Skip Navigation
Skip to contents

Clin Endosc : Clinical Endoscopy

OPEN ACCESS

Author index

Page Path
HOME > Browse Articles > Author index
Search
Masanori Furukawa 2 Articles
Laser-cut-type versus braided-type covered self-expandable metallic stents for distal biliary obstruction caused by pancreatic carcinoma: a retrospective comparative cohort study
Koh Kitagawa, Akira Mitoro, Takahiro Ozutsumi, Masanori Furukawa, Yukihisa Fujinaga, Kenichiro Seki, Norihisa Nishimura, Yasuhiko Sawada, Kosuke Kaji, Hideto Kawaratani, Hiroaki Takaya, Kei Moriya, Tadashi Namisaki, Takemi Akahane, Hitoshi Yoshiji
Clin Endosc 2022;55(3):434-442.   Published online October 28, 2021
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2021.161
AbstractAbstract PDFPubReaderePub
Background
/Aims: Covered self-expandable metallic stents (CMSs) are widely used for malignant distal biliary obstructions (MDBOs) caused by pancreatic carcinoma. This study compared the efficacy and safety of the laser-cut-type and braided-type CMSs.
Methods
To palliate MDBOs caused by pancreatic carcinoma, the laser-cut-type CMSs was used from April 2014 to March 2017, and the braided-type CMSs was used from April 2017 to March 2019. The tested self-expandable metallic stents were equipped with different anti-migration systems.
Results
In total, 47 patients received CMSs for MDBOs (24 laser-cut type, 23 braided-type). The time to recurrent biliary obstruction (TRBO) was significantly longer in the braided-type CMSs (p=0.0008), and the median time to stent dysfunction or patient death was 141 and 265 days in the laser-cut-type CMSs and braided-type CMSs, respectively (p=0.0023). Stent migration was the major cause of stent dysfunction in both groups, which occurred in 37.5% of the laser-cut-type CMSs and 13.0% of the braidedtype CMSs. There were no differences in the survival duration between the groups.
Conclusions
The TRBO was significantly longer for the braided-type CMSs with an anti-migration system than for the laser-cuttype. Stent migration tended to be less frequent with the braided-type CMSs than with the laser-cut-type CMSs.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  
  • Braided-type stent versus laser-cut-type stent for patients with unresectable distal malignant biliary obstruction: a randomized controlled trial
    Sho Hasegawa, Takamitsu Sato, Satoru Shinoda, Yusuke Kurita, Tomoki Ogata, Shinichi Nihei, Shin Yagi, Kunihiro Hosono, Itaru Endo, Noritoshi Kobayashi, Kensuke Kubota, Atsushi Nakajima
    Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.2024; 99(5): 739.     CrossRef
  • Removal of Duckbill‐type laser‐cut anti‐reflux metal stents: Clinical evaluation and in vitro study
    Yuto Yamada, Takashi Sasaki, Tsuyoshi Takeda, Takeshi Okamoto, Takafumi Mie, Chinatsu Yonekura, Takaaki Furukawa, Akiyoshi Kasuga, Masato Matsuyama, Masato Ozaka, Takahisa Matsuda, Yoshinori Igarashi, Naoki Sasahira
    DEN Open.2023;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Comparable Efficacy of Laser-Cut and Braided Self Expanding Metallic Biliary Stent: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Priyadarshini Loganathan, Saurabh Chandan, Babu P. Mohan, Shreyas Saligram, Douglas G. Adler
    Digestive Diseases and Sciences.2023; 68(9): 3756.     CrossRef
  • Evaluation of the mechanical properties of current biliary self-expandable metallic stents: axial and radial force, and axial force zero border
    Wataru Yamagata, Toshio Fujisawa, Takashi Sasaki, Rei Ishibashi, Tomotaka Saito, Shuntaro Yoshida, Shizuka No, Kouta Inoue, Yousuke Nakai, Naoki Sasahira, Hiroyuki Isayama
    Clinical Endoscopy.2023; 56(5): 633.     CrossRef
  • Covered self-expandable metal stents for distal biliary obstruction from pancreatic carcinoma: what type of stent is preferred?
    Hideyuki Shiomi, Ryota Nakano, Shogo Ota
    Clinical Endoscopy.2022; 55(3): 369.     CrossRef
  • 3,260 View
  • 261 Download
  • 5 Web of Science
  • 5 Crossref
Close layer
Efficacy of Underwater Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for Superficial Non-Ampullary Duodenal Epithelial Tumor
Masanori Furukawa, Akira Mitoro, Takahiro Ozutumi, Yukihisa Fujinaga, Keisuke Nakanishi, Koh Kitagawa, Soichiro Saikawa, Sinya Sato, Yasuhiko Sawada, Hiroaki Takaya, Kosuke Kaji, Hideto Kawaratani, Tadashi Namisaki, Kei Moriya, Takemi Akahane, Junichi Yamao, Hitoshi Yoshiji
Clin Endosc 2021;54(3):371-378.   Published online February 18, 2021
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2020.147
AbstractAbstract PDFPubReaderePub
Background
/Aims: Endoscopic resection (ER) for superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors (SNADETs) is challenging. Conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (CEMR) is also problematic due to the anatomical features of the duodenum. We compared the safety and efficacy of underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) with those of CEMR through a retrospective analysis.
Methods
Altogether, 44 consecutive patients with 46 SNADETs underwent ER (18 CEMR cases and 28 UEMR cases) between January 2016 and October 2019. We investigated the proportions of en bloc resection, R0 resection, complications, resection time, and total procedure time and compared the outcomes of patients from the CEMR group with those of patients from the UEMR group.
Results
The median tumor size was 8.0 mm (range, 2.0–20.0 mm). The UEMR group showed a higher proportion of en bloc resection (96.4% vs. 72.2%, p<0.05) and significantly lower median resection time and total procedure time (4 min vs. 9.5 min, p<0.05 and 13 min vs. 19 min, p<0.05; respectively) than the CEMR group. No complications were observed. However, two patients treated with piecemeal resection in the CEMR group had residual tumors.
Conclusions
UEMR is a feasible therapeutic option for SNADETs. It can be recommended as a standard treatment.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  
  • Conventional versus underwater endoscopic resection for superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumours
    Hajime Miyazaki, Osamu Dohi, Tsugitaka Ishida, Mayuko Seya, Katsuma Yamauchi, Hayato Fukui, Takeshi Yasuda, Takuma Yoshida, Naoto Iwai, Toshifumi Doi, Ryohei Hirose, Ken Inoue, Akihito Harusato, Naohisa Yoshida, Kazuhiko Uchiyama, Tomohisa Takagi, Takeshi
    Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology.2024; 54(2): 137.     CrossRef
  • Can underwater endoscopic mucosal resection be an alternative to conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for superficial non‐ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors?
    Hidenori Tanaka, Yuji Urabe, Hiroki Takemoto, Kazuki Ishibashi, Hirona Konishi, Yuka Matsubara, Yudai Takehara, Shin Morimoto, Fumiaki Tanino, Noriko Yamamoto, Hajime Teshima, Junichi Mizuno, Issei Hirata, Hirosato Tamari, Akiyoshi Tsuboi, Ken Yamashita,
    DEN Open.2024;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Underwater Endoscopic Mucosal Resection Vs Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for Superficial Nonampullary Duodenal Epithelial Tumors in the Western Setting
    Rui Morais, José Amorim, Renato Medas, Bernardo Sousa-Pinto, João Santos-Antunes, Romain Legros, Jérémie Albouys, Frédéric Moll, Margarida Marques, Filipe Vilas-Boas, Eduardo Rodrigues-Pinto, Irene Gullo, Fátima Carneiro, Elisa Gravito Soares, Pedro Amaro
    Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology.2024;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Underwater versus conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors ≤20mm: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Xiu-He Lv, Rong Luo, Qing Lu, Kai Deng, Jin-Lin Yang
    Digestive and Liver Disease.2023; 55(6): 714.     CrossRef
  • Underwater Versus Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for Superficial Non-ampullary Duodenal Epithelial Tumors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Jae Gon Lee, Sang Pyo Lee, Hyun Joo Jang, Sea Hyub Kae
    Digestive Diseases and Sciences.2023; 68(4): 1482.     CrossRef
  • A feasibility study comparing gel immersion endoscopic resection and underwater endoscopic mucosal resection for superficial nonampullary duodenal epithelial tumors
    Akihiro Miyakawa, Toshio Kuwai, Yukie Sakuma, Manabu Kubota, Akira Nakamura, Ei Itobayashi, Haruhisa Shimura, Yoshio Suzuki, Kenji Shimura
    Endoscopy.2023; 55(03): 261.     CrossRef
  • Underwater Endoscopic Mucosal Resection Versus Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for Superficial Non-ampullary Duodenal Epithelial Tumors ≤20 mm
    Zhikun Yin, Ji Li, Weilin Yang, Weifeng Huang, Dong Xu, Xiaoyi Lei, Jinyan Zhang
    Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology.2023; 57(9): 928.     CrossRef
  • Efficacy and safety of underwater endoscopic mucosal resection for ≤20 mm superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors: Systematic review and meta-analysis
    Jixiang Liu, Shaojie Duan, Yichong Wang, Hongye Peng, Youjia Kong, Shukun Yao
    Frontiers in Medicine.2023;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Underwater versus conventional EMR for nonpedunculated colorectal lesions: a randomized clinical trial
    Luciano Lenz, Bruno Martins, Gustavo Andrade de Paulo, Fabio Shiguehissa Kawaguti, Elisa Ryoka Baba, Ricardo Sato Uemura, Carla Cristina Gusmon, Sebastian Naschold Geiger, Renata Nobre Moura, Caterina Pennacchi, Marcelo Simas de Lima, Adriana Vaz Safatle-
    Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.2023; 97(3): 549.     CrossRef
  • Endoscopic resection of superficial non‐ampullary duodenal epithelial tumor
    Motohiko Kato, Takanori Kanai, Naohisa Yahagi
    DEN Open.2022;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • The Application of Underwater Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for Nonampullary Duodenal Adenomas
    Xiu-He Lv, Jin-Lin Yang
    Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology.2022; 20(8): 1884.     CrossRef
  • Utility of underwater EMR for nonpolypoid superficial nonampullary duodenal epithelial tumors ≤20 mm
    Kenichiro Okimoto, Daisuke Maruoka, Tomoaki Matsumura, Kengo Kanayama, Naoki Akizue, Yuki Ohta, Takashi Taida, Keiko Saito, Yosuke Inaba, Yohei Kawasaki, Makoto Arai, Jun Kato, Naoya Kato
    Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.2022; 95(1): 140.     CrossRef
  • Reply
    Yasushi Yamasaki, Noriya Uedo
    Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology.2022; 20(8): 1884.     CrossRef
  • Appropriate selection of endoscopic resection for superficial nonampullary duodenal adenomas in association with recurrence
    Kenichiro Okimoto, Daisuke Maruoka, Tomoaki Matsumura, Kengo Kanayama, Naoki Akizue, Yuki Ohta, Takashi Taida, Keiko Saito, Yosuke Inaba, Yohei Kawasaki, Jun Kato, Naoya Kato
    Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.2022; 95(5): 939.     CrossRef
  • Reply to Lv and Yang
    Motohiko Kato, Yoji Takeuchi, Shu Hoteya, Tsuneo Oyama, Satoru Nonaka, Shoichi Yoshimizu, Naomi Kakushima, Ken Ohata, Hironori Yamamoto, Yuko Hara, Hisashi Doyama, Osamu Dohi, Yasushi Yamasaki, Hiroya Ueyama, Kengo Takimoto, Koichi Kurahara, Tomoaki Tashi
    Endoscopy.2022; 54(05): 523.     CrossRef
  • Endoscopic treatment selection for superficial duodenal tumors: pay attention to small lesions
    Xiu-He Lv, Jin-Lin Yang
    Endoscopy.2022; 54(05): 522.     CrossRef
  • Resectability of underwater endoscopic mucosal resection for duodenal tumor: A single‐center, retrospective pilot study
    Yosuke Toya, Masaki Endo, Masanao Yamazato, Shun Yamada, Tomo Kumei, Minami Hirai, Makoto Eizuka, Toshifumi Morishita, Risaburo Akasaka, Shunichi Yanai, Noriyuki Uesugi, Tamotsu Sugai, Takayuki Matsumoto
    Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology.2021; 36(11): 3191.     CrossRef
  • 4,386 View
  • 147 Download
  • 16 Web of Science
  • 17 Crossref
Close layer

Clin Endosc : Clinical Endoscopy Twitter Facebook
Close layer
TOP