, depth of invasion, and Helicobacter pylori status. The detection score improved in 46.4% cases and deteriorated in 4.9% when the modality changed from WLI to LCI. A mixed-effects multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that use of LCI (odds ratio [OR] 2.57), elevated type (OR 1.92), invasion to submucosa (OR 2.18) were significantly associated with improved visibility of EGC. CONCLUSIONS: Linked color imaging significantly improves visibility of EGC regardless of differences in lesion morphology, histology, location, depth of invasion, and H. pylori status compared to conventional WLI.

BACKGROUND: Duodenal ulcers are classified into bulbar and post-bulbar ulcers. The aim of this study is to compare the long-term outcomes of patients with post-bulbar ulcer bleeding and those with bulbar ulcer bleeding. METHODS: A total of 272 patients with hemorrhagic duodenal ulcers requiring hospitalization were included. Their medical records were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: All patients were categorized as bulbar or post-bulbar bleeding ulcer groups. The post-bulbar ulcer group had more patients of advanced age, concurrent malignancy, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, cirrhosis, and chronic kidney disease undergoing hemodialysis. We performed long-term follow-up for an average of 2.6 years. The mortality rate during the follow-up period in the post-bulbar ulcer group was significantly higher than that in the bulbar ulcer group (p < 0.001). The PNED score was a better predictor of 30-day mortality compared to the complete Rockall score and the Glasgow-Blatchford Score. Predictors of mortality were evaluated using a Cox proportional hazards regression model. In multivariate analysis, post-bulbar ulcer, concurrent malignancy, cirrhosis, antiplatelet/anticoagulant use, and transfusion were significant predictors of mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with post-bulbar ulcers have a poorer prognosis than those with bulbar ulcers. After the diagnosis of hemorrhagic post-bulbar duodenal ulcer, close follow-up is necessary.