Literature DB >> 21261716

Advantages of endoscopic submucosal dissection versus endoscopic oblique aspiration mucosectomy for superficial esophageal tumors.

Yuji Urabe1, Toru Hiyama, Shinji Tanaka, Masaharu Yoshihara, Koji Arihiro, Kazuaki Chayama.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIM: In the treatment of superficial esophageal tumors (SET), en bloc histologically-complete resection reduces the risk of local recurrence. Endoscopic oblique aspiration mucosectomy (EOAM) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) have been applied to resect SET. The aim of this study was to retrospectively determine whether ESD is more advantageous than EOAM for SET.
METHODS: In the present study, there was a total of 122 patients in whom 162 SET were resected endoscopically at Hiroshima University Hospital. EOAM (83 lesions/63 patients) or ESD (79 lesions/59 patients) was performed. En bloc histologically-complete resection rates, operation time, complications, and the local recurrence rate were studied.
RESULTS: In SET > 20 mm, the en bloc histologically-complete resection rate was significantly higher with ESD than with EOAM (94% vs 42%, P < 0.001). In SET of 16-20 mm, the rate tended to be higher with ESD than with EOAM (100% vs 81%, P = 0.08). In SET < 15 mm, the rates did not differ significantly between groups. The average operation time was significantly longer for ESD than for EOAM, regardless of tumor size (49.7 ± 33.0 min vs 19.1 ± 6.1 min, P < 0.001). Complication rates did not differ significantly between groups. The local recurrence rate was significantly lower with ESD than with EOAM (0%, mean observation period: 18.9 months vs 9%, mean observation period: 30.7 months, P = 0.03).
CONCLUSION: Although increased operation time with ESD remains problematic, SET > 15 mm should be treated with ESD to reduce local recurrence. In lesions ≤ 15 mm, EOAM might be preferable, especially in high-risk patients.
© 2011 Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Foundation and Blackwell Publishing Asia Pty Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21261716     DOI: 10.1111/j.1440-1746.2010.06503.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gastroenterol Hepatol        ISSN: 0815-9319            Impact factor:   4.029


  21 in total

1.  Effectiveness and safety of endoscopic aspiration mucosectomy and endoscopic submucosal dissection in patients with superficial esophageal squamous-cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Yasuaki Furue; Chikatoshi Katada; Satoshi Tanabe; Kenji Ishido; Yuki Kondo; Yo Kubota; Natuko Kawanishi; Sakiko Yamane; Akinori Watanabe; Hiromitsu Moriya; Keishi Yamashita; Takuya Wada; Takafumi Yano; Mizutomo Azuma; Wasaburo Koizumi
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-09-05       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 2.  Efficacy and safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial squamous esophageal neoplasia: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Joon Sung Kim; Byung-Wook Kim; In-Soo Shin
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2014-03-12       Impact factor: 3.199

Review 3.  Endoscopic submucosal dissection vs endoscopic mucosal resection for superficial esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Hui-Min Guo; Xiao-Qi Zhang; Min Chen; Shu-Ling Huang; Xiao-Ping Zou
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-05-14       Impact factor: 5.742

4.  Endoscopic submucosal dissection for early Barrett's neoplasia.

Authors:  Maximilien Barret; Dalhia Thao Cao; Frédéric Beuvon; Sarah Leblanc; Benoit Terris; Marine Camus; Romain Coriat; Stanislas Chaussade; Frédéric Prat
Journal:  United European Gastroenterol J       Date:  2015-09-24       Impact factor: 4.623

Review 5.  Bleeding after endoscopic submucosal dissection: Risk factors and preventive methods.

Authors:  Yosuke Kataoka; Yosuke Tsuji; Yoshiki Sakaguchi; Chihiro Minatsuki; Itsuko Asada-Hirayama; Keiko Niimi; Satoshi Ono; Shinya Kodashima; Nobutake Yamamichi; Mitsuhiro Fujishiro; Kazuhiko Koike
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-07-14       Impact factor: 5.742

6.  The safety and efficacy of endoscopic submucosal dissection for treating early oesophageal carcinoma: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  H Y Wang; X Zeng; S Y Bai; K Pu; Y Zheng; R Ji; Q H Guo; Q L Guan; Y P Wang; Y N Zhou
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2020-08-21       Impact factor: 1.891

7.  The low incidence of bacteremia after esophageal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) obviates the need for prophylactic antibiotics in esophageal ESD.

Authors:  Noboru Kawata; Masaki Tanaka; Naomi Kakushima; Kohei Takizawa; Kenichiro Imai; Kinichi Hotta; Hiroyuki Matsubayashi; Mika Tsukahara; Ichiro Kawamura; Hanako Kurai; Hiroyuki Ono
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-03-16       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  Outcomes of patients receiving additional esophagectomy after endoscopic resection for clinically mucosal, but pathologically submucosal, squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus.

Authors:  Satoru Motoyama; Mario Jin; Tamotsu Matsuhashi; Hiroshi Nanjo; Koichi Ishiyama; Yusuke Sato; Kei Yoshino; Tomohiko Sasaki; Akiyuki Wakita; Hajime Saito; Yoshihiro Minamiya; Hirohide Ohnishi; Jun-Ichi Ogawa
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2012-08-17       Impact factor: 2.549

Review 9.  Endoscopic and surgical resection of T1a/T1b esophageal neoplasms: a systematic review.

Authors:  George Sgourakis; Ines Gockel; Hauke Lang
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2013-03-07       Impact factor: 5.742

10.  Esophagectomy for superficial esophageal cancer after non-curative endoscopic resection.

Authors:  Hiroshi Saeki; Masayuki Watanabe; Shinji Mine; Hironobu Shigaki; Shuichiro Oya; Akiyoshi Ishiyama; Tomohiro Tsuchida; Junko Fujisaki; Hideo Baba; Yoshihiko Maehara; Takeshi Sano
Journal:  J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-08-02       Impact factor: 7.527

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.