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.

A large multicenter cohort on the use of full-thickness resection device for difficult colonic lesions

Technical failure during colorectal endoscopic full-thickness resection: the "through thick and thin" study

Use of endoscopic submucosal dissection or full-thickness resection device to treat residual colorectal neoplasia after endoscopic resection: a multicenter historical cohort study

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

Endoscopic full-thickness resection of T1 colorectal cancers: a retrospective analysis from a multicenter Dutch eFTR registry

Current status of endoscopic full-thickness resection for treatment of colorectal neoplastic lesions

Colon Sparing Endoscopic Full-Thickness Resection for Advanced Colorectal Lesions: Is It Time for Global Adoption?

Outcome after colorectal full-thickness resection and management of recurrence

A Real-World Promising Result of Endoscopic Full-Thickness Resection: It's Time for Endoscopic Full-Thickness Resection to Be Widely Used

A Real-World Promising Result of Endoscopic Full-Thickness Resection: It's Time for Endoscopic Full-Thickness Resection to Be Widely Used.

Endoscopic full-thickness resection: circumferential cutting method

Combined endoscopic mucosal resection and full-thickness resection for large colorectal polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Concerns about the study of Yzet et al. on treatment of residual colorectal neoplasia after endoscopic resection

Meta-Analysis of Endoscopic Full-Thickness Resection Versus Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Complex Colorectal Lesions

Using Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection as a Routine Component of the Standard Treatment Strategy for Large and Complex Colorectal Lesions in a Western Tertiary Referral Unit

Monocentric experience of transforaminal endoscopic lumbar discectomy and foraminotomy outcomes: pushing the indications and avoiding failure. Report of 200 cases

Feasibility and safety of endoscopic full‐thickness resection for submucosal tumors in the upper gastrointestinal tract, including predominantly extraluminal submucosal tumors (with video)

The Efficacy of Dental Floss and a Hemoclip As a Traction Method for the Endoscopic Full-Thickness Resection of Submucosal Tumors in the Gastric Fundus.

Safety and efficacy of a modified endoscopic full-thickness resection technique for gastric submucosal tumors: a case series

Feasibility of Endoscopic Full-Thickness Resection in the Treatment of Colorectal Submucosal Tumors

Endoscopic Full-Thickness Resection (EFTR) Without Laparoscopic Assistance for Nonampullary Duodenal Subepithelial Lesions: Our Clinical Experience of 32 Cases