Clinical Outcomes of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Large Colorectal Laterally Spreading Tumors in Older Adults.

Jing,Li,Yi Qun Zhang,Wei Feng Chen,Yun Shi Zhong,Mei Dong Xu,Ping Hong Zhou,Shi Yao Chen
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jgo.2017.12.005
IF: 3.929
2018-01-01
Journal of Geriatric Oncology
Abstract:Background and Aims: The colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) remains technically challenging, especially for older patients who frequently encounter complex chronic diseases and have a loose colon. However, only limited number of studies are available for the safety of ESD in older patients with especially large laterally spreading tumors. Therefore, in this retrospective study, we compared the outcomes of ESD for laterally spreading tumors (1ST) >= 3 cm(cm) in older patients to that in younger patients. Methods: Consecutive patients with LSTs 3 cm or larger were enrolled for from May 2010-2016. These patients were divided into two groups: the younger group (<65 years) and the older group >= 65 years). The clinicopathologic findings and the outcomes of ESD procedures were compared between the two groups. Results: A total of 70 patients in the younger group and 73 patients in the older group were treated by ESD for colorectal LSTs larger than 3 cm. No significant differences were observed in the gender ratio, tumor morphological type, tumor location, and tumor size between the two groups. The en bloc resection rates were 85.7 and 89.0%, respectively, without a significant difference. The procedural time was similar between the younger and older patients (71.8 +/- 34.7 min vs. 70.6 +/- 29.5 min). The duration of hospital stay was not significantly different between the two groups (4.1 +/- 2.2 days vs. 4.4 +/- 2.5 days). No significant differences were observed between the two groups with respect to ESD-related complications including delayed bleeding, perforation, and stricture. Conclusions: ESD appears to be an effective and safe method for LST5 larger than 3 cm in older patients. (C) 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?