Real-world topographical efficacy, procedural outcome and safety of endoscopic full thickness resection in colon segments

Table 5 Frequency of adverse events related to endoscopic full thickness resection, n (%)

Location	Hematochezia	Fever	Post-interventional abdominal pain	Hemoglobin decline	Severe adverse events (any)	Total no. of AE/pts with AE, (%)
Cecum (n = 12)	1 (8.3)	2 (16.6)	1 (8.3)	1 (8.3)	-	5/4 (33.3)
Ascending colon (n = 25)	2 (8.0)	-	5 (20.0)	3 (12.0)	-	10/8 (32.0)
Transverse colon (n = 15)	4 (26.7)	2 (13.3)	5 (33.3)	1 (6.7)	-	12/8 (53.3)
Descending colon (n = 13)	1 (7.7)	1 (7.7)	4 (30.8)	2 (15.4)	-	8/5 (38.5)
Sigmoid colon (n = 17)	2 (11.8)	2 (11.8)	3 (17.7)	-	1 (5.9)1	8/6 (35.3)
Rectum (n = 20)	-	-	1 (5.0)	1 (5.0)	-	2/2 (10.0)
Total (n = 102) (across segments)	10 (9.8)	7 (6.9)	19 (18.6)	8 (7.8)	1 (0.98)	45/33 (32.4)

¹Perforation of sigmoid colon with immediate emergency surgery.

This table shows the distribution of adverse events (AE) related to endoscopic full thickness resection by section of the large intestine. Blank table cells reflect absence of AEs occurring in the respective section. Percentages for AEs are given with respect to the underlying number of patients with lesions in the corresponding section (see first column in each line). Total proportions across segments refer to the proportions of patients with the corresponding AE in the analysis population (n = 102).