Hye Kyung Jeon1, Gwang Ha Kim2, Bong Eun Lee1, Do Youn Park3, Geun Am Song1, Dae Hwan Kim4, Tae Yong Jeon4. 1. Department of Internal Medicine, Pusan National University School of Medicine, and Biomedical Research Institute, Pusan National University Hospital, 179, Gudeok-ro, Seo-Gu, Busan, 602-739, Korea. 2. Department of Internal Medicine, Pusan National University School of Medicine, and Biomedical Research Institute, Pusan National University Hospital, 179, Gudeok-ro, Seo-Gu, Busan, 602-739, Korea. doc0224@pusan.ac.kr. 3. Department of Pathology, Pusan National University School of Medicine, and Biomedical Research Institute, Pusan National University Hospital, Busan, Korea. 4. Department of Surgery, Pusan National University School of Medicine, and Biomedical Research Institute, Pusan National University Hospital, Busan, Korea.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Data concerning the long-term outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) versus surgery for early gastric cancer (EGC) are limited. We aimed to compare the long-term outcomes of ESD and surgery for patients with EGC. METHODS: Data were reviewed from patients treated by ESD or surgery for EGC in 2005-2010. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes were disease-specific survival (DSS), disease-free survival (DFS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), treatment-related complications, and hospital stay duration. RESULTS: Among 617 patients, 342 underwent ESD and 275 underwent surgery. The 5-year OS rates were similar between the ESD group and the surgery group (96.9% vs 98.1%, P = 0.581). In a propensity-score-matched analysis of 117 pairs, there were no significant differences in the OS rates (96.5% vs 99.1%, P = 0.125) and DSS rates (100% vs 99.1%, P = 0.317) between the ESD group and the surgery group. The ESD group had a significantly lower DFS rate (90.3% vs 98.0%, P = 0.002), a significantly lower RFS rate (95.1% vs 98.0%, P = 0.033), a significantly higher early complication rate (6.7% vs 1.5%, P < 0.001), a significantly lower late complication rate (0% vs 9.1%, P < 0.001), and a significantly shorter median hospital stay (3 days vs 10 days, P < 0.001) than the surgery group. CONCLUSIONS: ESD and surgery have comparable OS rates in patients with EGC. ESD has benefits, including a lower late complication rate and shorter hospital stay. However, RFS and DFS rates might be lower after ESD than after surgery.
BACKGROUND: Data concerning the long-term outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) versus surgery for early gastric cancer (EGC) are limited. We aimed to compare the long-term outcomes of ESD and surgery for patients with EGC. METHODS: Data were reviewed from patients treated by ESD or surgery for EGC in 2005-2010. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes were disease-specific survival (DSS), disease-free survival (DFS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), treatment-related complications, and hospital stay duration. RESULTS: Among 617 patients, 342 underwent ESD and 275 underwent surgery. The 5-year OS rates were similar between the ESD group and the surgery group (96.9% vs 98.1%, P = 0.581). In a propensity-score-matched analysis of 117 pairs, there were no significant differences in the OS rates (96.5% vs 99.1%, P = 0.125) and DSS rates (100% vs 99.1%, P = 0.317) between the ESD group and the surgery group. The ESD group had a significantly lower DFS rate (90.3% vs 98.0%, P = 0.002), a significantly lower RFS rate (95.1% vs 98.0%, P = 0.033), a significantly higher early complication rate (6.7% vs 1.5%, P < 0.001), a significantly lower late complication rate (0% vs 9.1%, P < 0.001), and a significantly shorter median hospital stay (3 days vs 10 days, P < 0.001) than the surgery group. CONCLUSIONS: ESD and surgery have comparable OS rates in patients with EGC. ESD has benefits, including a lower late complication rate and shorter hospital stay. However, RFS and DFS rates might be lower after ESD than after surgery.
Entities:
Keywords:
Early gastric cancer; Endoscopic submucosal dissection; Gastrectomy; Survival
Authors: Il Ju Choi; Jun Ho Lee; Young-Il Kim; Chan Gyoo Kim; Soo-Jeong Cho; Jong Yeul Lee; Keun Won Ryu; Byung-Ho Nam; Myeong-Cherl Kook; Young-Woo Kim Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2014-10-03 Impact factor: 9.427
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: Younhee Kim; Young Woo Kim; Il Ju Choi; Joo Young Cho; Jong Hee Kim; Jin Won Kwon; Ja Youn Lee; Na Rae Lee; Sang Yong Seol Journal: Gut Liver Date: 2015-03 Impact factor: 4.519