BACKGROUND: Detection of early gastric cancer (EGC) in the remnant stomach is increasing because of follow-up endoscopic surveillance programs. Endoscopic treatment appears to be desirable for EGC in the remnant stomach because it is less invasive than surgical resection. METHODS: In this retrospective study, to evaluate the feasibility of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for EGC in an anastomotic site, treatment results of ESD for EGC in an anastomotic site and in remnant stomach not involving an anastomotic site were compared. In total, 11 EGC lesions of anastomotic sites in 11 patients and 22 EGC lesions of remnant stomach not involving an anastomotic site in 21 patients were treated by ESD. RESULTS: All lesions were successfully treated by en bloc resection. There were three patients with perforations in the anastomotic site group. Although resected specimen size and tumor size were larger in the anastomotic site group than in the non-anastomotic site group (P < 0.01), the procedure duration was far longer in the anastomotic site group than in the non-anastomotic site group (P < 0.01). The speed of the procedure was faster in the non-anastomotic site group than in the anastomotic site group (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Although ESD for EGC in an anastomotic site is a time-consuming procedure and requires advanced techniques compared with ESD for EGC not involving an anastomotic site, a high en bloc resection rate was achieved. ESD by endoscopists with sufficient experience appears to be a feasible treatment for EGC in an anastomotic site.
BACKGROUND: Detection of early gastric cancer (EGC) in the remnant stomach is increasing because of follow-up endoscopic surveillance programs. Endoscopic treatment appears to be desirable for EGC in the remnant stomach because it is less invasive than surgical resection. METHODS: In this retrospective study, to evaluate the feasibility of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for EGC in an anastomotic site, treatment results of ESD for EGC in an anastomotic site and in remnant stomach not involving an anastomotic site were compared. In total, 11 EGC lesions of anastomotic sites in 11 patients and 22 EGC lesions of remnant stomach not involving an anastomotic site in 21 patients were treated by ESD. RESULTS: All lesions were successfully treated by en bloc resection. There were three patients with perforations in the anastomotic site group. Although resected specimen size and tumor size were larger in the anastomotic site group than in the non-anastomotic site group (P < 0.01), the procedure duration was far longer in the anastomotic site group than in the non-anastomotic site group (P < 0.01). The speed of the procedure was faster in the non-anastomotic site group than in the anastomotic site group (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Although ESD for EGC in an anastomotic site is a time-consuming procedure and requires advanced techniques compared with ESD for EGC not involving an anastomotic site, a high en bloc resection rate was achieved. ESD by endoscopists with sufficient experience appears to be a feasible treatment for EGC in an anastomotic site.
Authors: T Toyonaga; M Man-i; T Fujita; J E East; E Nishino; W Ono; Y Morita; T Sanuki; M Yoshida; H Kutsumi; H Inokuchi; T Azuma Journal: Endoscopy Date: 2010-08-30 Impact factor: 10.093
Authors: M Fujishiro; N Yahagi; N Kakushima; S Kodashima; Y Muraki; S Ono; K Kobayashi; T Hashimoto; N Yamamichi; A Tateishi; Y Shimizu; M Oka; K Ogura; T Kawabe; M Ichinose; M Omata Journal: Endoscopy Date: 2006-10 Impact factor: 10.093
Authors: Jong Yeul Lee; Il Ju Choi; Soo-Jeong Cho; Chan Gyoo Kim; Myeong-Cherl Kook; Jun Ho Lee; Keun Won Ryu; Young-Woo Kim Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2009-12-09 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: W Osumi; Y Fujita; M Hiramatsu; M Kawai; K Sumiyoshi; E Umegaki; S Tokioka; Y Yoda; Y Egashira; S Abe; K Higuchi; N Tanigawa Journal: Endoscopy Date: 2009-09-10 Impact factor: 10.093
Authors: Mohamed Barakat; Mohamed Seif; Mohamed M Abdelfatah; Andrew Ofosu; David L Carr-Locke; Mohamed O Othman Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2019-04-08 Impact factor: 4.584