Current status of submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection for gastrointestinal submucosal tumors originating from the muscularis propria layer

Nomogram to predict gas-related complications during transoral endoscopic resection of upper gastrointestinal submucosal lesions

BACKGROUND

Gas-related complications present a potential risk during transoral endoscopic resection of upper gastrointestinal submucosal lesions. Therefore, the identification of risk factors associated with these complications is essential.

AIM

To develop a nomogram to predict risk of gas-related complications following transoral endoscopic resection of the upper gastrointestinal submucosal lesions.

METHODS

We collected patient data from the First Affiliated Hospital of the Army Medical University. Patients were randomly allocated to training and validation cohorts. Risk factors for gas-related complications were identified in the training cohort using univariate and multivariate analyses. We then constructed a nomogram and evaluated its predictive performance based on the area under the curve, decision curve analysis, and Hosmer-Lemeshow tests.

RESULTS

Gas-related complications developed in 39 of 353 patients who underwent transoral endoscopy at our institution. Diabetes, lesion origin, surgical resection method, and surgical duration were incorporated into the final nomogram. The predictive capability of the nomogram was excellent, with area under the curve values of 0.841 and 0.906 for the training and validation cohorts, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The ability of our four-variable nomogram to efficiently predict gas-related complications during transoral endoscopic resection enhanced postoperative assessments and surgical outcomes.

Subepithelial tumors: How does endoscopic full-thickness resection & submucosal tunneling with endoscopic resection compare with laparoscopic endoscopic cooperative surgery?

Background and study aims  Endoscopic techniques are rapidly emerging for resection of subepithelial tumors (SETs). Submucosal tunneling for endoscopic resection (STER), endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) and laparoscopic endoscopic cooperative surgery (LECS) are current alternatives to open surgery. In this study, we aimed to compare the three endoscopic techniques. Patients and methods  Consecutive patients who underwent resection of a submucosal esophageal or gastric lesion at several tertiary care centers were included in a dedicated registry over 3 years. Demographics, size and location of resected lesion, histology of specimen, length of procedure, adverse events (AEs), duration of hospital stay, and follow-up data were collected. Results  Ninety-six patients were included (47.7 % male, mean age 62): STER n = 34, EFTR n = 34, LECS n = 280. The lesions included leiomyoma, gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) and other. The mean lesion size was 28 mm (STD 16, range 20-72 mm). The majority of lesions in the EFTR and laparoscopic-assisted resection group were GISTs. There was no significant difference in clear resection margins, post-procedure complication rates, recurrence rate and total follow-up duration between the groups. However, the LECS group had a procedure time at least 30 minutes longer than STER or EFTR ( P  < 0.01). Total hospital stay for the laparoscopic-assisted resection group was also longer when compared to STER (1.5) and EFTR (1.8) ( P  < 0.01). Conclusions  STER, EFTR, and laparoscopic-assisted resection are efficacious approaches for resection of SETs with similar R0 resection rates, complication rates, and AE rates. Laparoscopic assisted resection appears more time-consuming and is associated with a longer hospital stay.

Simultaneous peroral endoscopic myotomy and submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection for coexisting achalasia and a submucosal tumor

Co-existence of achalasia and SMT is rare. Herein, we presented a case with coexisted achalasia and submucosal tumor, who treated with simultaneous peroral endoscopic myotomy and submucosal endoscopic tunneling resection in the same tunnel.

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.

Resection of early esophageal neoplasms: The pendulum swings from surgical to endoscopic management

Esophageal cancer is a highly lethal disease and is the sixth leading cause of cancer related mortality in the world. The standard treatment is esophagectomy which is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. This led to development of minimally invasive, organ sparing endoscopic therapies which have comparable outcomes to esophagectomy in early cancer. These include endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection. In early squamous cell cancer, endoscopic submucosal dissection is preferred as it is associated with cause specific 5-year survival rates of 100% for M1 and M2 tumors and 85% for M3 and SM1 tumors and low recurrence rates. In early adenocarcinoma, endoscopic resection of visible abnormalities is followed by ablation of the remaining flat Barrett’s mucosa to prevent recurrences. Radiofrequency ablation is the most widely used ablation modality with others being cryotherapy and argon plasma coagulation. Focal endoscopic mucosal resection followed by radiofrequency ablation leads to eradication of neoplasia in 93.4% of patients and eradication of intestinal metaplasia in 73.1% of patients. Innovative techniques such as submucosal tunneling with endoscopic resection are developed for management of submucosal tumors of the esophagus. This review includes a discussion of various endoscopic techniques and their clinical outcomes in early squamous cell cancer, adenocarcinoma and submucosal tumors. An overview of comparison between esophagectomy and endoscopic therapy are also presented.

Comparison Between Submucosal Tunneling Endoscopic Resection (STER) and Other Resection Modules for Esophageal Muscularis Propria Tumors: A Retrospective Study

Background

Surgery has been considered to be the primary approach for resection of esophageal muscularis propria tumors. With the development of endoscopic technology, new techniques such as endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection (STER) have emerged for resecting these lesions. Previous studies have demonstrated that STER might be an intriguing alternative. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical value of STER by comparing it to other resecting modules.

Material/Methods

Clinical outcome and data were retrospectively collected from patients with esophageal muscularis propria tumors who underwent resection either endoscopically or thoracoscopically. The clinical data were statistically analyzed.

Results

A total of 137 patients were enrolled. They were divided into 3 groups: a STER group (27 patients), an ESD group (42 patients), and a thoracoscopic enucleation (TE) group (68 patients). There were no significant differences among the 3 groups in gender, age, pathological type of tumors, or major adverse events (P>0.05). However, the STER group had the shortest duration of hospitalization and the lowest cost (P<0.05). Furthermore, the STER group was superior in operation time and the location of tumors to the TE group. Moreover, STER outperformed ESD in the resection of large tumors (P<0.05). Although STER had the lowest en bloc resection rate, no recurrence or metastasis was noted during a mean follow-up of 22.14 months (range 3 to 60 months).

Conclusions

STER is a feasible, safe, and effective approach for the resection of esophageal muscularis propria tumors ≤40 mm. We recommend STER as a potent alternative for these tumors.

Endoscopic resection of gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors

Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) are the most common mesenchymal tumors in the gastrointestinal tract, and about 60% of them are found in the stomach. With the widespread application of endoscopy and endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), more and more gastric GISTs are being found in an early stage (with a relative small diameter and no metastasis), giving the chance of complete resection. Endoscopic resection such as endoscopic band ligation (EBL), endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), endoscopic submucosal excavation (ESE), endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) and submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection (STER), is a minimally invasive method compared with the conventional surgical approaches (open or laparoscopic), and has been demonstrated to be safe and effective for treating gastric GISTs. This review summarizes the recent advances on endoscopic resection of gastric GISTs, aiming to provide a rational management strategy for gastric GISTs.