Mo1126 COMPARISON BETWEEN ENDOSCOPIC SUBMUCOSAL DISSECTION AND SUBMUCOSAL TUNNELING ENDOSCOPIC RESECTION FOR ESOPHAGEAL SUBMUCOSAL TUMORS ORIGINATING FROM THE MUSCULARIS PROPRIA LAYER
Junyu Zhu,Qinfang Li,Tao Chen,Pinghong Zhou
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2018.04.1887
IF: 10.396
2018-01-01
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
Abstract:Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) or submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection (STER) is widely acknowledged as an important treatment option for esophageal submucosal tumor from the muscularis propria layer. However, the clinical outcomes of ESD or STER for esophageal submucosal tumor have not been completely evaluated. The aim of this study is to compare the two different treatments. We retrospectively collected the data of 876 patients who had undergone ESD or STER for esophageal submucosal tumors from January 2011 to September 2015 in the Endoscopy Center of Zhongshan Hospital. Gender, age, tumor size, depth and shape, procedure time, complications, postoperative length of stay, and follow-up were compared between ESD and STER groups. 424 patients received ESD, while 452 patients received STER. There was no significant differences in age, gender, tumor size, depth and shape, en bloc resection rate, complications, postoperative hospital stay (p > 0.05). The patients receiving STER had apparently a longer procedure time due to closing the tunnel entrance (ESD vs STER, 23.2 ± 16.5 min vs 44.0 ± 25.8 min, p<0.001). No recurrence and death was occurred in the STER and ESD groups during a mean follow-up of 50.0 and 51.8 months, respectively. Both ESD and STER would likely be effective and safe alternatives for resecting SMTs ≤ 10mm. Accounting for safety and preventing perforation, we are inclined to STER for SMTs > 10mm. Additionally, the choice between the two procedures will also depend on the depth and shape of submucosal tumors.Tabled 1Patients' clinical characteristicsCharacteristicESD groupSTER groupP valueNumber of patients424452Mean age (SD), year51.1 ± 10.550.3 ± 10.20.453Gender, Female/Male149/275136/3160.111Location no. (%)0.107Upper6245Middle204232Lower158175Macroscopic appearance no. (%)0.188regular368378irregular5674Tumor size, mean (SD), mm1.2 ± 0.81.5 ± 0.70.078Invasion depth no. (%)0.883Superficial MP358380Deep MP6672Pathology no. (%)0.070Leiomyoma403431GIST108Granular cell tumors82Schwannoma29Clarifying fibrous tumors12Procedure time, min23.2 ± 16.544.0 ± 25.8<0.001En bloc resection rate no. (%)417 (98.3%)446 (98.7%)0.692Complications no. (%)0.436Perforation41Pneumothorax/hydrothorax86Major bleeding12Postoperative hospital stay, day2.4 ± 1.82.8 ± 1.90.099Follow-up, month51.8 ± 16.450.3 ± 15.10.112Recurrence001Data are presented as number (no.) and rate (%). Abbreviations: MP, muscularis propria; GIST, gastrointestinal stromal tumors. Open table in a new tab