Skip to main content
. 2020 Aug 19;24(12):1293–1299. doi: 10.1007/s10151-020-02308-4

Table 2.

Comparison of current study results with the literature

Author references Uraoka et al. [6] Ahn et al. [5] Higuchi et al. [15] Ogata et al. [16] Colak et al. [17] Sohda et al. [18] Current study
Country Japan Korea Japan Japan Turkey Japan Germany
Study design Prospective, single-center RCT, single center Retrospective, single center Prospective, single-center Retrospective, single-center Retrospective, single-center Prospective, single-center
Time period 04/2006–10/2008 06/2010–08/2011 10/2008–05/2012 1999–2015 01/2014–04/2018 01/2010–06/2016 02–07/ 2019
Pts enrolled, (total/intervention/no—intervention, n) 37/21/16 51/25/26 57/30/27 122/122/0 22/22/0 111/51/60 9/9/0
Endoscopist expertise level 1 expert 2 nonexperts Experts NA NA Experts 2 experts
ESD location, n Rectum: 14, Sigmoid: 7 Stomach, 51 Stomach, 30 Stomach, 122 Stomach, 22 Esophagus, 111 Rectum 5, Sigmoid 4
Tumor size (mean ± SD; mm) 43.6 ± 16 20.5 ± 7.9 20 median (range 2–42) 1.8 median (range 0.2–4.2) NA 32.3 ± 11.2 52.1 ± 12.2
SMSA Score (median, range) NA NA NA NA NA NA 14 (12—16)
Pretreated (EMR), n (%) NA NA NA NA NA NA 3 (33.3)
En bloc resection, n (%) 21 (100) 26 (100) 30 (100) 119 (97.5) NA 46 (90.0) 9 (100)
Procedure time (mean ± SD; minutes) 96 ± 53 29.2 ± 12.6 80 (range 35–201 min) 70.9 (range 20–207 min) 54 (range 45–75 min) 114 ± 54.5 128.4 ± 54.1
Complications, n (%) 0 (0.0) 2 (7.7) 9 (30) 7 (6.0) NA 1 (1.96) 0 (0.0)
Recurrence, n (%) NA NA NA 2 (1.6) NA NA 0 (0.0)

RCT randomized control trial, Pts patients, ESD endoscopic submucosal dissection, SMSA site, morphology, size, access scoring system, EMR endoscopic mucosal resection, NA not available