{"id":10785,"date":"2021-08-23T10:14:18","date_gmt":"2021-08-23T08:14:18","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.endoscopy-campus.com\/?post_type=ec-news&#038;p=10785"},"modified":"2021-08-23T10:14:20","modified_gmt":"2021-08-23T08:14:20","slug":"underwater-emr-outperforms-conventional-emr-for-20-to-40-mm-nonpedunculated-polyps-in-randomized-controlled-trial","status":"publish","type":"ec-news","link":"https:\/\/www.endoscopy-campus.com\/en\/ec-news\/underwater-emr-outperforms-conventional-emr-for-20-to-40-mm-nonpedunculated-polyps-in-randomized-controlled-trial\/","title":{"rendered":"Underwater EMR Outperforms Conventional EMR for 20- to 40-mm Nonpedunculated Polyps in Randomized Controlled Trial"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>In a single-center randomized controlled trial from Germany, 148 nonpedunculated lesions 20 to 40 mm in size were included in a per-protocol analysis and randomized to underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) or conventional EMR (CEMR). The primary outcome was the overall recurrence rate, which was 15.1% with UEMR and 24.6% with CEMR (<em>P<\/em>=.253). For lesions >30 mm to \u226440 mm, the recurrence rates were 6.3% with UEMR and 42.9% with CEMR (<em>P<\/em>=.031). En bloc resection rates and R0 resection rates were higher with UEMR than CEMR (33.3% vs 18.4% and 32.1% vs 15.8%, respectively). The en bloc resections occurred largely in the 20- to 30-mm size range. Five patients were converted from UEMR to CEMR because of intraprocedural hemorrhage. There were no perforations and no difference in delayed bleeding.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>In a single-center randomized controlled trial from Germany, 148 nonpedunculated lesions 20 to 40 mm in size were included in a per-protocol analysis and randomized to underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) or conventional EMR (CEMR). The primary outcome was the overall recurrence rate, which was 15.1% with UEMR and 24.6% with CEMR (P=.253). For lesions &#8230; <a title=\"Underwater EMR Outperforms Conventional EMR for 20- to 40-mm Nonpedunculated Polyps in Randomized Controlled Trial\" class=\"read-more\" href=\"https:\/\/www.endoscopy-campus.com\/en\/ec-news\/underwater-emr-outperforms-conventional-emr-for-20-to-40-mm-nonpedunculated-polyps-in-randomized-controlled-trial\/\" aria-label=\"Read more about Underwater EMR Outperforms Conventional EMR for 20- to 40-mm Nonpedunculated Polyps in Randomized Controlled Trial\">Read more<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"template":"","categories":[1768,1769],"tags":[1830,2058,2907,1828,1827],"class_list":["post-10785","ec-news","type-ec-news","status-publish","hentry","category-asge-journal-scan","category-asge-kolon","tag-cemr","tag-colon-2","tag-conventional-emr","tag-uemr","tag-underwater-endoscopic-mucosal-resection"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.endoscopy-campus.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/ec-news\/10785","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.endoscopy-campus.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/ec-news"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.endoscopy-campus.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/ec-news"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.endoscopy-campus.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=10785"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.endoscopy-campus.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=10785"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.endoscopy-campus.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=10785"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}