Se Woo Park1, Hyuk Lee2, Chan Hyuk Park3, Hyun Joo Jang4, Hongyup Ahn5. 1. Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Institute of Gastroenterology, Hallym University Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, Seoku-dong, Hwaseong-si, Gyeonggi-do, 445-907, Korea. 2. Department of Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. leehyuk@skku.edu. 3. Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hanyang University Guri Hospital, Hanyang University College of Medicine, Guri, Gyeonggi-do, Korea. 4. Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Institute of Gastroenterology, Hallym University Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, Seoku-dong, Hwaseong-si, Gyeonggi-do, 445-907, Korea. jhj1229@hallym.or.kr. 5. Department of Statistics, Dongguk University, Seoul, Korea.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The criteria for endoscopic resection for early gastric cancer (EGC) have been expanded recently, and it has become acceptable to use techniques that are regarded as having equivalent technical and pathological outcomes to absolute indication (AI). However, the long-term oncological outcomes of expanded indication (EI) have yet to be clarified. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the long-term outcome of EI versus AI, to identify the endoscopic feasibility and safety according to the indication, and to provide the appropriate recommendations for each indication. METHODS: Electronic databases including PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and KoreaMed were searched for articles published between January 2000 and October 2014. After screening, the reviewers extracted the information from 12 retrospective cohort studies. A total of 9635 EGC lesions, 4150 lesions in the EI group and 5485 lesions in the AI group, were included in this study. RESULTS: Meta-analyses showed that the local recurrence rate [risk ratio (RR) 1.34; 95% CI 0.67-2.70] was not significantly higher in the EI group compared with the AI group, although the metachronous recurrence rate was higher in the EI group than in the AI group (RR 1.60; 95% CI 1.22-2.10). The rates of en bloc resection [odds ratio (OR) 0.57; 95% CI 0.41-0.78), complete resection (OR 0.37; 95% CI 0.25-0.57), and curative resection (OR 0.34; 95% CI 0.20-0.58) were significantly inferior in the EI group than in the AI group, whereas overall bleeding risk (RR 1.47; 95% CI 1.19-1.82) and procedure-related perforation rate (OR 2.04; 95% CI 1.56-2.68) were significantly higher in the EI group than in the AI group. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis suggests that the EI group showed acceptable long-term outcomes with local recurrence rate that was not significantly inferior, although the metachronous recurrence rate was higher compared with that in the AI group.
BACKGROUND: The criteria for endoscopic resection for early gastric cancer (EGC) have been expanded recently, and it has become acceptable to use techniques that are regarded as having equivalent technical and pathological outcomes to absolute indication (AI). However, the long-term oncological outcomes of expanded indication (EI) have yet to be clarified. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the long-term outcome of EI versus AI, to identify the endoscopic feasibility and safety according to the indication, and to provide the appropriate recommendations for each indication. METHODS: Electronic databases including PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and KoreaMed were searched for articles published between January 2000 and October 2014. After screening, the reviewers extracted the information from 12 retrospective cohort studies. A total of 9635 EGC lesions, 4150 lesions in the EI group and 5485 lesions in the AI group, were included in this study. RESULTS: Meta-analyses showed that the local recurrence rate [risk ratio (RR) 1.34; 95% CI 0.67-2.70] was not significantly higher in the EI group compared with the AI group, although the metachronous recurrence rate was higher in the EI group than in the AI group (RR 1.60; 95% CI 1.22-2.10). The rates of en bloc resection [odds ratio (OR) 0.57; 95% CI 0.41-0.78), complete resection (OR 0.37; 95% CI 0.25-0.57), and curative resection (OR 0.34; 95% CI 0.20-0.58) were significantly inferior in the EI group than in the AI group, whereas overall bleeding risk (RR 1.47; 95% CI 1.19-1.82) and procedure-related perforation rate (OR 2.04; 95% CI 1.56-2.68) were significantly higher in the EI group than in the AI group. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis suggests that the EI group showed acceptable long-term outcomes with local recurrence rate that was not significantly inferior, although the metachronous recurrence rate was higher compared with that in the AI group.
Entities:
Keywords:
Early gastric cancer; Endoscopic resection; Indication; Meta-analysis; Systematic review
Authors: H Isomoto; S Shikuwa; N Yamaguchi; E Fukuda; K Ikeda; H Nishiyama; K Ohnita; Y Mizuta; J Shiozawa; S Kohno Journal: Gut Date: 2008-11-10 Impact factor: 23.059
Authors: Keun Young Shin; Seong Woo Jeon; Kwang Bum Cho; Kyung Sik Park; Eun Soo Kim; Chang Keun Park; Yun Jin Chung; Joong Goo Kwon; Jin Tae Jung; Eun Young Kim; Kyeong Ok Kim; Byung Ik Jang; Si Hyung Lee; Jeong Bae Park; Chang Hun Yang Journal: Gut Liver Date: 2015-03 Impact factor: 4.519