BACKGROUND: Photodynamic therapy (PDT) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) have been proposed as a treatment for early esophageal neoplasia. The objective of this study is to compare between the clinical outcome after ESD and PDT to reach the best management for early esophageal neoplasia. METHODS: All patients undergoing ESD or PDT for early esophageal neoplasia between 2014 and 2015 were eligible for the study. A retrospective analysis for comparison between the results of ESD and PDT was done. RESULTS: 36 patients underwent ESD and Thirty PDT. No significant difference was found between the two groups regarding the demographic or pathologic data. Also, there was no significant difference regarding the length of hospital stay, presence of hydrothorax, fever, and pain. Operative time was significantly longer in ESD than in PDT (72 vs. 8 minutes, P<0.001). In addition, bleeding was significantly lower in ESD than PDT (12 vs. 2, P<0.05). There was a significant difference regarding stricture and cost which were less in ESD (6 vs. 15, P<0.05). However, perforation was much more in ESD (6 vs. 0, P<0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding the disease free survival (DFS), but it was observed that patients who underwent PDT had more favorable 2-year DFS rates than patients received ESD. CONCLUSIONS: The PDT may be comparable to the ESD. With the exception of esophageal stenosis, PDT could reduce many complications and have longer DFS in comparison with ESD. PDT is feasible for patients with early esophageal neoplasia confined to the mucosal layer without regional lymph nodal or distant metastasis.
BACKGROUND: Photodynamic therapy (PDT) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) have been proposed as a treatment for early esophageal neoplasia. The objective of this study is to compare between the clinical outcome after ESD and PDT to reach the best management for early esophageal neoplasia. METHODS: All patients undergoing ESD or PDT for early esophageal neoplasia between 2014 and 2015 were eligible for the study. A retrospective analysis for comparison between the results of ESD and PDT was done. RESULTS: 36 patients underwent ESD and Thirty PDT. No significant difference was found between the two groups regarding the demographic or pathologic data. Also, there was no significant difference regarding the length of hospital stay, presence of hydrothorax, fever, and pain. Operative time was significantly longer in ESD than in PDT (72 vs. 8 minutes, P<0.001). In addition, bleeding was significantly lower in ESD than PDT (12 vs. 2, P<0.05). There was a significant difference regarding stricture and cost which were less in ESD (6 vs. 15, P<0.05). However, perforation was much more in ESD (6 vs. 0, P<0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding the disease free survival (DFS), but it was observed that patients who underwent PDT had more favorable 2-year DFS rates than patients received ESD. CONCLUSIONS: The PDT may be comparable to the ESD. With the exception of esophageal stenosis, PDT could reduce many complications and have longer DFS in comparison with ESD. PDT is feasible for patients with early esophageal neoplasia confined to the mucosal layer without regional lymph nodal or distant metastasis.
Authors: Bergein F Overholt; Charles J Lightdale; Kenneth K Wang; Marcia I Canto; Steven Burdick; Roger C Haggitt; Mary P Bronner; Shari L Taylor; Michael G A Grace; Michelle Depot Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2005-10 Impact factor: 9.427