Comparative study of electrical and rheological properties of different solutions used in endoscopic mucosal resection
Background and Aim: The study of electrical and rheological properties of solutions to carry out endoscopic resection procedures could determinate the best candidate. An ex vivo study with porcine stomachs was conducted to analyze electrical resistivity (R) and rheological properties (temperature, v...
| Autores: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de documento: | artigo |
| Data de publicação: | 2019 |
| País: | España |
| Recursos: | Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona |
| Repositório: | Dipòsit Digital de Documents de la UAB |
| Idioma: | inglês |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:ddd.uab.cat:206948 |
| Acesso em linha: | https://ddd.uab.cat/record/206948 https://dx.doi.org/urn:doi:10.1111/den.13297 |
| Access Level: | Acceso aberto |
| Palavra-chave: | Electrical property Endoscopic mucosal resection Endoscopic submucosal dissection Rheological property Submucosal injection |
| Resumo: | Background and Aim: The study of electrical and rheological properties of solutions to carry out endoscopic resection procedures could determinate the best candidate. An ex vivo study with porcine stomachs was conducted to analyze electrical resistivity (R) and rheological properties (temperature, viscosity, height and lasting of the cushion) of different substances used in these techniques. Methods: Tested solutions were: 0.9% saline (S), platelet-rich plasma (PRP), Gliceol (GC), hyaluronic acid 2% (HA), Pluronic-F127 20% (PL), saline with 10% glucose (GS), Gelaspan (GP), Covergel-BiBio (TB) and PRP with TB (PRP+TB). Measurements of electrical and rheological properties were done at 0, 15, 30, 45 and 60 min after submucosal injection. Results: Solutions showed a wide variability of transepithelial R after submucosal injection. Substances able to maintain the highest R 60 min postinjection were TB (7 × 10 Ω), HA (7 × 10 Ω) and PL (7 × 10 Ω). Protective solutions against deep thermal injury (Tª lower than 60°C) were PL (47.6°C), TB (55°C) and HA (56.63°C). Shortest time to carry out resections were observed with GC (17.66″), PRP (20.3″) and GS (23.45″). Solutions with less cushion decrease (<25%) after 60 min were TB (11.74%), PL (18.63%) and PRP (22.12%). Conclusions: Covergel-BiBio, PL and HA were the best solutions with long-term protective effects (transepithelial R, lower thermal injury and less cushion decrease). Solutions with quicker resection time were GC, PRP and GS. |
|---|