Editorial
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2017.
World J Gastroenterol. Jun 7, 2017; 23(21): 3761-3764
Published online Jun 7, 2017. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v23.i21.3761
Table 1 Outcomes of endoscopic shielding techniques with different experimental models
Ref.YearnSpeciesLocation of lesionsSubstancePrimary endpointEfficacy
Maeng et al[4]201412/2Rabbit/pigsStomachEGF-CSMucosal healing90%-95%
Takao et al[5]20159PigsStomachPGA-FGPrevent late complications100%
Hiroyuki et al[6]201620CanineStomachPGA-FG with suturePrevent late complications100%
Lorenzo-Zúñiga et al[7]20164/16Pigs/ratsColonPRPPrevent late perforation and mucosal healing100% and 2.4% (control) vs 80% (treated)
Lorenzo-Zúñiga et al[8]20178/24Pigs/ratsColonHAMPAPrevent late perforation100%
Table 2 Outcomes of endoscopic shielding with different substances to prevent late complications after endoscopic resection
Ref.YearnLocation of lesionsSize (mm)SubstanceProcedure time (min)Primary endpointEfficacy
Takimoto et al[3]20121Duodenum20.0PGA-FGNRPrevent late perforation100%
Doyama et al[9]20143Duodenum17.5PGA-FG with clips22Prevent late perforation100%
Takimoto et al[10]20142Duodenum17.5PGA-FG with clipsNRPrevent late perforation100%
Tsuji et al[11]201410Colorectal39.7PGA-FG18.7Prevent late complications100%
Tsuji et al[13]201541Stomach40.1PGA-FG20.4Prevent late bleeding93.3%
Kataoka et al[16]20151Esophagus55.0PGA-FG-TNRPrevent late stricture100%
Myung et al[12]201635Colorectal38.8Surgicel®5Prevent late complications100%
Sakaguchi et al[15]201611Esophagus38.3PGA-T12Prevent late stricture81.8%
Takimoto et al[14]20163Stomach25.0PGA-FGNRTreatment of postoperative perforations100%