BACKGROUND: Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is an alternative to surgery for removal of superficial neoplastic lesions of the GI tract. The aim of this study was to assess the safety, efficacy, and clinical outcomes of EMR. METHODS: Data from consecutive EMR procedures performed by using suction cap-assisted and/or saline solution-assisted snare resection techniques over a 45-month period were reviewed retrospectively. EUS was performed before EMR in the majority of cases. Immediate and delayed complications were recorded. Survival was assessed in patients with carcinoma or high-grade dysplasia on final histopathology in whom EMR achieved complete resection. RESULTS: One hundred one lesions were removed by EMR in 92 patients. Indications were adenoma (67%), high-grade dysplasia (13%), intramucosal carcinoma (11%), and lesions of uncertain histopathology (10%). Locations were esophagus 19%, stomach 14%, duodenum 27%, rectum 12%, and colon 29%. Suction cap-assisted technique was used in 26% and saline solution-assisted polypectomy in 74% of cases. Complete resection was achieved in 89%. For complete resection, 17% required more than 1 session. Post-EMR histopathology was adenoma 47%, high-grade dysplasia 13%, carcinoma 16%, carcinoid 3%, benign 19%, and low-grade dysplasia 3%. EMR resulted in upgrading of histopathologic staging to carcinoma or high-grade dysplasia in 44%. Bleeding was the only complication (early 16, delayed 6). The median cancer-free survival in patients with adenocarcinoma who underwent complete resection by EMR was 27 months (interquartile range: 17-28 months). CONCLUSION: EMR achieves complete resection in a majority of patients but is associated with a higher risk of bleeding compared with standard polypectomy. EMR changes pathologic stage in a significant number of patients. Survival data are encouraging, but long-term follow-up studies are needed.
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is an alternative to surgery for removal of superficial neoplastic lesions of the GI tract. The aim of this study was to assess the safety, efficacy, and clinical outcomes of EMR. METHODS: Data from consecutive EMR procedures performed by using suction cap-assisted and/or saline solution-assisted snare resection techniques over a 45-month period were reviewed retrospectively. EUS was performed before EMR in the majority of cases. Immediate and delayed complications were recorded. Survival was assessed in patients with carcinoma or high-grade dysplasia on final histopathology in whom EMR achieved complete resection. RESULTS: One hundred one lesions were removed by EMR in 92 patients. Indications were adenoma (67%), high-grade dysplasia (13%), intramucosal carcinoma (11%), and lesions of uncertain histopathology (10%). Locations were esophagus 19%, stomach 14%, duodenum 27%, rectum 12%, and colon 29%. Suction cap-assisted technique was used in 26% and saline solution-assisted polypectomy in 74% of cases. Complete resection was achieved in 89%. For complete resection, 17% required more than 1 session. Post-EMR histopathology was adenoma 47%, high-grade dysplasia 13%, carcinoma 16%, carcinoid 3%, benign 19%, and low-grade dysplasia 3%. EMR resulted in upgrading of histopathologic staging to carcinoma or high-grade dysplasia in 44%. Bleeding was the only complication (early 16, delayed 6). The median cancer-free survival in patients with adenocarcinoma who underwent complete resection by EMR was 27 months (interquartile range: 17-28 months). CONCLUSION: EMR achieves complete resection in a majority of patients but is associated with a higher risk of bleeding compared with standard polypectomy. EMR changes pathologic stage in a significant number of patients. Survival data are encouraging, but long-term follow-up studies are needed.
Authors: Jun Haeng Lee; Su Jin Hong; Jae Young Jang; Seong Eun Kim; Sang Young Seol Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2011-08-21 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Lilian C Azih; Brett L Broussard; Milind A Phadnis; Martin J Heslin; Mohamad A Eloubeidi; Shayam Varadarajulu; Juan Pablo Arnoletti Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2013-01-28 Impact factor: 5.742