Treatment of leakage via metallic stents placements after endoscopic full-thickness resection for esophageal and gastroesophageal junction submucosal tumors

Endoscopic resection of giant esophageal subepithelial lesions: experience from a large tertiary center

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Increased reports on endoscopic resection (ER) of esophageal giant subepithelial lesions (g-SELs) have emerged in recent years. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy, technical difficulty, and safety through our single-center experience.

METHODS

Seventy-five patients with g-SELs undergoing endoscopic resection were included in the training set. Clinicopathologic features, procedure-related characteristics, postprocedural outcomes, and follow-up data were analyzed. A predictive nomogram model for procedural difficulty was proposed based on the multivariable logistic regression analysis. Internal and external validations were conducted to verify the model performance.

RESULTS

The overall en bloc resection rate was 93.3%. Intraoperative and postoperative adverse events occurred in 7 (9.3%) and 13 (17.3%) patients, respectively. No recurrence or metastasis was observed. Thirty-two (42.7%) patients underwent a difficult procedure. Age (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], .915; P = .004), maximal tumor diameter ≥8 cm (aOR, 9.896; P = .009), irregular shape (aOR, 4.081; P = .053), extraluminal growth pattern (aOR, 5.419; P = .011), and submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection (aOR, .109; P = .042) were found to be statistically or clinically significant factors for predicting endoscopic resection difficulty, based on which a nomogram model was developed. Internal and external validations of the nomogram via receiver-operating characteristic curves and calibration curves achieved favorable results.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic resection serves as a promising therapeutic option for esophageal g-SELs. A younger patient age, large tumor size, irregular shape, and extraluminal growth may indicate increased endoscopic resection difficulty, whereas a submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection procedure tends to be of lower difficulty. Our nomogram model performs well for predicting endoscopic resection difficulty for esophageal g-SELs.

The efficacy of full-thickness endoscopic resection of subepithelial tumors in the gastric cardia

BACKGROUND

Gastric subepithelial tumors (SETs) may harbor potential malignancy. Although it is well recognized that large SETs should be resected, the precise treatment strategy remains controversial. Compared to surgical resection, endoscopic resection (ER) has many advantages; however, ER of SETs in the cardia is challenging.

AIM

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) for the treatment of gastric cardia SETs.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed data from all patients with SETs originating from the muscularis propria layer in the gastric cardia that were treated by EFTR or submucosal tunneling ER (STER) at Zhongshan Hospital Fudan University between November 2014 and May 2022. Baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes, including procedure times and complications rates, were compared between groups of patients receiving EFTR and STER.

RESULTS

A total of 171 tumors were successfully removed [71 (41.5%) tumors in the EFTR and 100 (58.5%) tumors in the STER group]. Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) were the most common SET. The en bloc resection rate was 100% in the EFTR group vs 97.0% in STER group (P > 0.05). Overall, the EFTR group had a higher complete resection rate than the STER group (98.6% vs 91.0%, P < 0.05). The procedure time was also shorter in the EFTR group (44.63 ± 28.66 min vs 53.36 ± 27.34, P < 0.05). The most common major complication in both groups was electrocoagulation syndrome. There was no significant difference in total complications between the two groups (21.1% vs 22.0%, P = 0.89).

CONCLUSION

EFTR of gastric cardia SETs is a very promising method to facilitate complete resection with similar complications and reduced operative times compared to STER. In cases of suspected GISTs or an unclear diagnosis, EFTR should be recommended to ensure complete resection.

Clinical outcomes of endoscopic resection for the treatment of esophageal gastrointestinal stromal tumors: a ten-year experience from a large tertiary center in China

BACKGROUNDS

Esophageal gastrointestinal stromal tumors (E-GISTs) are extremely rare and surgical resection is the recommended approach. However, surgical resection usually causes severe trauma that may result in significant postoperative morbidity. Endoscopic resection (ER) has developed rapidly in recent years and has been widely used in gastrointestinal lesions. Nevertheless, the feasibility and efficacy of ER in the management of E-GISTs are unknown.

METHODS

Retrospective data were collected from January 2011 to December 2020 in a large tertiary center of China. Twenty-eight patients with E-GISTs treated by ER were included in the study.

RESULTS

Of the 28 patients, there were 21 males and 7 females, with a median age of 55 years (40-70 years). The median tumor size was 15 mm (5-80 mm). The technical success rate was 100% (28/28), while the en bloc resection rate was 96.4% (27/28). The median operation time was 35 min (10-410 min). Sixteen (57.2%) tumors were categorized into very low risk group, six (21.4%) into low risk group, and six (21.4%) into high risk group. Pathologists carefully examined margins of each lesion. There were 11 lesions (39.3%) determined as R0 resection and 17 lesions (60.7%) as R1 resection with positive margins. The median hospital stay was 2 days (range, 1-8 days). One patient suffered from hydrothorax and required drainage, leading to a major adverse event rate of 3.6% (1/28). There was no conversion to surgery, and no death occurred within 30 days after the procedure. Imatinib was given to two patients after ER under multidisciplinary team surveillance. During follow-up (median of 54 months, 9-122 months), no recurrences or metastasis were observed.

CONCLUSION

ER is safe and effective for E-GISTs and might become an optional choice in the future. Multicenter, prospective, large samples with long-term follow-up studies are still needed.

Endoscopic full-thickness resection, indication, methods and perspectives

Minimally invasive surgery has emerged as the dominant theme of modern surgery, in which endoscopic surgery plays a key role. The technique of endoscopic surgery has evolved continuously with extensive research, improving the treatment modalities as well as expanding the indications for its use. As an active perforation endoscopic technique, endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) is mainly used in the treatment of submucosal tumors (SMTs) of the gastrointestinal tract. With decades of evolution, EFTR has gradually developed into a mature endoscopic operation. Based on clinical experience and current research, indications, techniques, clinical outcomes and future perspectives for EFTR are discussed in this paper. We performed a bibliometric study on EFTR literature and showed robust data through a brief meta-analysis on the topic.

Critical Appraisal of the Impact of Oesophageal Stents in the Management of Oesophageal Anastomotic Leaks and Benign Oesophageal Perforations: An Updated Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic placement of oesophageal stents may be used in benign oesophageal perforation and oesophageal anastomotic leakage to control sepsis and reduce mortality and morbidity by avoiding thoracotomy. This updated systematic review aimed to assess the safety and effectiveness of oesophageal stents in these two scenarios.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of all published studies reporting use of metallic and plastic stents in the management of post-operative anastomotic leaks, spontaneous and iatrogenic oesophageal perforations were identified. Primary outcomes were technical (deploying ≥ 1 stent to occlude site of leakage with no evidence of leakage of contrast within 24-48 h) and clinical success (complete healing of perforation or leakage by placement of single or multiple stents irrespective of whether the stent was left in situ or was removed). Secondary outcomes were stent migration, perforation and erosion, and mortality rates. Subgroup analysis was performed for plastic versus metallic stents and anastomotic leaks versus perforations separately.

RESULTS

A total of 66 studies (n = 1752 patients) were included. Technical and clinical success rates were 96% and 87%, respectively. Plastic stents had significantly higher migration rates (24% vs 16%, p = 0.001) and repositioning (11% vs 3%, p < 0.001) and lower technical success (91% vs 95%, p = 0.032) than metallic stents. In patients with anastomotic leaks, plastic stents were associated with higher stent migration (26% vs 15%, p = 0.034), perforation (2% vs 0%, p = 0.013), repositioning (10% vs 0%, p < 0.001), and lower technical success (95% vs 100%, p = p = 0.002). In patients with perforations only, plastic stents were associated with significantly lower technical success (85% vs 99%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Covered metallic oesophageal stents appear to be more effective than plastic stents in the management of oesophageal perforation and anastomotic leakage. However, quality of evidence of generally poor and high-quality randomised trial is needed to further evaluate best management option for oesophageal perforation and anastomotic leakage.