Literature DB >> 17058162

Endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancer: results and degrees of technical difficulty as well as success.

A Imagawa1, H Okada, Y Kawahara, R Takenaka, J Kato, H Kawamoto, S Fujiki, R Takata, T Yoshino, Y Shiratori.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a new method for the curative treatment of early gastrointestinal neoplasms, which was developed in order to increase the en bloc and R0 resection rate, especially for lesions larger than 20 mm in diameter. Drawbacks of ESD include the fact that it is technically a substantially more difficult procedure and that it is associated with a higher perforation rate. A retrospective study was therefore carried out to analyze cases in relation to the procedure time and resection success, and these factors were correlated with the characteristics of the lesions. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From January 2002 to November 2005, 196 lesions in 185 patients with early gastric cancer were treated using ESD in our hospital. The rates of curative en bloc resection, the incidence of perforation, and the procedure times were analyzed in relation to lesion size (small, 20 mm or less in diameter; large, over 20 mm), location (upper, middle, or lower third of the stomach) and the presence or absence of ulceration.
RESULTS: The rate of curative en bloc resection was 84 % (93 % of the lesions overall were resected in one piece), with a perforation rate of 6.1 % (all perforations were managed endoscopically) and a mean procedure time of 68 min. The rate of curative en bloc resection differed significantly depending on the location of the lesion (upper vs. middle vs. lower, 74 % vs. 77 % vs. 91 %; P < 0.05), as well as on the size of the lesion (> 20 mm vs. 20 mm or less, 59 % vs. 89 %; P < 0.0001). There were also significant differences in the mean procedure times in relation to the location of the lesion (upper vs. middle vs. lower, 105 min vs. 81 min vs. 45 min; P < 0.0001) and the size of the lesion (> 20 mm vs. 20 mm or less, 124 min vs. 55 min; P < 0.0001), as well as the presence of ulceration (positive vs. negative, 97 min vs. 65 min; P < 0.05). With regard to perforation rates, significant differences were also observed in relation to the location of the lesion (upper vs. middle vs. lower, 22.6 % vs. 2.8 % vs. 3.2 %; P < 0.0005) and size of the lesion (> 20 mm vs. 20 mm or less, 16.2 % vs. 3.8 %; P < 0.005). No local recurrences of curatively resected lesions (n = 119) were observed after a follow-up period of 1 year.
CONCLUSIONS: The difficulty of ESD depends on the location and size of the lesion, as well as on the presence of ulceration. We would recommend that trainees should begin by carrying out ESD on lesions with a diameter of less than 20 mm without ulceration that are located in the lower third of the stomach.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17058162     DOI: 10.1055/s-2006-944716

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Endoscopy        ISSN: 0013-726X            Impact factor:   10.093


  119 in total

1.  Management of bleeding and artificial gastric ulcers associated with endoscopic submucosal dissection.

Authors:  Yosuke Muraki; Shotaro Enomoto; Mikitaka Iguchi; Mitsuhiro Fujishiro; Naohisa Yahagi; Masao Ichinose
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2012-01-16

2.  A decade in gastric cancer curative surgery: Evidence of progress (1999-2009).

Authors:  Stefano Rausei; Gianlorenzo Dionigi; Francesca Rovera; Luigi Boni; Caterina Valerii; Luisa Giavarini; Francesco Frattini; Renzo Dionigi
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2012-03-27

3.  Do you have what it takes for challenging endoscopic submucosal dissection cases?

Authors:  Kyoung-Oh Kim; Sung Jung Kim; Tae Hyeon Kim; Jong-Jae Park
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2011-08-21       Impact factor: 5.742

4.  Technical issues and new devices of ESD of early gastric cancer.

Authors:  Wan Sik Lee; Jin Woong Cho; Young Dae Kim; Kyu Jong Kim; Byung Ik Jang
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2011-08-21       Impact factor: 5.742

5.  Endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancer: Current and original devices.

Authors:  Keiichiro Kume
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2009-10-15

6.  Optimal management for patients not meeting the inclusion criteria after endoscopic submucosal dissection for gastric cancer.

Authors:  Takahiro Toyokawa; Masaichi Ohira; Hiroaki Tanaka; Hiroaki Minamino; Katsunobu Sakurai; Yasuaki Nagami; Naoshi Kubo; Atsushi Yamamoto; Koji Sano; Kazuya Muguruma; Kazunari Tominaga; Hiroko Nebiki; Yoshito Yamashita; Tetsuo Arakawa; Kosei Hirakawa
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-10-13       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  Endoscopic submucosal dissection training with ex vivo human gastric remnants.

Authors:  David V Pham; Anand Shah; Frank J Borao; Steven Gorcey
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2013-08-31       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  Predictive factors of endoscopic submucosal dissection procedure time for gastric superficial neoplasia.

Authors:  Zhong-Sheng Lu; Yun-Sheng Yang; Dan Feng; Shu-Fang Wang; Jing Yuan; Jin Huang; Xiang-Dong Wang; Jiang-Yun Meng; Hong Du; Hong-Bin Wang
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2012-12-21       Impact factor: 5.742

9.  Chromoendoscopy of gastric adenoma using an acetic acid indigocarmine mixture.

Authors:  Yoshiyasu Kono; Ryuta Takenaka; Yoshiro Kawahara; Hiroyuki Okada; Keisuke Hori; Seiji Kawano; Yasushi Yamasaki; Koji Takemoto; Takayoshi Miyake; Shigeatsu Fujiki; Kazuhide Yamamoto
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-05-07       Impact factor: 5.742

10.  Gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection under steady pressure automatically controlled endoscopy (SPACE); a multicenter randomized preclinical trial.

Authors:  Takuya Yamada; Masashi Hirota; Shusaku Tsutsui; Motohiko Kato; Tsuyoshi Takahashi; Kazuhiro Yasuda; Kazuki Sumiyama; Masahiko Tsujii; Tetsuo Takehara; Masaki Mori; Yuichiro Doki; Kiyokazu Nakajima
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-12-06       Impact factor: 4.584

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.