Case Report
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2016.
World J Gastrointest Endosc. Apr 25, 2016; 8(8): 368-373
Published online Apr 25, 2016. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v8.i8.368
Table 1 Clinicopathological features and clinical outcomes in 16 patients with delayed perforation after endoscopic submucosal dissection
Case No.AgeSexLocationTumor size (mm)Resected specimen size (mm)Depth of tumorScar in tumorHistological typeTime required for ESD (h)DeviceTime until peritonitis (h)Size of perforation (mm)Treatment of perforationHospital stay (d)
189MaleL, Lc84 × 50102 × 73SM1AbsentDiff.4IT> 243Surgery23
274MaleL, Gc17 × 10, 20 × 1780 × 45 (2 lesions)MAbsentDiff.2.4IT210-Surgery15
363MaleR, P15 × 1228 × 28MAbsentDiff.1.5IT215-Surgery30
483FemaleL, Lc37 × 1553 × 30SM2PresentDiff.2.5IT2112Surgery23
5[4]50FemaleU, Lc2050MPresentDiff.3.5IT22420Surgery16
6[4]60MaleM, A1832SMAbsentDiff.2IT19-Surgery14
7[4]70MaleU, A1545MAbsentDiff.3IT21-Conservative15
8[4]61MaleU, P5085SMAbsentDiff.9IT15-Surgery33
9[4]64FemaleU, Lc1250MAbsentDiff.2.2IT23-Surgery20
10[4]64MaleU, P1545MPresentDiff.1.5IT210-Surgery12
11[13]70FemaleR, Lc530MAbsentDiff.2TT> 24-Conservative21
12[14]60FemaleU, P419MAbsentSignet1.1IT2> 242Endo clips12
13[8]70FemaleL, Gc2638MAbsentDiff.0.5IT-3Endo clips13
14[15]60MaleM, Gc6 × 418 × 17MAbsentDiff.0.4-101Surgery10
15[16]64MaleL, A18 × 1540 × 38SM2PresentDiff.--> 24 (49 d)8Surgery-
16[9]59FemaleL, A10-MPresentDiff.0.4-> 2420Conservative33