Abstract:Background and aims Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) has been increasingly applied in the treatment of gastric submucosal tumors (G-SMTs) with explorative intention. This study aimed to compare the efficacy, tolerability, and clinical outcomes of EFTR and surgical intervention for the management of muscularis propria (MP)-derived G-SMTs. Methods Between September 2011 and May 2019, the clinical records of patients with MP-derived G-SMTs undergoing EFTR at our endoscopic unit were collected. A cohort of people with primary MP-derived G-SMTs treated by surgery was matched in a 1:1 ratio to EFTR group with regard to patients’ baseline characteristics, clinicopathologic features of the tumor and the procedure date. The perioperative outcomes and follow-up data were analyzed. Results In total, 62 and 62 patients were enrolled into the surgery and EFTR group, respectively, with median follow-up of 786 days. The size of G-SMTs (with ulceration) ranged from 10 to 90 mm. For patients with tumor smaller than 30 mm, surgery and EFTR group presented comparable procedural success rate (both were 100%), en bloc resection rate (100% vs. 94.7%), tumor capsule rupture rate (0% vs. 5.3%), and pathological R0 resection rate (both were 100%). EFTR had a statistically significant advantage over surgery for estimated blood loss (3.12 ± 5.20 vs. 46.97 ± 60.73 ml, p ≤ 0.001), discrepancy between the pre- and postprocedural hemoglobin level (5.18 ± 5.43 vs. 9.84 ± 8.25 g/L, p = 0.005), bowel function restoration [1 (0–5) vs. 3 (1–5) days, p ≤ 0.001], and hospital cost (28,617.09 ± 6720.78 vs. 33,963.10 ± 13,454.52 Yuan, p = 0.033). The patients with tumor larger than 30 mm showed roughly the same outcomes after comparison analysis of the two groups. However, the clinical data revealed lower en bloc resection rate (75.0% vs. 100%, p = 0.022) and higher tumor capsule rupture rate (25.0% vs. 0%, p = 0.022) for EFTR when compared to surgery. The procedure time, duration of postprocedural fasting and antibiotics usage, and hospital stay of the two groups were equivalent. The occurrence rate of adverse events within postoperative day 7 were 74.2% and 72.6% after EFTR and surgery, respectively ( p = 1.000). No complications occurred during the follow-up. Conclusion For treatment of MP-derived G-SMTs (with or without ulceration), our study showed the feasibility and safety of EFTR, which also provided better results in terms of procedural blood loss, the postoperative bowel function restoration and cost-effectiveness when compared to surgery, whereas the surgery was superior in en bloc resection rate for G-SMTs larger than 30 mm. The postprocedural clinical outcomes seemed to be equivalent in these two resection methods.

Therapeutic effect of endoscopic resection for large gastric stromal tumors

Laparoscopic Resection for Gastric Stromal Tumors with Sizes Larger Than 5 Cm

Clinical Evaluation of Endoscopic Resection for Treatment of Large Gastric Stromal Tumors

Resection of the Gastric Submucosal Tumor (G-SMT) Originating from the Muscularis Propria Layer: Comparison of Efficacy, Patients' Tolerability, and Clinical Outcomes Between Endoscopic Full-Thickness Resection and Surgical Resection

Comparison between endoscopy and laparoscopy in resection of gastric stromal tumor

Comparison Between Endoscopy and Laprotomy in Resection of Gastric Stromal Tumor

Efficacy and Safety of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Large Gastric Stromal Tumors

Clinical application of endoscopy combined with laparoscopy to the treatment of gastric stromal tumors

Comparison of Effectiveness and Safety Between Endoscopic and Surgical Resection for 2–5 Cm Gastric Stromal Tumors

Endoscopic Resection of 12 Giant Gastric Stromal Tumors

Comparison of Safety and Short‐term Outcomes Between Endoscopic and Laparoscopic Resections of Gastric Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors with a Diameter of 2–5 Cm

Comparison of Treatment Outcomes Between Laparoscopic and Endoscopic Surgeries for Relatively Small Gastric Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors.

Laparoscopic Resection of Gastric Stromal Tumors:Report of 30 Cases

Safety and Feasibility of Laparoscopy-Assisted Surgery for Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors Larger Than 5 Cm: Results of a Retrospective, Single-Center Series of 1,802 Consecutive Patients.

Laparoscopic resection in treatment of gastric stromal tumor

Endoscopic versus open resection for small gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors: safety and outcomes.

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

Endoscopic or laparoscopic resection for small gastrointestinal stromal tumors: a cumulative meta-analysis

Therapeutic value of endoscopic full-thickness resection for small gastrointestinal stromal tumor in the fundus of stomach

Resection of Gastric Stromal Tumors with Laparoscopy:A Report of 25 Cases

Laparoscopic Diagnosis and Treatment for Small Intestinal Stromal Tumors