Ji Ha Kim1, Hyeong Seok Nam1, Cheol Woong Choi2, Dae Hwan Kang3, Hyung Wook Kim1, Su Bum Park1, Su Jin Kim1, Sun Hwi Hwang4, Si Hak Lee4. 1. Department of Internal Medicine, Medical Research Institute, Pusan National University School of Medicine and Research Institute for Convergence of Biomedical Science and Technology, Pusan National University Yangsan Hospital, Beomeo-ri, Mulgeum-eup, Yangsan-si, Gyeongsangnam-do, 626-770, Korea. 2. Department of Internal Medicine, Medical Research Institute, Pusan National University School of Medicine and Research Institute for Convergence of Biomedical Science and Technology, Pusan National University Yangsan Hospital, Beomeo-ri, Mulgeum-eup, Yangsan-si, Gyeongsangnam-do, 626-770, Korea. luckyace@hanmail.net. 3. Department of Internal Medicine, Medical Research Institute, Pusan National University School of Medicine and Research Institute for Convergence of Biomedical Science and Technology, Pusan National University Yangsan Hospital, Beomeo-ri, Mulgeum-eup, Yangsan-si, Gyeongsangnam-do, 626-770, Korea. sulsulpul@naver.com. 4. Department of Surgery, Pusan National University School of Medicine and Research Institute for Convergence of Biomedical Science and Technology, Pusan National University Yangsan Hospital, Yangsan, Korea.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIM: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a widely accepted treatment for superficial gastric neoplasms. Difficult ESD can lead to complications, such as bleeding and perforation. To predict difficult ESD procedures, we analyzed the factors associated with difficult ESD. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The medical records of 1052 ESD procedures were retrospectively reviewed. Difficult ESD was defined by any one of three end points: longer procedure time (≥60 min), piecemeal resection, incomplete (R1) resection, or gastric wall perforation. To determine the factors associated with difficult ESD, clinical and pathologic features and endoscopic findings were analyzed. RESULTS: The rates of en bloc resection and curative (R0) resection were 93.3 and 92.4 %, respectively. The mean procedure time was 27.7 ± 16.7 min. After multivariate analysis, larger tumor size (≥20 mm) was an independent risk factor for longer procedure time (OR 4.1, P < 0.001), for piecemeal resection (OR 2.3, P = 0.003) and incomplete (R1) resection (OR 2.1, P = 0.005). Location of the lesion (upper third) was an independent risk factor for longer procedure time (OR 5.8, P < 0.001), for piecemeal resection (OR 4.1, P < 0.001) and incomplete (R1) resection (OR 4.5, P < 0.001). Submucosal fibrosis was an independent risk factor for longer procedure time (OR 9.7, P < 0.001), for piecemeal resection (OR 2.4, P < 0.001) and incomplete (R1) resection (OR 2.6, P < 0.001). Finally, submucosal invasive gastric cancer was an independent risk factor for piecemeal resection (OR 2.6, P = 0.008), for perforation (OR 19.3, P = 0.001) and for incomplete (R1) resection (OR 2.7, P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Difficult ESD procedures are a function of the lesion size and location, submucosal fibrosis, and submucosal invasive cancer. When a difficult ESD procedure is expected, appropriate preparations should be considered, including consultation with more experienced endoscopists.
BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIM: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a widely accepted treatment for superficial gastric neoplasms. Difficult ESD can lead to complications, such as bleeding and perforation. To predict difficult ESD procedures, we analyzed the factors associated with difficult ESD. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The medical records of 1052 ESD procedures were retrospectively reviewed. Difficult ESD was defined by any one of three end points: longer procedure time (≥60 min), piecemeal resection, incomplete (R1) resection, or gastric wall perforation. To determine the factors associated with difficult ESD, clinical and pathologic features and endoscopic findings were analyzed. RESULTS: The rates of en bloc resection and curative (R0) resection were 93.3 and 92.4 %, respectively. The mean procedure time was 27.7 ± 16.7 min. After multivariate analysis, larger tumor size (≥20 mm) was an independent risk factor for longer procedure time (OR 4.1, P < 0.001), for piecemeal resection (OR 2.3, P = 0.003) and incomplete (R1) resection (OR 2.1, P = 0.005). Location of the lesion (upper third) was an independent risk factor for longer procedure time (OR 5.8, P < 0.001), for piecemeal resection (OR 4.1, P < 0.001) and incomplete (R1) resection (OR 4.5, P < 0.001). Submucosal fibrosis was an independent risk factor for longer procedure time (OR 9.7, P < 0.001), for piecemeal resection (OR 2.4, P < 0.001) and incomplete (R1) resection (OR 2.6, P < 0.001). Finally, submucosal invasive gastric cancer was an independent risk factor for piecemeal resection (OR 2.6, P = 0.008), for perforation (OR 19.3, P = 0.001) and for incomplete (R1) resection (OR 2.7, P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Difficult ESD procedures are a function of the lesion size and location, submucosal fibrosis, and submucosal invasive cancer. When a difficult ESD procedure is expected, appropriate preparations should be considered, including consultation with more experienced endoscopists.
Entities:
Keywords:
Dysplasia; Early gastric cancer; Endoscopic submucosal dissection; Neoplasia
Authors: A Imagawa; H Okada; Y Kawahara; R Takenaka; J Kato; H Kawamoto; S Fujiki; R Takata; T Yoshino; Y Shiratori Journal: Endoscopy Date: 2006-10 Impact factor: 10.093
Authors: Ji Yong Ahn; Kee Don Choi; Ji Young Choi; Mi-Young Kim; Jeong Hoon Lee; Kwi-Sook Choi; Do Hoon Kim; Ho June Song; Gin Hyug Lee; Hwoon-Yong Jung; Jin-Ho Kim Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2011-02-05 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: M Fujishiro; N Yahagi; K Kashimura; Y Mizushima; M Oka; T Matsuura; S Enomoto; N Kakushima; A Imagawa; K Kobayashi; T Hashimoto; M Iguchi; Y Shimizu; M Ichinose; M Omata Journal: Endoscopy Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 10.093
Authors: Gloria Fernández-Esparrach; José-Carlos Marín-Gabriel; Alberto H de Tejada; Eduardo Albéniz; Oscar Nogales; Andres J Del Pozo-García; Pedro J Rosón; Unai Goicotxea; Hugo Uchima; Alvaro Terán; Alvarez Alberto; Rodríguez-Sánchez Joaquín; Rivero-Sánchez Liseth; Santiago José Journal: United European Gastroenterol J Date: 2021-06-02 Impact factor: 4.623