Endoscopic submucosal dissection for gastric indefinite for neoplasia: which lesions should be resected?
- 85 Downloads
Background and study aims
The management plan for gastric indefinite for neoplasia is undetermined, and endoscopic forceps biopsy might be inconclusive in ascertaining whether a resection is required. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for gastric indefinite for neoplasia and to identify the factors highly predictive of true neoplasia.
Patients and methods
This retrospective study was conducted in a single, tertiary, referral hospital between November 2008 and December 2015. A total of 109 gastric indefinite for neoplasia lesions from endoscopic forceps biopsy that were resected by ESD were included in the study. The clinical outcomes and endoscopic factors for prediction of true neoplasia were analyzed.
A total of 99 patients (90.8%) were diagnosed with definite neoplasia after ESD and were classified as category 3 (n = 42), category 4 (n = 50), and category 5 (n = 7) according to the revised Vienna classification. The mean age of the patients was 65.8 ± 9.8 years. The mean lesion size was 10.7 ± 6.1 mm. The patient population predominantly consisted of male patients (70.6%). The en bloc and complete endoscopic resection rates were 98.2% and 94.5%, respectively. Factors associated with true neoplastic lesions were male sex (odds ratio [OR] 8.596, p = 0.008) and lesion size ≥ 5 mm (OR 11.355, p = 0.003). Factors associated with category 4–5 were male sex (OR 3.165, p = 0.021) and erosive change (OR 2.841, p = 0.031).
Endoscopic resection for indefinite for neoplasia with larger lesions size and erosive changes, especially in males, should be considered when possible.
KeywordsNeoplasia Biopsy Endoscopic submucosal dissection Gastric cancer
Hyeong Seok Nam and Cheol Woong Choi share first authorship.
Compliance with ethical standards
HS Nam, CW Choi, SJ Kim, DH Kang, HW Kim, SB Park, and DG Ryu have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.
Written informed consent was obtained from all patients prior to the procedure. The study was approved by the ethics committee of the Institutional Review Board.
- 1.Schlemper RJ, Riddell RH, Kato Y, Borchard F, Cooper HS, Dawsey SM, Dixon MF, Fenoglio-Preiser CM, Flejou JF, Geboes K, Hattori T, Hirota T, Itabashi M, Iwafuchi M, Iwashita A, Kim YI, Kirchner T, Klimpfinger M, Koike M, Lauwers GY, Lewin KJ, Oberhuber G, Offner F, Price AB, Rubio CA, Shimizu M, Shimoda T, Sipponen P, Solcia E, Stolte M, Watanabe H, Yamabe H (2000) The Vienna classification of gastrointestinal epithelial neoplasia. Gut 47:251–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Jeon HK, Ryu HY, Cho MY, Kim HS, Kim JW, Park HJ, Kim MY, Baik SK, Kwon SO, Park SY, Won SH (2014) A randomized trial to determine the diagnostic accuracy of conventional vs. jumbo forceps biopsy of gastric epithelial neoplasias before endoscopic submucosal dissection; open-label study. Gastric Cancer 17:661–668CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Committee ASoP, Evans JA, Chandrasekhara V, Chathadi KV, Decker GA, Early DS, Fisher DA, Foley K, Hwang JH, Jue TL, Lightdale JR, Pasha SF, Sharaf R, Shergill AK, Cash BD, DeWitt JM (2015) The role of endoscopy in the management of premalignant and malignant conditions of the stomach. Gastrointest Endosc 82:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar