Sunpyo Lee1, Kee Don Choi2, Minkyu Han3, Hee Kyong Na1, Ji Yong Ahn1, Kee Wook Jung1, Jeong Hoon Lee1, Do Hoon Kim1, Ho June Song1, Gin Hyug Lee1, Jeong-Hwan Yook4, Byung Sik Kim4, Hwoon-Yong Jung1. 1. Department of Gastroenterology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea. 2. Department of Gastroenterology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea. keedonchoi@gmail.com. 3. Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea. 4. Department of Surgery, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for early gastric cancer (EGC) meeting the expanded indication is considered investigational. We aimed to compare long-term outcomes of ESD and surgery for EGC in the expanded indication based on each criterion. METHODS: This study included 1823 consecutive EGC patients meeting expanded indication conditions and treated at a tertiary referral center: 916 and 907 patients underwent surgery or ESD, respectively. The expanded indication included four discrete criteria: (I) intramucosal differentiated tumor, without ulcers, size >2 cm; (II) intramucosal differentiated tumor, with ulcers, size ≤3 cm; (III) intramucosal undifferentiated tumor, without ulcers, size ≤2 cm; and (IV) submucosal invasion <500 μm (sm1), differentiated tumor, size ≤3 cm. We selected 522 patients in each group by propensity score matching and retrospectively evaluated each group. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS); the secondary outcomes were disease-specific survival (DSS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), and treatment-related complications. RESULTS: In all patients and subgroups meeting each criterion, OS and DSS were not significantly different between groups (OS and DSS, all patients: p = 0.354 and p = 0.930; criteria I: p = 0.558 and p = 0.688; criterion II: p = 1.000 and p = 1.000; criterion III: p = 0.750 and p = 0.799; and criterion IV: p = 0.599 and p = 0.871). RFS, in all patients and criterion I, was significantly shorter in the ESD group than in the surgery group (p < 0.001 and p < 0.003, respectively). The surgery group showed higher rates of late and severe treatment-related complications than the ESD group. CONCLUSIONS: ESD may be an alternative treatment option to surgery for EGCs meeting expanded indications, including undifferentiated-type tumors.
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for early gastric cancer (EGC) meeting the expanded indication is considered investigational. We aimed to compare long-term outcomes of ESD and surgery for EGC in the expanded indication based on each criterion. METHODS: This study included 1823 consecutive EGCpatients meeting expanded indication conditions and treated at a tertiary referral center: 916 and 907 patients underwent surgery or ESD, respectively. The expanded indication included four discrete criteria: (I) intramucosal differentiated tumor, without ulcers, size >2 cm; (II) intramucosal differentiated tumor, with ulcers, size ≤3 cm; (III) intramucosal undifferentiated tumor, without ulcers, size ≤2 cm; and (IV) submucosal invasion <500 μm (sm1), differentiated tumor, size ≤3 cm. We selected 522 patients in each group by propensity score matching and retrospectively evaluated each group. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS); the secondary outcomes were disease-specific survival (DSS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), and treatment-related complications. RESULTS: In all patients and subgroups meeting each criterion, OS and DSS were not significantly different between groups (OS and DSS, all patients: p = 0.354 and p = 0.930; criteria I: p = 0.558 and p = 0.688; criterion II: p = 1.000 and p = 1.000; criterion III: p = 0.750 and p = 0.799; and criterion IV: p = 0.599 and p = 0.871). RFS, in all patients and criterion I, was significantly shorter in the ESD group than in the surgery group (p < 0.001 and p < 0.003, respectively). The surgery group showed higher rates of late and severe treatment-related complications than the ESD group. CONCLUSIONS: ESD may be an alternative treatment option to surgery for EGCs meeting expanded indications, including undifferentiated-type tumors.
Authors: Ji Yong Ahn; Hwoon-Yong Jung; Kee Don Choi; Ji Young Choi; Mi-Young Kim; Jeong Hoon Lee; Kwi-Sook Choi; Do Hoon Kim; Ho June Song; Gin Hyug Lee; Jin-Ho Kim; Young Soo Park Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2011-07-13 Impact factor: 9.427
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: Chan Hyuk Park; Dong-Hoon Yang; Jong Wook Kim; Jie-Hyun Kim; Ji Hyun Kim; Yang Won Min; Si Hyung Lee; Jung Ho Bae; Hyunsoo Chung; Kee Don Choi; Jun Chul Park; Hyuk Lee; Min-Seob Kwak; Bun Kim; Hyun Jung Lee; Hye Seung Lee; Miyoung Choi; Dong-Ah Park; Jong Yeul Lee; Jeong-Sik Byeon; Chan Guk Park; Joo Young Cho; Soo Teik Lee; Hoon Jai Chun Journal: Clin Endosc Date: 2020-03-30
Authors: Chan Hyuk Park; Dong-Hoon Yang; Jong Wook Kim; Jie-Hyun Kim; Ji Hyun Kim; Yang Won Min; Si Hyung Lee; Jung Ho Bae; Hyunsoo Chung; Kee Don Choi; Jun Chul Park; Hyuk Lee; Min-Seob Kwak; Bun Kim; Hyun Jung Lee; Hye Seung Lee; Miyoung Choi; Dong-Ah Park; Jong Yeul Lee; Jeong-Sik Byeon; Chan Guk Park; Joo Young Cho; Soo Teik Lee; Hoon Jai Chun Journal: Intest Res Date: 2020-10-13