Efficacy of treatment with rebamipide for endoscopic submucosal dissection-induced ulcers

AIM:To prospectively compare the healing rates of endoscopic submucosal dissection(ESD)-induced ulcers treated with either a proton-pump inhibitor(PPI)or rebamipide.METHODS:We examined 90 patients with early gastric cancer who had undergone ESD.All patients were administered an intravenous infusion of the PPI lansoprazole(20 mg)every 12 h for 2 d,followed by oral administration of lansoprazole(30 mg/d,5 d).After7-d treatment,the patients were randomly assigned to 2 groups and received either lansoprazole(30 mg/d orally,n=45;PPI group)or rebamipide(300 mg orally,three times a day;n=45;rebamipide group).At 4and 8 wk after ESD,the ulcer outcomes in the 2 groups were compared.RESULTS:No significant differences were noted in patient age,underlying disease,tumor location,Helicobacter pylori infection rate,or ESD-induced ulcersize between the 2 groups.At both 4 and 8 wk,the healing rates of ESD-induced ulcers were similar in the PPI-treated and the rebamipide-treated patients(4 wk:PPI,27.2%;rebamipide,33.3%;P=0.5341;8 wk:PPI,90.9%;rebamipide,93.3%;P=0.6710).At 8 wk,the rates of granulation lesions following ulcer healing were significantly higher in the PPI-treated group(13.6%)than in the rebamipide-treated group(0.0%;P=0.0103).Ulcer-related symptoms were similar in the2 treatment groups at 8 wk.The medication cost of 8-wk treatment with the PPI was 10945 yen vs 4889 yen for rebamipide.No ulcer bleeding or complications due to the drugs were observed in either treatment group.CONCLUSION:The healing rate of ESD-induced ulcers was similar with rebamipide or PPI treatment;however,rebamipide treatment is more cost-effective and prevents granulation lesions following ulcer healing.

Removal of diminutive colorectal polyps: A prospective randomized clinical trial between cold snare polypectomy and hot forceps biopsy

AIM To compare the efficacy and safety of cold snare polypectomy(CSP) and hot forceps biopsy(HFB) for diminutive colorectal polyps.METHODS This prospective, randomized single-center clinical trial included consecutive patients ≥ 20 years of age with diminutive colorectal polyps 3-5 mm from December 2014 to October 2015. The primary outcome measures were en-bloc resection(endoscopic evaluation) and complete resection rates(pathological evaluation). The secondary outcome measures were the immediate bleeding or immediate perforation rate after polypectomy, delayed bleeding or delayed perforation rate after polypectomy, use of clipping for bleeding or perforation, and polyp retrieval rate. Prophylactic clipping after polyp removal wasn't routinely performed.RESULTS Two hundred eight patients were randomized into the CSP(102), HFB(106) and 283 polyps were evaluated(CSP: 148, HFB: 135). The en-bloc resection rate was significantly higher with CSP than with HFB [99.3%(147/148) vs 80.0%(108/135), P < 0.0001]. The complete resection rate was significantly higher with CSP than with HFB [80.4%(119/148) vs 47.4%(64/135), P < 0.0001]. The immediate bleeding rate was similar between the groups [8.6%(13/148) vs 8.1%(11/135), P = 1.000], and endoscopic hemostasis with hemoclips was successful in all cases. No cases of perforation or delayed bleeding occurred. The rate of severe tissue injury to the pathological specimen was higher HFB than CSP [52.6%(71/135) vs 1.3%(2/148), P < 0.0001]. Polyp retrieval failure was encountered CSP(7), HFB(2).CONCLUSION CSP is more effective than HFB for resecting diminutive polyps. Further long-term follow-up study is required.