Long-term outcomes of endoscopic resection of gastric GISTs

Endoscopic full-thickness resection for gastric submucosal tumors: Japanese multicenter prospective study

OBJECTIVES

Early gastric cancer endoscopic resection (ER) is prominent in Japan. However, evidence regarding ER of gastric submucosal tumors (SMT) is limited. This prospective multicenter phase II study investigated the efficacy and safety of endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) for gastric SMT.

METHODS

Endoscopic full-thickness resection indication for gastric SMT was 11-30 mm, histologically proven or clinically suspicious (irregular margin, increasing size, or internal heterogeneity) gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST), with no ulceration and intraluminal growth type. The primary end-point was the complete ER (ER0) rate, with a sample size of 42.

RESULTS

We enrolled 46 patients with 46 lesions between September 2020 and May 2023 at seven Japanese institutions. The mean ± SD (range) endoscopic tumor size was 18.8 ± 4.5 (11-28) mm. The tumor resection and defect closure times were 54 ± 26 (22-125) min and 33 ± 28 (12-186) min, respectively. A 100% ER0 was achieved in all 46 patients. The EFTR procedure was accomplished in all patients without surgical intervention. One patient had delayed perforation and was managed endoscopically. GIST accounted for 76% (n = 35) of the cases. R0, R1, and RX rates were 33 (77%), 3 (6.5%), and 7 (15%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic full-thickness resection for gastric SMT of 11-30 mm is efficacious. It warrants further validation in a large-scale cohort study to determine the long-term outcome of this treatment for patients with gastric GIST.

Risk factors of perforation in gastric stromal tumors during endoscopic resection: a retrospective case-control study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Perforation is a common complication during endoscopic resection (ER) of gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (gGISTs) associated with secondary infections, sepsis, hospitalization time and cost. However, the risk factors of perforation remain controversial. This study aimed to investigate the risk factors for perforation during ER of gGISTs.

METHODS

This retrospective case-control study included consecutive patients with gGISTs who underwent ER between June 2009 and November 2021 at the Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to investigate the risk factors for perforation. Sensitivity analyses with propensity scoring (PS) were performed to evaluate the stability of the independent effects.

RESULTS

In total, 422 patients with gGISTs were included. The following factors were associated with perforation during ER: in the non-intraluminal growth patterns (all confounders adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 5.39, 95% CI 2.99-9.72, P < 0.001), in the gastric fundus (aOR 2.25, 95% CI 1.40-3.60, P = 0.007), sized ≥ 2 cm (aOR 1.70, 95% CI 1.04-2.77, P = 0.035), in the lesser curvature (aOR 0.12, 95% CI 0.05-0.27, P < 0.001), and in the gastric cardia (aOR 0.13, 95% CI 0.04-0.50, P = 0.003). The PS analysis confirmed the stable independent effects of these identified risk factors.

CONCLUSIONS

ERs of gGISTs in non-intraluminal growth patterns, in the gastric fundus, and with larger tumor size were independent risk factors for perforation. While tumors in the lesser curvature or gastric cardia were independent protective factor for perforation.

Endoscopic full‑thickness resection with clip‑ and snare‑assisted traction for gastric submucosal tumours in the fundus: A single‑centre case series

Exposed endoscopic full-thickness resection (Eo-EFTR) has been recognized as a feasible therapy for gastrointestinal submucosal tumours (SMTs) originating deep in the muscularis propria layer; however, Eo-EFTR is difficult to perform in a retroflexed fashion in the gastric fundus. As a supportive technique, clip- and snare-assisted traction may help expose the surgical field and shorten the operation time in endoscopic resection of difficult regions. However, the application of clip- and snare-assisted traction in Eo-EFTR of SMTs in the gastric fundus is limited. Between April 2018 and December 2021, Eo-EFTR with clip- and snare-assisted traction was performed in 20 patients with SMTs in the gastric fundus at The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University. The relevant clinical data were collected retrospectively for all of the patients and analysed. All 20 patients underwent Eo-EFTR successfully without conversion to open surgery or severe adverse events. The en bloc resection rate and R0 resection rate were both 100%. Two patients had abdominal pain and fever after the operation, and five patients had fever, which recovered with medical therapy. No complications, such as delayed bleeding or delayed perforation, were observed. The postoperative pathology indicated that 19 cases were gastrointestinal stromal tumours and one case was leiomyoma. During the follow-up, no residual tumour, local recurrence or distant metastasis was detected by endoscopy or abdominal computed tomography. In conclusion, Eo-EFTR with clip- and snare-assisted traction appears to be a relatively safe and effective treatment for gastric SMTs in the fundus. However, prospective studies on a larger sample size are required to verify the effect of the clip- and snare-assisted traction in Eo-EFTR.

Endoscopic resection for gastric submucosal tumors: Japanese multicenter retrospective study

OBJECTIVES

Limited information is available on the efficacy and safety of endoscopic resection (ER) of gastric submucosal tumors (SMTs) in Japanese endoscopic practice where ER for gastric tumors is extremely popular.

METHODS

We conducted this study to elucidate the current scenario of ER for gastric SMTs in Japanese endoscopic practice. Patients (from 12 institutions) with gastric SMTs who underwent ER were enrolled from the first case until August 2020.

RESULTS

We enrolled 117 patients with 118 lesions. The number of patients who underwent ER increased over the years. The mean endoscopic tumor size was 20 ± 7.2 (8-40) mm. The growth type was primarily intraluminal (90%). The mean resection and wound closure times were 58 ± 38 (range, 12-254) min and 31 ± 41 (range, 3-330) min, respectively. Complete ER was achieved for 117 (99%) lesions. Full-thickness resection rate was 44%; however, only 12 (10%) patients required abdominal paracentesis for decompression. Endoscopic treatments were completed in 115 (97%) lesions, while three lesions required conversions to laparoscopic surgery due to luminal collapse, uncontrolled bleeding, and difficulty in defect closure. Gastrointestinal stromal tumors were the most common pathology (74%). No recurrence was observed during the mean follow-up period of 4.3 ± 2.9 years. The 5-year overall survival rate was 98.9% (95% confidence interval 97.8-100%).

CONCLUSION

Performance of ER for gastric SMTs is increasing in Japan. The technique seems feasible in Japanese endoscopic practice, warranting further validation in a prospective study.

Efficacy and safety of endoscopic "calabash" ligation and resection for small gastric stromal tumors originating from the muscularis propria

AIM

We compared endoscopic "calabash" ligation and resection (ECLR) and endoscopic submucosal excision (ESE) in treating endophytic gastric stromal tumors (GSTs) ≤15 mm in diameter originating from the muscularis propria.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study and included patients who visited our hospital for removal of small endophytic GSTs (diameter ≤ 15 mm) confirmed by postoperative pathological reports between February 2019 and December 2020. Patients were assigned to the study (received ECLR) or control (accepted ESE) groups, and their medical records were reviewed. Age, sex, GST size, resection outcomes, procedure measurements, lengths of hospital stays, medical expenses, intraoperative and postoperative complications, and follow-up outcomes were documented and compared between the two groups. Propensity score matching was used to avoid retrospective biases.

RESULTS

A total of 277 patients were included in the analysis, with 135 in the study group and 142 in the control group. After propensity score matching, 119 cases in each group were finally included in the study. Compared to the control group, the study group had significantly shorter procedure durations and lengths of hospital stays, as well as reduced medical expenses. Compared to the control group, the study group also had significantly lower incidence rates of intraoperative stomach perforation, postoperative intraperitoneal infection, and postoperative electrocoagulation syndrome, as well as a lower intensity of postoperative pain. There were no significant differences in the other measurements between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

ECLR is an effective and safe procedure for treating patients with endophytic GSTs ≤15 mm in diameter originating from the muscularis propria.

Efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound in the evaluation of small gastrointestinal stromal tumors

BACKGROUND

Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) with a diameter of < 2 cm are called small GISTs. Currently, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is widely used as a regular follow-up method for GISTs, which can also provide a preliminary basis for judging the malignancy potential of lesions. However, there are no studies on the accuracy of EUS to assess the malignant potential of small GISTs.

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy of EUS in the diagnosis and risk assessment of small GISTs.

METHODS

We collected data from patients with small GISTs who were admitted to Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University between October 2014 and July 2019. The accurate diagnosis and risk classifications of patients were based on the pathological assessment according to the modified National Institute of Health criteria after endoscopic resection or laparoscopic surgery. Preoperative EUS features (marginal irregularity, cystic changes, homogeneity, ulceration, and strong echogenic foci) were retrospectively analyzed. The assessment results based on EUS features were compared with the pathological features.

RESULTS

A total of 256 patients (69 men and 187 women) were enrolled. Pathological results included 232, 16, 7, and 1 very low-, low-, intermediate-, and high-risk cases, respectively. The most frequent tumor location was the gastric fundus (78.1%), and mitoses were calculated as > 5/50 high power field in 8 (3.1%) patients. Marginal irregularity, ulceration, strong echo foci, and heterogeneity were detected in 1 (0.4%), 2 (0.8%), 22 (8.6%), and 67 (65.1%) patients, respectively. However, cystic changes were not detected. Tumor size was positively correlated with the mitotic index (P < 0.001). Receiver operating curve analysis identified 1.48 cm as the best cut-off value to predict malignant potential (95% confidence interval: 0.824–0.956). EUS heterogeneity with tumor diameters > 1.48 cm was associated with higher risk classification (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Small GISTs (diameters > 1.48 cm) with positive EUS features should receive intensive surveillance or undergo endoscopic surgery. EUS and dissection are efficient diagnostic and therapeutic approaches for small GISTs.

Risk factors for the failure of endoscopic resection of gastric submucosal tumors: a long-term retrospective case-control study

OBJECTIVE

Endoscopic resection (ER) is an effective treatment method for gastric submucosal tumors (G-SMTs), but endoscopic resection failure requires emergency surgery. The purpose of this study was to assess potential risk factors for endoscopic resection failure.

METHODS

A total of 1041 patients with G-SMT undergoing endoscopic resection were enrolled. Twenty-five patients in whom endoscopic resection failed, requiring a transition to surgery midway through the operation, were included in the failed group, and 1016 patients who received successful endoscopic resection were included in the successful endoscopic resection group. Baseline and lesion characteristics were recorded, and the differences in tumor characteristics and risk factors for resection failure of G-SMT were analyzed. Sensitivity analysis was performed to detect the stability of the indicator.

RESULTS

Of the 1041cases included, there were 25 cases (2.4%) of failed endoscopic resection. Binary logistic analysis showed that the independent risk factors included tumors originating from deep muscularis propria(OR = 14.42, 95% CI 4.47-46.52), size > 3 cm (OR = 7.75, 95% CI 2.64-22.70), exophytic growth pattern (OR = 4.98, 95% CI 1.62-15.29), endoscopist with less experience (OR = 5.99, 95% CI 1.07-12.19), and irregular borders (OR = 4.13, 95% CI 1.40-12.19). The stable risk factors were tumors size, tumor origin and growth pattern according to sensitivity analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Tumors originating from the deep muscularis propria, tumor size > 3 cm, endoscopists with less experience, an exophytic growth pattern, and irregular boundaries were found to be independent risk factors for endoscopic resection failure. To reduce the risk of endoscopic resection failure, physicians should carefully evaluate G-SMT characteristics preoperative.

Effect of endoscopic resection of gastrointestinal stromal tumors in the stomach under double-channel gastroscopy: A retrospective observational study

We aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of endoscopic resection for the treatment of gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) under single-channel gastroscopy and double-channel gastroscopy. We identified 154 patients with GISTs of the stomach who underwent endoscopic resection and were retrospectively analyzed at our hospital between May 2016 and March 2020, including 49 patients by single-channel gastroscopy and 105 patients by double-channel gastroscopy. We observed the clinical efficacy, complications, and safety of endoscopic resection of gastric GISTs, and the data were evaluated retrospectively. All patients underwent endoscopic resection successfully, without conversion to open surgery. In the single-channel gastroscopy group, 7 patients had lesions in the gastric cardia, 17 in the gastric fundus, 20 in the gastric corpus, and 5 in the gastric antrum. In the double-channel gastroscopy group, 13 patients had lesions in the gastric cardia, 34 in the gastric fundus, 46 in the gastric body, 10 in the gastric antrum, 1 in the pylorus, and 1 in the gastric angular incisure. The double-channel gastroscopy group had a shorter operation time than the single-channel gastroscopy group (59.9 ± 34.9 minutes vs 74.8 ± 26.7 minutes; P = .009 and P < .01, respectively), while they also had a lower perforation rate than the single-channel gastroscopy group (34.3% vs 51.0%; P = .048 and P < .05, respectively). No residual or recurrent lesions were discovered in any patients by gastroscopy reexamination. Both single-channel gastroscopy and double-channel gastroscopy can provide safe, effective, feasible endoscopic resection. However, double-channel gastroscopy has some distinct advantages in endoscopic resection.

Effects of Endoscopic Submucosal Excavation With Non-Submucosal Injection on Stromal Tumors in Stomach

Background and Aim

Endoscopic submucosal excavation (ESE) is commonly used to treat gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs), especially for tumor sizes within 2 cm; compared with the conventical ESE, the efficacy and safety of the no-submucosal injection (NSI) ESE remains unclear. The aim of this study was to assess the clinical efficacy and safety of NSI-ESE for gastric stromal tumors.

Methods

ESE was performed in 102 patients at our hospital between January 2018 and January 2020, and the clinical features, surgical outcomes, complications, cost of performance, pathological diagnosis, and risk classification were evaluated.

Results

All tumors were completely resected by endoscopic resection (ER), with a complete resection rate of 100%. It was achieved by ESE/EFTR (endoscopic full-thickness resection) in 49 cases with submucosal injection, and by ESE/EFTR in 53 cases with NSI-ESE. The mean surgical time in cases with submucosal injection was 25.86 ± 4.45 min, compared to the cases without submucosal injection (17.23 ± 3.47 min), and the difference was significant (p < 0.001); the exposure time of tumor, the time of complete excavation of tumor, procedure cost, and hospital stay in the NSI-ESE group were all lower than those cases with submucosal injection (p < 0.05). In the risk classification, 95 (93.1%) cases had a very low risk, 4 (4.0%) cases had a low risk, and 2 (2.0%) cases had a high risk. No recurrence or metastasis was observed during the follow-up period of 18 ± 6 months (range: 13–25 months).

Conclusions

NSI-ESE is a feasible, effective, and safe treatment for gastric GISTs; compared to the conventional ESE, NSI-ESE has the following advantages: it decreases procedure time, it lowers the risk of perforation, and it is cost-effective.

Predictors of the difficulty for endoscopic resection of gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumor and follow-up data

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) are among the most common submucosal tumors in the stomach that require therapeutic intervention. We aim to identify the predictors of technical difficulty during endoscopic resection of gastric GIST and to investigate follow-up outcomes.

METHODS

Patients with gastric GISTs were reviewed from June 2009 to June 2020 at Zhongshan Hospital. Clinical and pathological features, endoscopic procedure information, and follow-up data were collected and analyzed. A nomogram was developed and validated internally and externally.

RESULTS

A total of 628 GISTs were finally analyzed. The difficulty was experienced in 66 cases. GISTs size (2-3 cm: OR 2.431 P = 0.018 and > 3 cm: OR 9.765 P < 0.001), invasion depth beyond submucosal (MP: OR 2.280, P = 0.038 and MP-ex: OR 4.295, P = 0.002), and lack of experience (OR 2.075, P = 0.016) were independent risk factors of difficulty. The nomogram prediction model showed a bias-corrected C-index value of 0.778 and acquired an area under curve (AUC) of 0.756 on the external validation cohort. At the cut-off of 0.15, the nomogram's negative predictive value (NPV) and accuracy (ACC) were 94.9% and 79.8% in identifying non-difficult GISTs. Follow-up results showed that only five GIST patients had local recurrence after endoscopic resection.

CONCLUSIONS

Tumor size, invasion depth, and endoscopists' experience were risk factors for the difficulty of endoscopic GIST resection. Our nomogram provided a valuable tool for screening non-difficult GIST resection.

Surgical Resection Is Still Better Than Endoscopic Resection for Patients With 2-5 cm Gastric Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumours: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

Background

The management of 2-5 cm gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs) is still debated between surgeons and endoscopists. We aimed to investigate short-term and long-term outcomes between surgical resection (SR) and endoscopic resection (ER).

Methods

This study included 67 and 215 patients between 2010 and 2020 who underwent ER and SR, respectively. After propensity score matching, the clinical outcomes were compared. Individual patient information that requires special instructions is also summarized.

Results

After matching, the operation time (P=0.005) and postoperative hospital stay (P=0.005) were significantly longer in the SR group than in the ER group. However, there were no significant differences in blood loss (P=0.741), resection margin (P=1.000) or time to liquid diet (P=0.055). Statistical differences were also seen in en bloc resection (P<0.001) and adverse events (P=0.027). The recurrence rate did not differ significantly between the two techniques, and the mitotic index and ulceration were identified as independent prognostic factors of progression-free survival.

Conclusions

ER might be comparable to SR for the treatment of 2-3 cm gastric GISTs. SR is still considered the standard treatment for 3-5 cm gastric GISTs, while the intraoperative and postoperative information of ER should be recorded in detail and closely evaluated. Surgical resection is recommended if the tumour has a high mitotic index or mucosal ulceration.

Retrospective Comparison of Endoscopic Full-Thickness Versus Laparoscopic or Surgical Resection of Small (≤ 5 cm) Gastric Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors

AIM AND BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety between endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFR) and laparoscopic or surgical resection methods for gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) in size of 5.0 cm or less. Gastric GISTs are common, and resection is the most effective treatment.

METHOD

We retrospectively reviewed 216 resections of gastric GISTs in size of up to 5.0 cm at our center from 2009 to 2017.Eligible resection cases were divided into EFR (n = 85), laparoscopic(n = 64), and surgical (n = 67) groups. The clinical records, patient demographic, symptoms, perioperative data, pathological findings, and long-term follow-up outcomes were collected and compared statistically.

RESULTS

No tumor rupture or recurrence occurred in the three groups. The prevalence of complications was significantly lower in EFR (5.9%) than both laparoscopic (7.8%) and surgical group (16.4%) (P < 0.01). In EFR group, the R0 resection rate (95.3%) was significantly lower than in the laparoscopic group and surgical group (100%) (P < 0.001). The hospital cost (OR = 62.79, CI: 12.954-304.363, P < 0.0001) were significantly lower in the EFR than in the laparoscopic group. The hospital cost (OR = 39.032, CI: 8.045-189.371, P < 0.0001) and post-operative diet time (OR = 2.779, CI: 1.225-6.304, P < 0.05) were also significantly lower in the EFR than in the surgical group.

CONCLUSION

EFR was a feasible treatment for gastric GISTs of size of ≤ 5.0 cm with an acceptable complete resection rate. In addition, EFR had significantly fewer postoperative complications, shorter length of hospital stay, and lower cost.

Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumours: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Background

Gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs) are the most common mesenchymal neoplasms. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been used to remove submucosal tumours for many years. However, whether ESD can be recommended for the treatment of GISTs is still controversial. Therefore, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of ESD for treating GISTs.

Patients and Methods

We retrospectively analysed 75 GIST patients who underwent ESD in our hospital from January 2016 to December 2018, and the demographic data, clinical presentation of tumours, operative parameters, postoperative complications and length of hospital stay were analysed.

Results

Seventy-five patients successfully underwent en bloc resection, and 74 (98.7%) patients underwent complete resection of the lesions, with an average tumour size of 1.7 cm (range 0.3–6.0 cm). The median operation time was 84.8 min (range 20–180 min). Forty-two (56.0%) patients underwent endoscopic purse-string suture with no conversions to an open operation. The median postoperative length of hospitalization was 6.6 days (range 3–14 days). Out of a total of 75 GIST patients, 48 (64.0%) were considered very low risk, 19 (25.3%) were low risk, 5 (6.7%) were mild risk, and 3 (4.0%) were high risk. The median follow-up was 24.0 months (range 6–45 months). During hospitalization and follow-up, no complications, recurrence or metastasis occurred.

Conclusion

Based on our study from a medical centre, ESD is a safe and effective method for treating GISTs. However, further studies are needed.

Treatment of a Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor (GIST) Adherent to the Spleen and the Tail of the Pancreas: A Case Report

BACKGROUND Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) are the most common mesenchymal gastrointestinal tumors (GIT). Usually, they appear in patients ages 55-65 years, with no apparent difference between males and females. Their annual incidence is about 11-14 per 10⁶. They generally do not present with any prominent symptoms, appearing with the atypical symptoms of abdominal pain, weight loss, early satiety, and occasionally bleeding. Adequate surgical treatment involves sphenoid resection of the tumor within clear margins. If adjacent organs are involved, en bloc resection is the procedure of choice. CASE REPORT A 62-year-old male patient presented to the Emergency Department complaining of melena for 1 week. He underwent gastroscopy, colonoscopy and abdominal computed tomography scan, which revealed a large, exophytic, lobular mass (12.6×9.7×12 cm) of the greater curvature of the stomach. The patient underwent en bloc sphenoid gastrectomy, splenectomy, and caudal pancreatectomy. The histopathologic examination revealed findings compatible with a gastrointestinal stromal tumor located at the stomach, with low-grade malignancy (G1) and T4N0 according to TNM classification. He was discharged from the hospital on the 7th postoperative day. CONCLUSIONS GISTs are uncommon tumors of the gastrointestinal system that usually do not invade neighboring organs or develop distant metastases; therefore, local resection is usually the treatment of choice. However, in cases of large GISTs that are adherent to neighboring organs, en bloc resection and resection of adjacent organs may be inevitable.

Comparison of the treatment outcomes of endoscopic and surgical resection of GI stromal tumors in the stomach: a propensity score-matched case-control study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

We aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of endoscopic resection (ER) compared with surgical resection (SR) of gastric GI stromal tumors (GISTs).

METHODS

This study included 51 and 403 patients who underwent ER and SR, respectively, for ≤5 cm GISTs in the stomach between June 2005 and August 2017. After propensity score matching (1:1) using age, sex, tumor size, mitotic count, and comorbidities, the oncologic outcomes were compared with 48 patients each from ER and SR groups.

RESULTS

The ER group had significantly shorter hospital stay (4.4 ± 2.9 vs 6.6 ± 3.6 days, P < .001) and procedure time (38.3 ± 24.2 vs 66 ± 33.3 min, P < .001). The R0 resection rate was 62.7% in the ER group and 98.5% in the SR group. In the ER group, macroperforation occurred in 6 patients (11.8%) with a tumor located in the fundus (4/6, 66.7%) or body (2/6, 33.3%). All cases of perforation were cured with conservative treatment. In the SR group, postoperative adverse events such as stricture and leakage occurred in 7 patients (1.7%) with a tumor located in the antrum (4/7, 57.1%) or cardia (3/7, 42.9%). After matching, the overall mean follow-up period was 47.9 ± 37.8 months in the ER group and 41.3 ± 22.6 months in the SR group. No recurrence or distant metastasis occurred in either group during the follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS

ER is an effective and safe therapeutic method that might be comparable with SR for treating small-sized (≤5 cm) gastric GISTs. Selecting the resection method according to the tumor location seems appropriate.

Laparoscopic resection is better than endoscopic dissection for gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumor between 2 and 5 cm in size: a case-matched study in a gastrointestinal center

BACKGROUND

The feasibility of endoscopic dissection for gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumor (gGIST) between 2 and 5 cm in size has been demonstrated. However, its impact on short-term and long-term outcomes, compared with laparoscopic resection, is unknown. The purpose of this study was to compare short-term and long-term outcomes between laparoscopic resection and endoscopic dissection for 2-5-cm gGIST.

METHODS

A case-matched study was performed using the propensity score. To overcome selection bias, we performed a 1:1 match using six covariates, including age, sex, BMI, ASA score, tumor size, and tumor location. Short-term and long-term outcomes between laparoscopic resection and endoscopic dissection were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 210 patients with 2-5-cm gGIST were enrolled between 2006 and 2017 in our gastrointestinal center. According to the intention-to-treat approach, 165 patients underwent laparoscopic resection, and 45 patients underwent endoscopic dissection. After the propensity score, 45 pairs were balanced and analyzed. There was no significant difference in the baseline characteristics between the laparoscopic and endoscopic groups after matching. The rate of complications was significantly higher in the endoscopic group compared with the laparoscopic group (P < 0.001). Perforations occurred in 16 patients in the endoscopic group (16/45, 35.6%). The postoperative hospital stay was significantly longer in the endoscopic group compared with the laparoscopic group (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the two groups in disease-free survival or overall survival.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic resection is better than endoscopic dissection for 2-5-cm gGIST because of the lower complication rate and shorter hospital stay.

Endoscopic full-thickness resection of gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumor: a Japanese case series

BACKGROUND

Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) are potentially malignant and are indicated for resection. The standard treatment for resectable GISTs is surgery, although endoscopic resection has been reported outside Japan. This study retrospectively analyzed the results of endoscopic resection of GISTs in Japan.

METHOD

We identified patients with GISTs treated only by endoscopic resection in our institute between January 2016 and December 2018, and analyzed their clinical and pathological characteristics.

RESULTS

During the study period, 8 GISTs were resected only by endoscopy: 7 were located in the upper third of the stomach and 1 in the middle. All were intraluminal growth type. Median (range) tumor diameter was 20 (10-35) mm. All tumors were resected en bloc with a median (range) operation time of 67.5 (50-166) min. Complete perforation occurred in 5 cases, but the serosa remained in 2 and the outer layer of the muscularis propria remained in 1. The defect was endoscopically closed with clip-and-endoloop purse-string suturing (n=3), simple endoclipping (n=2), or over-the-scope clipping (n=2), and 1 did not require closure because the outer longitudinal muscle was preserved. Oral feeding was commenced on postoperative day (POD) 3 (median; range 2-4), and the patient was discharged on POD 6 (median; range 4-11). No serious adverse event developed after the procedures.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic resection for selected cases of small intraluminal GISTs is feasible, making it a viable alternative treatment option to laparoscopic surgery.

Endoscopic Removal of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors in the Stomach: A Single-Center Experience

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic removal of GISTs (gastrointestinal stromal tumors) is recently recognized, but less is known about its efficacy and safety. This study is aimed at assessing the feasibility, clinical efficacy, and safety of the endoscopic removal of gastric GISTs.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Endoscopic removal (ER) of GISTs was performed in 134 patients at our hospital between January 2015 and January 2019. The clinical features, surgical outcomes, complications, pathological diagnosis, and risk classification were evaluated retrospectively.

RESULTS

ER was successful in 131 cases (98%), including 58 by ESD (endoscopic submucosal dissection), 43 by ESE (endoscopic submucosal excavation), 25 by EFTR (endoscopic full-thickness resection), and 5 by STER (submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection). In addition, GISTs of two cases were resected using LECS (laparoscopic and luminal endoscopic cooperative surgery) for the extraluminal and intraluminal growth pattern. The average tumor size was 1.89 ± 1.25 cm (range: 0.5-6.0 cm). Of these patients, 26 cases had a large tumor size (range: 2.0-6.0 cm), and endoscopic removal was successful in all of them. During the procedure, endoclips were used to close the perforation in all cases, without conversion to open surgery. The average length of hospital stay was 5.50 ± 2.15 days (range: 3-10 days). In the risk classification, 106 (79.7%) were of a very low risk, 25 (18.8%) of a low risk, and 2 (1.5%) of a moderate risk. The moderate-risk cases were treated with imatinib mesylate after ER. No recurrence or metastasis was observed during the follow-up period of 23 ± 8 months (range: 3-48 months).

CONCLUSIONS

The endoscopic treatment is feasible, effective, and safe for gastric GISTs, and individualized choice of approaches is recommended for GISTs.

Multiband mucosectomy versus endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic submucosal excavation for GI submucosal tumors: short and long term follow-up

AIMS

To evaluate the short- and long-term outcomes of 3 different endoscopic dissection techniques for upper gastrointestinal (GI) submucosal tumours (SMTs).

METHODS

Data for 135 patients withGI SMTs who underwent multiband mucosectomy (MBM), endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), or endoscopic submucosal excavation (ESE) were retrospectively assessed. The en bloc resection rate, endoscopic complete resection rate, operation time, potential complications and local recurrence rate were compared.

RESULTS

No significant differences were observed in the rate of endoscopic complete resections and pathologic complete resections among the three groups. For SMTs > 15 mm in width, the lowest en bloc resection rate was found for MBM (P = 0.000). MBM was also associated with the shortest procedure time, lowest perforation rate and lowest rate of major bleeding. ESE was the most effective procedure for muscularis propria (MP) lesions but was associated with the longest operation time (P < 0.01). The ESD and ESE groups had similar perforation rates (P > 0.05). No differences were observed in 4-year local recurrence rates among the groups (P = 0.945).

CONCLUSIONS

MBM is a simple and effective method for the treatment of small SMTs and achieves clinical success rates similar to those of ESD and ESE. However, ESD and ESE are preferable for larger and deep lesions and are associated with a longer operation time. Nonetheless, all 3 techniques resulted in a low 4-year local recurrence rate. Large-scale randomized clinical trials are needed to further investigate these results.

Endoscopic full-thickness resection for a gastrointestinal stromal tumor in a liver transplant recipient: A case report

RATIONALE

With the development of endoscopic technique and the improvement of available accessories, endoscopic therapy became to play an important role in the management of gastrointestinal submucosal tumors (SMTs).

PATIENTS CONCERNS

A gastric SMT which was suspected to be gastrointestinal stroma tumor (GIST) was diagnosed in a liver transplant recipient who received transplanted operation 11 months ago.

DIAGNOSIS

gastric SMT, post-liver transplantation INTERVENTIONS:: Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFR) was preformed to remove the tumor. The operation time was 50 minutes and oral immunosuppressant drug was not interrupted in the postoperative period.

OUTCOMES

The clinical course was uneventful and slightly elevated liver enzyme was observed on the fourth day after operation. The pathological diagnosis was GIST with complete capsule.

LESSONS

Our successful experience showed that EFR is a feasible, safe and efficacious treatment for small (<2 cm) gastric GIST in liver transplant recipients, providing the advantages of little damage, short operative time, stable graft function, without compromising postoperative outcomes.

Endoscopic resection for subepithelial lesions-pure endoscopic full-thickness resection and submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection

Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) and submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection (STER) are the frontier of therapeutic endoscopic. These two methods rely on the skillset and equipment of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) while going beyond the boundaries of the gastrointestinal lumen. They are both representatives of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery, with STER being a direct off-shoot of peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM). Both techniques are designed for the removal of gastrointestinal tumors originating from the muscularis propria but tend to be used in different organs and come with respective challenges. In this review we will go over the history, indication, technique and literature of these two techniques.

Clinical evaluation of endoscopic resection for treatment of large gastric stromal tumors

BACKGROUND

Gastric stromal tumor is a digestive tract mesenchymal tumor with malignant potential, and endoscopic techniques have been widely used in the treatment of gastric stromal tumors, but there is still controversy over their use for large gastric stromal tumors (≥ 3 cm).

AIM

To evaluate the clinical long-term efficacy and safety of endoscopic resection for large (≥ 3 cm) gastric stromal tumors.

METHODS

All patients who underwent endoscopic resection or surgery at our hospital from 2012 to 2017 for pathologically confirmed gastric stromal tumor with a maximum diameter of ≥ 3 cm were collected. The clinical data, histopathologic characteristics of the tumors, and long-term outcomes were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 261 patients were included, including 37 patients in the endoscopy group and 224 patients in the surgical group. In the endoscopy group, the maximum tumor diameter was 3-8 cm; the male: Female ratio was 21/16; 34 cases had low-risk tumors, 3 had intermediate-risk, and 0 had high-risk; the mean follow-up time was 30.29 ± 19.67 mo, no patient was lost to follow-up, and no patient received chemotherapy after operation; two patients with recurrence had low-risk stromal tumors, and neither had complete resection under endoscopy. In the surgical group, the maximum tumor diameter was 3-22 cm; the male: Female ratio was 121/103; 103 cases had low-risk tumors, 75 had intermediate-risk, and 46 had high-risk; the average follow-up time was 38.83 ± 21.50 mo, 53 patients were lost to follow-up, and 8 patients had recurrence after operation (6 cases had high-risk tumors, 1 had intermediate-risk, and 1 had low-risk). The average tumor volume of the endoscopy group was 26.67 ± 26.22 cm³ (3.75-120), all of which were less than 125 cm³. The average volume of the surgical group was 273.03 ± 609.74 cm³ (7-4114). Among all patients with a tumor volume < 125 cm³, 7 with high-risk stromal tumors in the surgical group (37.625 cm³ to 115.2 cm³) accounted for 3.8% (7/183); of those with a tumor volume < 125 cm³, high-risk patients accounted for 50% (39/78). We found that 57.1% (12/22) of patients with high-risk stromal tumors also had endoscopic surface ulcer bleeding and tumor liquefaction on ultrasound or abdominal computed tomography; the ratio of tumors positive for both in high-risk stromal tumors with a volume < 125 cm³ was 60% (3/5).

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic treatment is safe for 95.5% of patients with gastric stromal tumors with a tumor diameter ≥ 3 cm and a volume of < 125 cm³ without endoscopic surface ulcer bleeding or CT liquefaction.

Per oral endoscopic tumor (POET) resection for treatment of upper gastrointestinal subepithelial tumors

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic submucosal tunneling has evolved to allow endoscopic resection of subepithelial tumors of gastrointestinal tract without full-thickness perforation. This study aimed to investigate safety and efficacy of submucosal tunnel resection for these tumors.

METHOD

Patients with subepithelial tumors (SET) located in esophagus, gastric cardia, lesser curvature, and antrum were recruited. The size of tumor was limited to < 40 mm. The procedures were performed under general anesthesia. A mucosal entrance was created 2 cm proximal to the SET after submucosal injection. Submucosal tunnel was then extended and the tumor was dissected and mobilized with intact overlying mucosa. After complete dissection, the tumors would be retrieved per orally and mucosal entrance closed by endoclips.

RESULTS

From June 2012 to December 2016, 51 patients with subepithelial tumors received POET. 39 patients had SET in stomach, 11 located in esophagus, and 1 in duodenum. The mean operative time was 90.46 ± 46.49 min, while the mean size of the tumors was 20.71 ± 14.05 mm. The POET was converted to endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) in three patients with gastric subepithelial tumors located at greater curvature. The overall complication rate was 4.0%, and there was no bleeding, mucosal dehiscence, or leakage. The time to resume diet was 1.7 days, while the average hospital stay was 3.2 ± 1.0 days. The mean follow-up period was 19 ± 16 months, and only 1 patient developed recurrence of leiomyoma.

CONCLUSION

Per oral endoscopic tumor resection is safe and effective treatment for esophageal and gastric SET located at cardia, lesser curvature, and antrum. Currently, POET for treatment of upper GI SET is limited by the size and location of the tumor.

Endoscopic full-thickness resection for gastrointestinal submucosal tumors

Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) is a "changing-concept" endoscopic resection technique, which safely allows resecting deep submucosal tumors (SMTs) in the gastrointestinal (GI) wall. It's a highly promising endoscopic procedure that allows full-thickness excision of a small piece of the complete GI wall by using only a flexible endoscope. EFTR is a meeting point between surgery and endoscopy and probably the onset of many prospective combined minimally invasive therapeutic techniques that science will explore. In this review, use of the EFTR technique for gastrointestinal SMTs is highlighted, focusing on some technical aspects, indications, contraindications and outcomes.

Complications, Implications, and Prevention of Electrosurgical Injuries: Corner Stone of Diathermy Use for Junior Surgical Trainees

Diathermy is commonly used in modern-day surgery. The incidence of electrosurgical injuries related to diathermy is under reported, as it is difficult to ascertain the true impact on both patient and healthcare professionals. As junior surgical trainees, understanding of the mechanism and biophysics of the electrosurgical tools enables safer usage and contributes to improved outcome. Careful use of electrosurgical tools during operation and appropriate communication amongst staff members are pivotal to a safe surgical outcome. Here, we discuss the causes and risk factors regarding electrosurgical complications along with suggestions to ensure safe practice, focusing on commonly neglected areas.