| Literature DB >> 30328950 |
Ernesto Quaresma Mendonça1, Fernanda Cristina Simões Pessorrusso1, Marcus Fernando Kodama Pertille Ramos2, Carlos Eduardo Jacob2, Joel Fernandez de Oliveira1, Maria Sylvia Ribeiro1, Adriana Safatle-Ribeiro1, Bruno Zilberstein2, Ulysses Ribeiro Júnior2, Fauze Maluf-Filho1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to evaluate the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society criteria for endoscopic submucosal resection of early gastric cancer (EGC) based on the experience in a Brazilian cancer center.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30328950 PMCID: PMC6157092 DOI: 10.6061/clinics/2018/e553s
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Clinics (Sao Paulo) ISSN: 1807-5932 Impact factor: 2.365
Characteristics of the lesions.
| Criteria | Data |
|---|---|
| Median tumor size | 19.98 mm (±11.7) |
| Localization | |
| Cardia | 7 (13.7%) |
| Body | 17 (33.3%) |
| Body-antrum | 2 (3.9%) |
| Incisura angularis | 3 (5.9%) |
| Antrum | 22 (43.1%) |
| Paris Classification | |
| Is | 7 (13.7%) |
| IIa | 15 (29.4%) |
| IIb | 2 (3.9%) |
| IIc | 9 (17.6%) |
| IIa+IIc | 13 (25.5%) |
| Other | 5 (9.8%) |
| Histology | |
| Adenocarcinoma | 38 (76.0%) |
| Well-differentiated | 34 (68.0%) |
| Poorly differentiated | 4 (8.0%) |
| Adenoma | 8 (16.0%) |
| Neuroendocrine tumor | 3 (6.0%) |
| Inflammatory fibroid polyp | 1 (2.0%) |
Characteristics of the ESD procedure.
| Parameter | Data | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Median surgery length | 113.91 min (±71.4) | ||
| Median hospital stay | 3.24 days (±2.7) | ||
| En-bloc resection | 35 (92.1%) | ||
| Complete resection | 28 (73.7%) | ||
| Classic indication criteria | 16 (84.2%) | ||
| Expanded indication criteria | 12 (63.1%) | ||
| Complications | |||
| Bleeding | 5 (10.6%) | ||
| Minor perforation | 4 (8.5%) | ||
| Major perforation | 1 (2.1%) | ||
Cure criteria comparison in adenocarcinoma cases.
| Criteria | Data | |
|---|---|---|
| Curative criteria | ||
| Classic criteria | 15 (39.5%) | |
| Expanded | 12 (31.6%) | |
| Noncurative | 11 (28.9%) | |
| Indication criteria | ||
| Expanded indication: well-differentiated, intramucosal, >2cm | 14 (36.8%) | |
| Expanded indication by other parameters | 5 (13.2%) | |
| Classic indication | 19 (50.0%) | |
| Cure by indication criteria | ||
| Expanded indication: well-differentiated, intramucosal, >2cm | 9 (64.3%) | |
| Expanded indication by other parameters | 2 (40.0%) | |
| Classic indication | 17 (89.4%) | |
| Cure by indication criteria (pairwise comparison 1) | ||
| Expanded indication: well-differentiated, intramucosal, >2cm | 9 (64.3%) | |
| Expanded indication by other parameters | 2 (40.0%) | |
| Cure by indication criteria (pairwise comparison 2) | ||
| Expanded indication: well-differentiated, intramucosal, >2cm | 9 (64.3%) | |
| Classic indication | 17 (89.5%) | |
| Cure by indication criteria (pairwise comparison 3) | ||
| Expanded indication by other parameters | 2 (40.0%) | |
| Classic indication | 17 (89.5%) | |
| Adenocarcinoma differentiation grade | ||
| Well-differentiated | 34 (89.5%) | |
| Poorly differentiated | 4 (10.5%) | |
| Recurrence by differentiation grade | ||
| Well-differentiated | 4 (11.7%) | |
| Poorly differentiated | 1 (25.0%) | |
| Recurrence by curative criteria | ||
| Classic criteria | 0 (0.0%) | |
| Expanded criteria | 1 (8.3%) | |
| Noncurative criteria | 4 (40.0%) | |
| Recurrence by curative criteria (pairwise comparison 1) | ||
| Classic criteria | 0 (0.0%) | |
| Expanded criteria | 1 (8.3%) | |
| Recurrence by curative criteria (pairwise comparison 2) | ||
| Classic criteria | 0 (0.0%) | |
| Noncurative criteria | 4 (40.0%) | |
| Recurrence by curative criteria (pairwise comparison 3) | ||
| Expanded criteria | 1 (8.3%) | |
| Noncurative criteria | 4 (40.0%) |