Olympus reviewed the following literature titled "the conundrum in endoscopic management of duodenal polyps: a tertiary cancer center experience." endoscopic mucosal resection of duodenal polyps (emr) is a challenging intervention.The aim of this study was to review the patient characteristics, techniques, procedure outcomes, adverse events, and recurrence of duodenal polyps.Research design and methods: patients were included if they had pathologically confirmed nonampullary duodenal polyps and had received emr with at least one follow-up egd for surveillance.Descriptive statistics were employed to report the findings.Results: a total of 65 patients underwent a total of 90 emrs for duodenal polyps.The mean age was 65.4 years, and 29 of the patients were female.Complete resection of the visible mass was achieved in 96.9% of cases.Endoscopic hemostasis was required in 18.5% of patients.Delayed bleeding occurred in 9%, and delayed perforations requiring surgical intervention occurred in 2.2% of patients with no mortality.Surgery after emr was needed in 12.7% of cases.Eleven (16.9%) patients had recurrent duodenal adenoma on follow-up egd.Conclusion: duodenal polyps can be safely resected and have a notable recurrence rate.This is particularly true for adenomas, warranting post-resection endoscopic surveillance.The appropriate interval for post-resection surveillance of duodenal adenomas should be a focus of future study.Adverse events: bleeding 12 patients.Delayed perforation 2 patients.Delayed bleeding 6 patients.This literature article requires 4 reports.The related patient identifiers are as follows: (b)(6) gif-q180, evis exera ii gastrointestinal videoscope.(b)(6) tjf-160f, evis exera duodenovideoscope.(b)(6) maj-935, probe driving unit.(b)(6) unknown, emr kit.This medwatch report is for patient identifier (b)(6).There is no report of any olympus device malfunction in any procedure described in this study.
|
This report is being supplemented to provide additional information based on the legal manufacturer's final investigation.The device history record was unable to be reviewed for this device since the serial and/or lot number was not provided.However, olympus only releases products to market that meet all manufacturing specifications and final product release criteria.Based on the results of the investigation, the relationship between the device and the adverse event cannot be confirmed.There was no complaint reported on the subject device.There is no evidence of an olympus device malfunction.Therefore, the root cause cannot be determined.This supplemental report includes information added to e4 an g2.Olympus will continue to monitor field performance for this device.
|