OBJECTIVE: Extensive surgery is the mainstay of therapy for patients with gastrointestinal mesenchymal tumors (GIMTs) adjacent to the esophagogastric junction (EGJ). However, this modality is invasive and may interfere with anatomic consistency of the digestive tract. Therefore, we evaluated the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for GIMTs close to the EGJ and factors related to incomplete resection. PATIENTS AND METHODS: For 39 GIMTs adjacent to the EGJ in 39 consecutive patients, the baseline information, complications, and therapeutic outcomes were recorded. Subsequently, risk factors, focusing on age, sex, tumor size, extent, shape, perforation presence/absence, and histopathology, were analyzed. RESULTS: Complete removal of junctional GIMTs was achieved in 32 cases, giving an overall complete resection rate of 82%. The mean tumor size was 16.1±12.7 (median, 12; range, 4-50) mm. There were no major intra- and postoperative complications, but two small perforations were found. The final histopathologic diagnoses included 28 leiomyomas, 10 gastrointestinal stromal tumors, and 1 schwannoma. No local recurrence or distant metastasis was observed during a mean follow-up of 15.7±8.4 (median, 16; range, 6-35) months. Univariate analysis showed incomplete resection was associated with tumor shape and size. Multivariate regression analysis identified tumor irregularity (odds ratio=37.50, 95% confidence interval=4.253-330.627) as the single factor associated with incomplete resection. CONCLUSIONS: ESD is feasible and safe for well-selected patients with GIMTs adjacent to the EGJ. Irregular tumor shape should be considered as a technical difficulty while performing ESD. Oncologic outcomes need to be assessed with longer follow-up.
OBJECTIVE: Extensive surgery is the mainstay of therapy for patients with gastrointestinal mesenchymal tumors (GIMTs) adjacent to the esophagogastric junction (EGJ). However, this modality is invasive and may interfere with anatomic consistency of the digestive tract. Therefore, we evaluated the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for GIMTs close to the EGJ and factors related to incomplete resection. PATIENTS AND METHODS: For 39 GIMTs adjacent to the EGJ in 39 consecutive patients, the baseline information, complications, and therapeutic outcomes were recorded. Subsequently, risk factors, focusing on age, sex, tumor size, extent, shape, perforation presence/absence, and histopathology, were analyzed. RESULTS: Complete removal of junctional GIMTs was achieved in 32 cases, giving an overall complete resection rate of 82%. The mean tumor size was 16.1±12.7 (median, 12; range, 4-50) mm. There were no major intra- and postoperative complications, but two small perforations were found. The final histopathologic diagnoses included 28 leiomyomas, 10 gastrointestinal stromal tumors, and 1 schwannoma. No local recurrence or distant metastasis was observed during a mean follow-up of 15.7±8.4 (median, 16; range, 6-35) months. Univariate analysis showed incomplete resection was associated with tumor shape and size. Multivariate regression analysis identified tumor irregularity (odds ratio=37.50, 95% confidence interval=4.253-330.627) as the single factor associated with incomplete resection. CONCLUSIONS: ESD is feasible and safe for well-selected patients with GIMTs adjacent to the EGJ. Irregular tumor shape should be considered as a technical difficulty while performing ESD. Oncologic outcomes need to be assessed with longer follow-up.