Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Microscopic positive tumor margin does not increase the rate of recurrence in endoscopic resected gastric mesenchymal tumors compared to negative tumor margin

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The endoscopic resection of gastrointestinal mesenchymal tumors (GIMTs) is widely accepted because of its minimal invasiveness. However, one major concern is the high rate of positive microscopic margins remaining following endoscopic resection, which was thought to be related to a higher risk of recurrence. This study aimed to determine whether positive margins affect the recurrence rate of gastric GIMTs and the factors associated with positive margins.

Methods

Patients with gastric GIMTs were recruited retrospectively from January 2008 to December 2013. Clinical and pathological features, endoscopic procedure information, and follow-up data were collected and analyzed.

Results

The study included 777 patients. All tumors were removed along with the pseudocapsule without macroscopic residual (ER0), and the median tumor size was 15.2 mm (range 3–100 mm). Pathological evaluation revealed 371(47.7%) GISTs. The rate of microscopic R1 resection rate was 47.0% (443/777). In a stepwise multivariate analysis, a significantly increased incidence of R1 resection was recorded for the GISTs (OR 11.13, 95% CI 3.00–41.37). In a subgroup analysis of GISTs, a univariate analysis revealed that EFTR achieved a higher rate of R0 resection (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.31–1.00), but it was proven insignificant in a stepwise multivariate analysis. Local recurrence occurred in two patients (0.3%) during a mean follow-up time of 34.2 months. Differences in the recurrence rates between the R0 and R1 groups were statistically insignificant (P = 0.841).

Conclusions

R1 resection for gastric GIMTs is not related to a higher recurrence rate than R0 resection, and ER0 resection is sufficient for gastric GIMTs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

ESE:

Endoscopic submucosal excavation

STER:

Submucosal tunnel endoscopic resection

EFTR:

Endoscopic full-thickness resection

GIST:

Gastrointestinal stromal tumor

GIMT:

Gastrointestinal mesenchymal tumor

RFS:

Recurrence-free survival

References

  1. Bucher P, Villiger P, Egger JF, Buhler LH, Morel P (2004) Management of gastrointestinal stromal tumors: from diagnosis to treatment. Swiss Med Wkly 134:145–153

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Fletcher CD, Berman JJ, Corless C, Gorstein F, Lasota J, Longley BJ, Miettinen M, O’Leary TJ, Remotti H, Rubin BP, Shmookler B, Sobin LH, Weiss SW (2002) Diagnosis of gastrointestinal stromal tumors: a consensus approach. Hum Pathol 33:459–465

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Joo MK, Park JJ, Kim H, Koh JS, Lee BJ, Chun HJ, Lee SW, Jang YJ, Mok YJ, Bak YT (2016) Endoscopic versus surgical resection of GI stromal tumors in the upper GI tract. Gastrointest Endosc 83:318–326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Catena F, Di Battista M, Ansaloni L, Pantaleo M, Fusaroli P, Di Scioscio V, Santini D, Nannini M, Saponara M, Ponti G, Persiani R, Delrio P, Coccolini F, Di Saverio S, Biasco G, Lazzareschi D, Pinna A (2012) Microscopic margins of resection influence primary gastrointestinal stromal tumor survival. Onkologie 35:645–648

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Zhi X, Jiang B, Yu J, Roe OD, Qin J, Ni Q, Sun L, Xu M, Zhu J, Ma L (2016) Prognostic role of microscopically positive margins for primary gastrointestinal stromal tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sci Rep 6:21541

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. McCarter MD, Antonescu CR, Ballman KV, Maki RG, Pisters PW, Demetri GD, Blanke CD, von Mehren M, Brennan MF, McCall L, Ota DM, DeMatteo RP (2012) Microscopically positive margins for primary gastrointestinal stromal tumors: analysis of risk factors and tumor recurrence. J Am Coll Surg 215:53–59. (discussion 59–60)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Jain D, Desai A, Mahmood E, Singhal S (2017) Submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection of upper gastrointestinal tract tumors arising from muscularis propria. Ann Gastroenterol 30:262–272

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Lu J, Jiao T, Zheng M, Lu X (2014) Endoscopic resection of submucosal tumors in muscularis propria: the choice between direct excavation and tunneling resection. Surg Endosc 28:3401–3407

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Zhang Y, Ye LP, Mao XL (2015) Endoscopic treatments for small gastric subepithelial tumors originating from muscularis propria layer. World J Gastroenterol 21:9503–9511

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Zhou PH, Shi Q, Zhong YS, Yao LQ (2013) New progress in endoscopic treatment of esophageal diseases. World J Gastroenterol 19:6962–6968

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Sarker S, Gutierrez JP, Council L, Brazelton JD, Kyanam Kabir Baig KR, Monkemuller K (2014) Over-the-scope clip-assisted method for resection of full-thickness submucosal lesions of the gastrointestinal tract. Endoscopy 46:758–761

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Zhou PH, Yao LQ, Qin XY, Cai MY, Xu MD, Zhong YS, Chen WF, Zhang YQ, Qin WZ, Hu JW, Liu JZ (2011) Endoscopic full-thickness resection without laparoscopic assistance for gastric submucosal tumors originated from the muscularis propria. Surg Endosc 25:2926–2931

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Chen T, Zhou PH, Chu Y, Zhang YQ, Chen WF, Ji Y, Yao LQ, Xu MD (2017) Long-term outcomes of submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection for upper gastrointestinal submucosal tumors. Ann Surg 265:363–369

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Huang H, Li C, Huang W, Hu T, Lin C, Uen Y, Hsiung C, Lu D (2007) A modification of NIH consensus criteria to better distinguish the highly lethal subset of primary localized gastrointestinal stromal tumors: a subdivision of the original high-risk group on the basis of outcome. Surgery 141:748–756

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Hermanek P, Wittekind C (1994) The pathologist and the residual tumor (R) classification. Pathol Res Pract 190:115–123

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Gouveia AM, Pimenta AP, Capelinha AF, de la Cruz D, Silva P, Lopes JM (2008) Surgical margin status and prognosis of gastrointestinal stromal tumor. World J Surg 32:2375–2382

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. DeMatteo RP, Lewis JJ, Leung D, Mudan SS, Woodruff JM, Brennan MF (2000) Two hundred gastrointestinal stromal tumors: recurrence patterns and prognostic factors for survival. Ann Surg 231:51–58

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Bauer S, Rutkowski P, Hohenberger P, Miceli R, Fumagalli E, Siedlecki JA, Nguyen BP, Kerst M, Fiore M, Nyckowski P, Hoiczyk M, Cats A, Casali PG, Treckmann J, van Coevorden F, Gronchi A (2014) Long-term follow-up of patients with GIST undergoing metastasectomy in the era of imatinib—analysis of prognostic factors (EORTC-STBSG collaborative study). Eur J Surg Oncol 40:412–419

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Langer C, Gunawan B, Schuler P, Huber W, Fuzesi L, Becker H (2003) Prognostic factors influencing surgical management and outcome of gastrointestinal stromal tumours. Br J Surg 90:332–339

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Unalp HR, Derici H, Kamer E, Bozdag AD, Tarcan E, Onal MA (2009) Gastrointestinal stromal tumours: outcomes of surgical management and analysis of prognostic variables. Can J Surg 52:31–38

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. McCarter MD, Antonescu CR, Ballman KV, Maki RG, Pisters PW, Demetri GD, Blanke CD, Von Mehren M, Brennan MF, McCall L (2012) Microscopically positive margins for primary gastrointestinal stromal tumors: analysis of risk factors and tumor recurrence. J Am Coll Surg 215:53–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Cananzi FC, Lorenzi B, Belgaumkar A, Benson C, Judson I, Mudan S (2014) Prognostic factors for primary gastrointestinal stromal tumours: are they the same in the multidisciplinary treatment era? Langenbeck’s Arch Surg 399:323–332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Park JJ (2016) Long-term outcomes after endoscopic treatment of gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumor. Clin Endosc 49:232–234

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. European Sarcoma Network Working Group (ESMO) (2012) Gastrointestinal stromal tumors: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 23(Suppl 7):vii49–55

    Google Scholar 

  25. European Sarcoma Network Working Group (ESMO) (2014) Gastrointestinal stromal tumours: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 25(Suppl 3):iii21–i26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Faulx AL, Kothari S, Acosta RD, Agrawal D, Bruining DH, Chandrasekhara V, Eloubeidi MA, Fanelli RD, Gurudu SR, Khashab MA, Lightdale JR, Muthusamy VR, Shaukat A, Qumseya BJ, Wang A, Wani SB, Yang J, DeWitt JM (2017) The role of endoscopy in subepithelial lesions of the GI tract. Gastrointest Endosc 85:1117–1132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Sakamoto Y, Sakaguchi Y, Akimoto H, Chinen Y, Kojo M, Sugiyama M, Morita K, Saeki H, Minami K, Soejima Y (2012) Safe laparoscopic resection of a gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumor close to the esophagogastric junction. Surg Today 42:708–711

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Lu J, Jiao T, Li Y, Liu Y, Wang Y, Zheng M, Lu X (2015) Heading toward the right direction–solution package for endoscopic submucosal tunneling resection in the stomach. PLoS ONE 10:e0119870

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Lu J, Zheng M, Jiao T, Wang Y, Lu X (2014) Transcardiac tunneling technique for endoscopic submucosal dissection of gastric fundus tumors arising from the muscularis propria. Endoscopy 46:888–892

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Goto O, Shimoda M, Sasaki M, Kiguchi Y, Mitsunaga Y, Akimoto T, Ochiai Y, Fujimoto A, Maehata T, Nishizawa T, Takeuchi H, Kitagawa Y, Kameyama K, Yahagi N (2017) Potential for peritoneal cancer cell seeding in endoscopic full-thickness resection for early gastric cancer. Gastrointest Endosc 87:450–456

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Jeong IH, Kim JH, Lee SR, Kim JH, Hwang JC, Shin SJ, Lee KM, Hur H, Han SU (2012) Minimally invasive treatment of gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors: laparoscopic and endoscopic approach. Surg Laparosc, Endosc Percutaneous Tech 22:244–250

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was supported by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 81873552, 81470811, 81570595, and 81670483), Major Project of Shanghai Municipal Science and Technology Committee (Grant Nos. 18ZR1406700, 16411950400, and 15JC1490300), Chen Guang Program of Shanghai Municipal Education Commission (Grant No. 15CG04), and Outstanding Young Doctor Training Project of Shanghai Municipal Commission of Health and Family Planning (Grant No. 2017YQ026).

Author information

Author notes

  1. Drs. Yan Zhu, Mei-Dong Xu, and Chen Xu shared co-first authorship.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Endoscopy Center and Endoscopy Research Institute, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, 180 FengLin Road, Shanghai, 200032, People’s Republic of China

    Yan Zhu, Mei-Dong Xu, Xiao-Cen Zhang, Shi-Yao Chen, Yun-Shi Zhong, Yi-Qun Zhang, Wei-Feng Chen, Tian-Yin Chen, Jia-Xin Xu, Li-Qing Yao, Quan-Lin Li & Ping-Hong Zhou

  2. Department of Pathology, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, People’s Republic of China

    Chen Xu

  3. Department of Medicine, Mount Sinai St Luke’s-West Hospital, New York, NY, USA

    Xiao-Cen Zhang

Authors
  1. Yan Zhu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mei-Dong Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Chen Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Xiao-Cen Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Shi-Yao Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Yun-Shi Zhong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Yi-Qun Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Wei-Feng Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Tian-Yin Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Jia-Xin Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Li-Qing Yao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Quan-Lin Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Ping-Hong Zhou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Quan-Lin Li or Ping-Hong Zhou.

Ethics declarations

Disclosures

Drs. Yan Zhu, Mei-Dong Xu, Chen Xu, Xiao-Cen Zhang, Shi-Yao Chen, Yun-Shi Zhong, Yi-Qun Zhang, Wei-Feng Chen, Tian-Yin Chen, Jia-Xin Xu, Li-Qing Yao, Quan-Lin Li, and Ping-Hong Zhou declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhu, Y., Xu, MD., Xu, C. et al. Microscopic positive tumor margin does not increase the rate of recurrence in endoscopic resected gastric mesenchymal tumors compared to negative tumor margin. Surg Endosc 34, 159–169 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-06744-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-06744-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation