Comparison of endoscopic versus laparoscopic resection for gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors: A preliminary meta-analysis

Long-term outcomes of endoscopic therapy versus surgical resection for 2-5 cm gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors: A population-based comparative study

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic therapy (ET) of gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) has become a viable treatment. We intended to compare long-term outcomes of ET versus surgical resection for 2-5 cm GIST using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database.

METHODS

A multicenter retrospective study was conducted to compare the long-term outcomes of patients treated with ET and surgical resection for GIST. The multivariate Cox proportional hazards models were used to identify predictors for patients survival. To balance the clinicopathologic characteristics, a 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) was utilized.

RESULTS

A total of 749 patients with 2-5 cm GIST were enrolled, of whom 113 accepted ET and 636 underwent surgical resection. Before PSM, there was no significant difference in long-term outcomes between ET and surgical resection (5-year overall survival (OS): 93.5% vs. 91.6%, P=0.374; 5-year cancer-specific survival (CSS): 99.1% vs. 96.5%, P=0.546; 10-year OS: 71.1% vs. 78.2%, P=0.374; 10-year CSS: 93.6% vs. 92.7%, P=0.546). After adjusting for the relevant variables using the multivariable Cox proportional hazards models, we observed that the ET and surgical resection groups were similar in OS (HR 0.726, 95%CI 0.457-1.153, P=0.175) and CSS (HR 1.286, 95%CI 0.474-3.488, P=0.621). After PSM, the long-term OS and CSS of patients with 2-5 cm GIST after ET and surgical resection were comparable.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that the long-term survival of patients with 2-5 cm gastric GIST after ET and surgical resection were comparable. Further high-quality studies are needed to confirm the role of ET in 2-5 cm GIST.

Clinical outcomes of endoscopic resection for the treatment of intermediate- or high-risk gastric small gastrointestinal stromal tumors: a multicenter retrospective study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Many studies of gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (g-GISTs) following endoscopic resection (ER) have typically focused on tumor size, with most tumors at low risk of aggressiveness after risk stratification. There have been few systematic studies on the oncologic outcomes of intermediate- or high-risk g-GISTs after ER.

METHODS

From January 2014 to January 2020, we retrospectively collected patients considered at intermediate- or high-risk of g-GISTs according to the modified NIH consensus classification system. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Six hundred and seventy nine (679) consecutive patients were diagnosed with g-GISTs and treated by ER between January 2014 and January 2020 in three hospitals in Shanghai, China. 43 patients (20 males and 23 females) were confirmed at intermediate-or high-risk. The mean size of tumors was 2.23 ± 1.01 cm. The median follow-up period was 62.02 ± 15.34 months, with a range of 28 to 105 months. There were no recurrences or metastases, even among patients having R1 resections. The 5-year OS rate was 97.4% (42/43).

CONCLUSION

ER for intermediate- or high-risk gastric small GISTs is a feasible and safe method, which allows for a wait-and-see approach before determining the necessity for imatinib adjuvant or surgical treatment. This approach to g-GISTs does require that patients undergo close follow-up.

Endoscopic resection of extra-luminal gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors using a snare assisted external traction technique (with video)

OBJECTIVE

The primary purpose of the study was to explore the clinical efficacy of the novel snare assisted endoscopic resection of extraluminal growing gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (gastric GISTs) using external traction, and the secondary purpose was to compare the novel snare assisted endoscopic resection of extraluminal GISTs with the standard laparoscopic procedure.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the patients who underwent novel external traction assisted endoscopic resection or laparoscopic resection for their extraluminal gastric GIST ≤5 cm in diameter.

RESULTS

A total of 111 patients (27 in the endoscopic group and 84 in the laparoscopic group) were included in this study. There was no significant difference in tumor diameter and complication rate between the two groups. The overall procedure time was slightly higher in the endoscopic group compared to the laparoscopic group (P = 0.034). However, postoperative hospitalization time (P < 0.001) and postoperative fasting time (P = 0.005) were shorter in the endoscopic group compared to the laparoscopic group.

CONCLUSION

Snare external traction-assisted endoscopic resection of extraluminal growing gastric GISTs is safe and effective, and it provides a new adjunctive method for endoscopic resection of GIST.

Comparative Analysis of Enbloc or Piecemeal Removal After Enbloc Resection of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the safety and prognosis of enbloc or piecemeal removal after enbloc resection of a gastric GIST by comparing the clinical data of endoscopic en block resection and piecemeal removal (EP) and en block resection and complete removal (EC) of gastric GISTs.

METHODS

A total of 111 (43 endoscopic piecemeal, and 68 complete removal) patients with gastric GIST's ≥ 2 cm in diameter who underwent endoscopic therapy from January 2016 to June 2020 at the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University were retrospectively analyzed. In all cases, it was ensured that the tumor was intact during the resection, however, it was divided into EP group and EC group based on whether the tumor was completely removed or was cut into pieces which were then removed. The patients' recurrence-free survival rate and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were recorded.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant difference in RFS rates between the two groups (P = 0.197). The EP group had relatively high patient age, tumor diameter, risk classification, and operation time. However, there was no statistically significant difference in the number of nuclear fission images, postoperative hospitalization time, postoperative fasting time, complication rate and complication grading between the two groups (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic piecemeal removal after en block resection of gastric GIST is safe and effective and achieves similar clinical outcomes as complete removal after en block resection.

Adaptation of endoscopic submucosal dissection techniques for endoscopic full-thickness resection: a review of key steps and technical aspects

Background and Aims

GI stromal tumors (GISTs) represent the most common mesenchymal tumors of the GI tract. Guidelines recommend the removal of histologically proven gastric GISTs >2 cm. While the conventional treatment of a gastric GIST involves surgical excision, endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) has been described as an acceptable alternative. We aim to outline how the key steps used in endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) can be adapted to the performance of exposed EFTR and discuss the variations in technical aspects between the 2 procedures.

Methods

We use a video case illustration with a comprehensive narrative to highlight the similarities and differences in equipment used and techniques in EFTR and ESD. Images and graphical illustrations are also used to describe these techniques.

Results

ESD techniques and equipment can be adapted for use in EFTR of gastric GISTs. Principles such as deep mucosal incision, the appropriate use of traction, and identification of vessels for prophylactic coagulation help to ensure a safe and efficient procedure. The main difference in EFTR is the need for general anesthesia, starting the mucosal incision as close to the tumor margin as possible, submucosal dissection around the surface of the tumor capsule, and a strong closure method for the muscle defect.

Conclusions

The equipment and techniques in ESD can be adapted to EFTR for gastric GISTs by endoscopists who are familiar with ESD techniques.

Efficacy analysis of endoscopic treatment of giant gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (≥5 cm)

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the safety, feasibility and prognosis of endoscopic treatment of giant (≥5 cm) gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (gastric GISTs).

METHODS

Data from patients who underwent surgical resection of nonmetastatic gastric GISTs in our hospital from January 2016 to February 2022 were collected. The patients were divided into an endoscopic group and a laparoscopic group according to the surgical method. The clinical data and tumor recurrence information were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Eighteen cases were collected in the endoscopic group and sixty-three cases in the laparoscopic group. There were no significant differences in age, gender, tumor diameter, tumor growth site, tumor growth mode, clinical manifestations, risk classification or complication rate between the two groups (P > 0.05). The hospitalization cost, length of postoperative hospital stay and postoperative fasting time of the endoscopic group were less than those of the laparoscopic group, while the operation time was greater than that of the laparoscopic group (P < 0.05). In the endoscopic group, the follow-up was 33.50 ± 19.410 months, and no patients were lost to follow-up. The laparoscopic group was followed up for 59.07 ± 12.964 months, and eleven patients were lost to follow-up. There was no recurrence or metastasis in the two groups during the follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic resection of gastric GIST with a diameter ≥5 cm is technically feasible. And it not only achieves a short-term prognosis similar to laparoscopic resection but also has the advantages of rapid postoperative recovery and low cost.

Impact of tumour rupture risk on the oncological rationale for the surgical treatment choice of gastrointestinal stromal tumours

Tumour rupture of gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs) has been considered to be a remarkable risk factor because of its unfavourable impact on the oncological outcome. Although tumour rupture has not yet been included in the current tumor-node-metastasis classification of GISTs as a prognostic factor, it may change the natural history of a low-risk GIST to a high-risk GIST. Originally, tumour rupture was defined as the spillage or fracture of a tumour into a body cavity, but recently, new definitions have been proposed. These definitions distinguished from the prognostic point of view between the major defects of tumour integrity, which are considered tumour rupture, and the minor defects of tumour integrity, which are not considered tumour rupture. Moreover, it has been demonstrated that the risk of disease recurrence in R1 patients is largely modulated by the presence of tumour rupture. Therefore, after excluding tumour rupture, R1 may not be an unfavourable prognostic factor for GISTs. Additionally, after the standard adjuvant treatment of imatinib for GIST with rupture, a high recurrence rate persists. This review highlights the prognostic value of tumour rupture in GISTs and emphasizes the need to carefully take into account and minimize the risk of tumour rupture when choosing surgical strategies for GISTs.

Goldilocks principle of minimally invasive surgery for gastric subepithelial tumors

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery had been tailored to individual cases of gastric subepithelial tumors (SETs) after comparing the clinical outcomes of endoscopic resection (ER), laparoscopic resection (LR), and hybrid methods.

AIM

To study the use of Goldilocks principle to determine the best form of minimally invasive surgery for gastric SETs.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, 194 patients of gastric SETs with high probability of surgical intervention were included. All patients underwent tumor resection in the operating theater between January 2013 and December 2021. The patients were divided into two groups, ER or LR, according to the tumor characteristics and the initial intent of intervention. Few patients in the ER group required further backup laparoscopic surgery after an incomplete ER. The patients who had converted open surgery were excluded. A logistic regression model was used to assess the associations between patient characteristics and the likelihood of a treatment strategy. The area under the curve was used to assess the discriminative ability of tumor size and Youden's index to determine the optimal cut-off tumor size.

RESULTS

One-hundred ninety-four patients (100 in the ER group and 94 in the LR group) underwent tumor resection in the operating theater. In the ER group, 27 patients required backup laparoscopic surgery after an incomplete ER. The patients in the ER group had small tumor sizes and shorter procedure durations while the patients in the LR group had large tumor sizes, exophytic growth, malignancy, and tumors that were more often located in the middle or lower third of the stomach. Both groups had similar durations of hospital stays and a similar rate of major postoperative complications. The patients in the ER group who underwent backup surgery required longer procedures (56.4 min) and prolonged stays (2 d) compared to the patients in the LR group without the increased rate of major postoperative complications. The optimal cut-off point for the tumor size for laparoscopic surgery was 2.15 cm.

CONCLUSION

Multidisciplinary teamwork leads to the adoption of different strategies to yield efficient clinical outcomes according to the tumor characteristics.

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.

Therapeutic Effects of 4 Surgical Approaches for Small Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors: A Network Meta-analysis

This study aims to systematically evaluate the efficacy of endoscopic resection (ER), laparoscopic resection (LR), laparoscopic endoscopic cooperative surgery (LECS), and open surgery (OpS) for gastrointestinal stromal tumors with small diameters (≤5 cm). Relevant studies were collected through Pubmed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases. Operative time, hospital stays, time to liquid diet, intraoperative bleeding, and complications were used as outcome indicators for meta-analysis. Twenty-four retrospective cohort studies with 2406 participants were analyzed. LR and OpS groups had longer operating time than the ER group. ER, LECS, and LR groups had decreased lengths of hospital stay than the OpS group. Moreover, patients in LR and LECS groups had fewer complications than those in the OpS group. Endoscopic operation for small gastrointestinal stromal tumors contributes to shortened lengths of surgery and hospital stay. This reduces intraoperative blood loss and promotes gastroenteric functional recovery without increasing the risk of complications or tumor recurrence.

Clinical outcomes of endoscopic treatment for gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors: a single-center study of 240 cases in China

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic resection (ER) gradually becomes an important treatment method for gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs). The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ER of gastric GISTs.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 240 patients with gastric GISTs who underwent ER at Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology from January 2010 to December 2019. The clinicopathologic, endoscopic and follow-up data of the patients were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

The mean maximum tumor diameter was 1.67 ± 1.00 cm (range 0.2-6.5 cm), of which 156 cases (65.00%) were small gastric GISTs (tumor diameter < 2 cm). A total of 43 patients (17.92%) had perioperative bleeding, including 40 cases (16.67%) of minor bleeding and three cases (1.25%) of major bleeding. Perioperative perforation occurred in 101 patients (42.08%), of which 51 patients (21.25%) were active perforation and 50 patients (20.83%) were passive perforation. The en bloc resection rate was 97.08% (233/240), and seven cases (2.92%) had piecemeal resection. There were three cases (1.92%) of small gastric GISTs at intermediate risk and one case (0.64%) at high risk. A total of 193 patients were followed up, and no tumor residual, recurrence or metastasis occurred within a median follow-up time of 30 months (range 1-127 months).

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic treatment for gastric GISTs is safe and effective. Piecemeal resection does not seem to be related to the patient's prognosis. Endoscopic resection can be performed if patients are willing to remove small gastric GISTs.

Comparison of effectiveness and safety between endoscopic and surgical resection for 2-5 cm gastric stromal tumors

BACKGROUND

As endoscopic resection remains controversial, this study aims to compare the effectiveness and safety between endoscopic and surgical resection for 2-5 cm gastric stromal tumors (GSTs).

METHODS

Patients with 2-5 cm GST resected at West China Hospital from March 2008 to April 2019 were enrolled. Propensity score matching (PSM) (1:1) was performed to achieve baseline data consistency.

RESULTS

112 patients were matched between the endoscopic resection group (ER) and the open surgery group. There were no significant differences in the complete resection rate (94.6% vs. 100%), the incidence of complications (25.0% vs. 14.3%), the recurrence rate (0% vs. 1.8%) and the 5-year relapse-free survival (100% vs. 97.9%) (P > 0.05). The ER had a shorter fasting time (3.5 days vs. 5 days), a shorter postoperative hospital stay (7 days vs. 8 days) and a lower hospitalization cost (3,589.16 USD vs. 5,931.24 USD) (P < 0.05). 54 cases were matched between the ER and the laparoscopic surgery group (LS). There were no significant differences in the complete resection rate (92.6% vs. 96.3%), the incidence of complications (22.2% vs. 11.1%), the fasting time (4 days vs. 3 days), the recurrence rate (0% vs. 3.7%) and the 5-year relapse-free survival (100% vs. 96.3%) (P > 0.05). The hospitalization cost (3,589.25 USD vs. 4,715.16 USD) was lower in the ER, and the postoperative hospital stay was shorter in the LS (6 days vs. 7 days) (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Although slightly higher incidences of incomplete resection and perforation were shown in the endoscopic resection group, there was insignificant difference between groups (P > 0.05). Endoscopic resection might be an alternative surgical method for 2-5 cm GSTs.

Comparable long-term survival of patients with colorectal or gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors treated with endoscopic vs. surgical resection

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

With the development of endoscopic technology, endoscopic treatment has been widely used in Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs). However, population-based studies comparing the long-term results of patients who received endoscopic treatment vs. Surgery are lacking. We used the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database to analyze the long-term survival of colorectal or gastric GISTs who underwent primary tumor resection (endoscopic therapy or surgery) in the USA.

METHODS

Patients with colorectal or gastric GISTs were selected from the SEER database between 2010 and 2015. Kaplan-Meier analyses and log-rank tests were used to evaluate the difference in the long-term survival between the endoscopic therapy group and the surgery group. We examined the association between different treatments and survival after using the multivariate cox proportional hazards model to adjust the relevant covariates. Besides, we used Propensity score matching (PSM) to overcome the different distributions of covariates between the two groups and then further compare the survival difference.

RESULTS

In total, 2355 patients were enrolled in our study, of which 1999 (84.9%) received surgical treatment and 356 (15.1%) received endoscopic treatment. There was no significant difference in overall survival (OS) between the two groups before PSM. The median OS (73.5 months vs. 72.2 months) and 5-year OS rate (85.7% vs. 81.5%) of endoscopic therapy were similar to surgical patients (P = 0.34). The median Cancer-specific survival (CSS) and 5-year CSS rate in the endoscopic treatment group were higher than the surgical group before PSM, with 81.3 months, 97.1% versus 78.8 months, 92.7% (P = 0.011). After adjusting for other clinical factors and PSM, the long-term OS and CSS did not significantly differ between those treated surgically and treated endoscopically.

CONCLUSION

Based on the American population, we preliminarily found that the long-term OS and CSS did not differ between patients undergoing endoscopic therapy and surgery.

Comparison Among Endoscopic, Laparoscopic, and Open Resection for Relatively Small Gastric Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (<5 cm): A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis

Background

Endoscopic resection (ESR) is a novel minimally invasive procedure for superficial tumors. Its safety, efficiency, and outcome for gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (gGISTs) less than 5 cm remains unclear compared to laparoscopic resection (LAR) and open resection (ONR). The current network meta-analysis aimed to review and analyze the available evidence of this question.

Methods

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched to identify eligible studies published up to July 6, 2020. The perioperative and long-term oncological outcomes among ESR, LAR, and ONR for gGIST (<5 cm) were estimated through the Bayesian network meta-analysis with a random-effect model.

Results

Fifteen studies with 1,631 patients were included. ESR was associated with a shorter operative time [mean difference, MD: -36; 95% confidence interval, CI (-55, -16)], a higher rate of positive margin [odds ratio, OR: 5.1 × 10¹⁰, 95% CI (33, 2.5 × 10³²)], and less costs [MD: -1 × 10⁴, 95% CI (-1.6 × 10⁴, -4.4 × 10³)] but similar time to resume flatus [MD: 0.52, 95% CI (-0.16, 1.1)] and diet [MD: -3.5, 95% CI (-5.6, -1.6)] compared to LAR. A higher rate of total complications [OR: 11, 95% CI (1.2, 140)] was observed in patients who received ESR compared to patients who received LAR. After excluding perforation from the total complication category, the difference of complication between ESR and LAR disappeared [OR: 0.87, 95% CI (0.22, 2.3)]. The recurrence rate [OR: 1.3, 95% CI (0.40, 4.5)] and disease-free survival [hazard ratio: 1.26, 95% CI (0.60, 2.63)] showed no significant difference between ESR and LAR. ESR was associated with better or equivalent perioperative and long-term outcomes compared to ONR, except for positive margin. A subgroup analysis (<2 and 2–5 cm) showed no significantly different results among these three procedures either.

Conclusion

ESR was shown to be a safe and efficient alternative procedure to both LAR and ONR for gGISTs less than 2 cm and within 2–5 cm, respectively, without worsening the oncologic outcomes. However, preoperative assessment of tumor site is of importance for the determination of procedures regarding the increased incidence of a positive margin related to ESR.

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.