| Literature DB >> 24672541 |
Tomoyuki Boda1, Masanori Ito1, Shiro Oka2, Yoko Kitamura1, Norifumi Numata1, Yoji Sanomura2, Taiji Matsuo2, Shinji Tanaka2, Masaharu Yoshihara3, Koji Arihiro4, Kazuaki Chayama1.
Abstract
Background. Recently, endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has become a standard treatment method for early gastric cancer and concurrent stomach preservation. However, metachronous recurrences have become a major problem. We evaluated the incidence and clinicopathologic features of and examined the risk factors for metachronous gastric tumors. Methods. A total of 357 patients who underwent ESD for gastric tumors (245 early gastric cancers and 112 adenomas) and were followed up for more than 12 months without recurrence within the first 12 months were enrolled. We investigated the incidence and clinicopathologic features of metachronous tumors after ESD. We also analyzed the potential risk factors for metachronous tumors using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox's proportional hazards model. Results. The annual incidence of metachronous tumors after ESD was 2.4%. The median period until discovery after initial ESD was 26.0 months, and the median observation period was 52.6 months. Male patients developed metachronous tumors more frequently (P = 0.04), and the hazard ratio of female to male patients was 0.36 (95% confidence interval: 0.11-0.89). Conclusions. Patients with a previous history of gastric tumors have a high risk of subsequent gastric tumor development and male patients should be carefully followed up after ESD for gastric tumor.Entities:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24672541 PMCID: PMC3942338 DOI: 10.1155/2014/863595
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Gastroenterol Res Pract ISSN: 1687-6121 Impact factor: 2.260
Figure 1Kaplan-Meier curve of the cumulative incidence of metachronous tumors after ESD for gastric tumors.
Clinicopathologic characteristics associated with metachronous gastric tumors.
| Factors | No. of patients |
|---|---|
| Total patients | 39 |
| Age (years) | |
| Mean (range) | 70.3 (50–88) |
| Gender | |
| Male | 35 (90%) |
| Female | 4 (10%) |
| Tumor size (mm) | |
| Mean (range) | 11.1 (3–20) |
| Location | |
| Upper third | 10 (26%) |
| Middle third | 12 (31%) |
| Lower third | 17 (44%) |
| Gross type† | |
| Elevated | 18 (46%) |
| Depressed | 21 (54%) |
| Gastric mucosal atrophy | |
| Closed | 1 (3%) |
| Open | 38 (97%) |
| Synchronous tumor | |
| Negative | 36 (92%) |
| Positive | 3 (8%) |
| Histology | |
| Intestinal | 37 (95%) |
| Diffuse | 2 (5%) |
| Depth | |
| Mucosa | 34 (87%) |
| Submucosa | 5 (13%) |
†Elevated: 0-I and 0-IIa; depressed: 0-IIc and 0-IIa+IIc.
Figure 2Cumulative incidence of metachronous tumors after ESD in male and female patients. The incidence of metachronous tumors was significantly greater among male patients (solid line) than among female patients (dotted line; P = 0.04).
Analysis of risk factors for metachronous gastric tumors according to Cox's proportional hazards model.
| Factors | No. | Univariate analysis | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hazard ratio | 95% CI | ||
| Age (1-year increment) | 1.00 | 0.97–1.04 | |
| Gender | |||
| Male | 272 | 1 | |
| Female | 85 | 0.36 | 0.11–0.89 |
| Tumor size (increment of 1 mm) | 1.01 | 0.98–1.03 | |
| Location | |||
| Upper third | 38 | 1 | |
| Middle third | 91 | 1.68 | 0.55–7.29 |
| Lower third | 228 | 1.02 | 0.35–4.32 |
| Gross type | |||
| Elevated | 161 | 1 | |
| Depressed | 196 | 1.07 | 0.57–2.04 |
| Gastric mucosal atrophy | |||
| Closed | 30 | 1 | |
| Open | 327 | 1.20 | 0.43–4.99 |
| Synchronous tumor | |||
| Negative | 307 | 1 | |
| Positive | 50 | 1.26 | 0.47–2.79 |
| Histology | |||
| Intestinal | 331 | 1 | |
| Diffuse | 26 | 0.84 | 0.20–2.33 |
| Depth | |||
| Mucosa | 326 | 1 | |
| Submucosa | 31 | 1.05 | 0.25–2.92 |
| Serum gastrin | |||
| ≤100 pg/mL | 94 | 1 | |
| >100 pg/mL | 187 | 0.58 | 0.28–1.21 |
| Serum pepsinogen† | |||
| Negative | 111 | 1 | |
| Positive | 170 | 1.23 | 0.59–2.75 |
CI: confidence interval.
†Serum pepsinogen-positive: PG I ≤ 70 ng/mL and PG I/II ≤ 3.