Endoscopic band ligation versus XXXX and laparoscopic resection for small gastric @entity5 .

@entity1 @entity5 @entity190 @entity5848 @entity674 @entity361
BACKGROUND AND AIM: @entity674 ( @entity674 ) are the most common @entity361 of the gastrointestinal tract. Previous studies have addressed the safety and feasibility of endoscopic band ligation (EBL) for the treatment of small gastric @entity674 . However, published reports comparing EBL with other interventions are limited. This current study evaluates the efficacy of EBL and compares EBL to both @entity5848 ( @entity5848 ) and laparoscopic resection (LAP) for small gastric @entity674 less than 15  mm. METHODS: A total of 339 @entity1 who underwent endoscopic therapy or laparoscopic resection for gastric @entity674 between 1998 and 2012 were retrospectively identified and collected from medical records in our hospital. The parameters measured for each procedure type includes clinicopathological characteristics, length of stay, hospitalization expense and surgical outcomes. RESULTS: Among the 147 @entity1 included in our study, 72 (48.98  %) received EBL, 27 (18.37  %) received @entity5848 , and 48 (32.65  %) received LAP. The demographic and clinical characteristics of the @entity1 such as gender, age, @entity5 site and size were well balanced between the study groups. There was also no significant difference in follow-up time between the study groups. The mean operating time was significantly shorter in the @entity1 receiving EBL than @entity1 receiving @entity5848 and LAP (p  <  0.001). The estimated @entity190 was significantly different between the three groups (p  <  0.001). Complications occurred in 1.39  % of the @entity1 receiving EBL, 18.52  % of the @entity1 receiving @entity5848 and 4.17  % of the @entity1 receiving LAP (p  =  0.004), and recurrence rate in 15.00, 9.10 and 11.76  %, respectively (p  =  0.705). There was also significant difference about mean hospital stay and hospital cost between three groups (p  <  0.001). CONCLUSION: Our results show a significant advantage in the short-term outcome for EBL compared to @entity5848 and LAP. However, long-term randomized controlled trials are needed to compare the three methods for the treatment of small @entity674 .
