AIMS: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for early gastric cancer (EGC) is performed safely and effectively in elderly patients; however, whether ESD for EGC in elderly patients with frailty is safe and improves prognosis remains unclear. METHODS: In total, 142 patients aged ≥80 years who underwent ESD for EGC between September 2008 and September 2014 were included. We compared outcomes between patients with frailty and those without frailty. Frailty was assessed using the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) based on a patient's status before admission. Study endpoints were short- and long-term clinical outcomes after ESD. RESULTS: Patients were allocated into two groups: no frailty (CFS 1-3, n = 101) versus frailty (CFS 4-7, n = 41). Short-term clinical outcomes, specifically, adverse events and curability, did not differ between the two groups. For the long-term clinical outcomes, patients with frailty had significantly worse outcomes after ESD than those without frailty (the 3-year overall survival rates were 73.2% vs. 93.1%; P < 0.001 with log-rank test). The Cox proportional hazards model showed that frailty was only an independent risk factor for poor prognosis. CONCLUSIONS: ESD for EGC is safe for elderly patients with or without frailty. However, elderly patients with frailty have a significantly poorer prognosis than those without frailty after ESD. Our results indicate that the frailty evaluation may be helpful to determine whether ESD for EGC should be performed. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2020; 20: 461-466.
AIMS: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for early gastric cancer (EGC) is performed safely and effectively in elderly patients; however, whether ESD for EGC in elderly patients with frailty is safe and improves prognosis remains unclear. METHODS: In total, 142 patients aged ≥80 years who underwent ESD for EGC between September 2008 and September 2014 were included. We compared outcomes between patients with frailty and those without frailty. Frailty was assessed using the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) based on a patient's status before admission. Study endpoints were short- and long-term clinical outcomes after ESD. RESULTS:Patients were allocated into two groups: no frailty (CFS 1-3, n = 101) versus frailty (CFS 4-7, n = 41). Short-term clinical outcomes, specifically, adverse events and curability, did not differ between the two groups. For the long-term clinical outcomes, patients with frailty had significantly worse outcomes after ESD than those without frailty (the 3-year overall survival rates were 73.2% vs. 93.1%; P < 0.001 with log-rank test). The Cox proportional hazards model showed that frailty was only an independent risk factor for poor prognosis. CONCLUSIONS: ESD for EGC is safe for elderly patients with or without frailty. However, elderly patients with frailty have a significantly poorer prognosis than those without frailty after ESD. Our results indicate that the frailty evaluation may be helpful to determine whether ESD for EGC should be performed. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2020; 20: 461-466.