Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Diagnostic Approach of Benign Esophageal Tumors: A Narrative Review

  • Published:
Current Treatment Options in Gastroenterology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Benign esophageal tumors (BETs) pose diagnostic challenges due to overlapping clinical and imaging features, necessitating advancements in diagnostic techniques. Distinguishing between tumors with and without malignant potential is essential to guide management. We aim to review the diagnostic approach to BETs with an emphasis on recent advances.

Recent Findings

EUS-guided tissue acquisition is the current gold standard, particularly in subepithelial lesions (SELs). EUS with fine-needle biopsy (FNB) is considered superior to fine-needle aspiration (FNA), unless rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) is available. The influence of needle size and suction technique has limited impact on the tissue sample quality. Mucosal-incision–assisted biopsy aims to improve diagnostic yield for smaller SELs and improve accessibility of diagnostic techniques. Recent studies assessing integration of artificial intelligence have shown promise in improving diagnostic accuracy.

Summary

Retrospective data shows promise for technologies intended to improve both non-invasive and invasive modalities for the diagnosis of BETs. Future research should aim to prospectively explore these strategies and include lesions throughout the gastrointestinal tract.

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

Data Availability

No datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.

References and Recommended Readings

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Ha C, Regan J, Cetindag IB, Ali A, Mellinger JD. Benign esophageal tumors. Surg Clin North Am. 2015;95(3):491–514.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Rice TW. Benign esophageal tumors: Esophagoscopy and endoscopic esophageal ultrasound. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2003;15(1):20–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Menon L, Buscaglia JM. Endoscopic approach to subepithelial lesions. Ther Adv Gastroenterol. 2014;7(3):123–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. •• Jacobson BC, Bhatt A, Greer KB, Lee LS, Park WG, Sauer BG, et al. ACG clinical guideline: diagnosis and management of gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions. Am J Gastroenterol. 2023;118(1):46–58. American College of Gastroenterology clinical guidelines for the diagnosis and management of gastrointestinal SELs with review of pertinent literature corresponding to recommendations.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Sharzehi K, Sethi A, Savides T. AGA clinical practice update on management of subepithelial lesions encountered during routine endoscopy: expert review. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2022;20(11):2435-2443.e4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Polkowski M, Larghi A, Weynand B, Boustière C, Giovannini M, Pujol B, et al. Learning, techniques, and complications of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided sampling in gastroenterology: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) technical guideline. Endoscopy. 2012;44(02):190–206.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Faulx AL, Kothari S, Acosta RD, Agrawal D, Bruining DH, Chandrasekhara V, et al. The role of endoscopy in subepithelial lesions of the GI tract. Gastrointest Endosc. 2017;85(6):1117–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hwang JH, Saunders MD, Rulyak SJ, Shaw S, Nietsch H, Kimmey MB. A prospective study comparing endoscopy and EUS in the evaluation of GI subepithelial masses. Gastrointest Endosc. 2005;62(2):202–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Alkhatib AA, Faigel DO. Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided diagnosis of subepithelial tumors. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 2012;22(2):187–205.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Khan S, Zhang R, Fang W, Wang T, Li S, Wang D, et al. Reliability of endoscopic ultrasound using miniprobes and grayscale histogram analysis in diagnosing upper gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions. Gastroenterol Res Pract. 2020;2020:1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Yamashita Y, Yoshikawa T, Kawaji Y, Tamura T, Hatamaru K, Itonaga M, et al. Novel endoscopic ultrasonography imaging technique for visualizing microcirculation without contrast enhancement in subepithelial lesions: prospective study. Dig Endosc. 2021;33:955–61.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. • Yamashita Y, Ashida R, Yamazaki H, Kawaji Y, Shimokawa T, Tamura T, et al. Comparison of 22G fork-tip and Franseen needles and usefulness of contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound for diagnosis of upper gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions. Diagnostics. 2022;12(12):3122. Retrospective observational study assessing the utility of contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS for evaluation of gastrointestinal SELs. Results indicate the contrast-enhanced EUS could differentiate GIST and non-GIST and could be particularly useful for lesions <2 cm.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. • Liu XY, Song W, Mao T, Zhang Q, Zhang C, Li XY. Application of artificial intelligence in the diagnosis of subepithelial lesions using endoscopic ultrasonography: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Oncol. 2022;12:915481. Systematic review and meta-analysis including eight studies demonstrating excellent diagnostic performance of artificial intelligence interpretation of EUS for evaluation of gastrointestinal SELs.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Ye XH, Zhao LL, Wang L. Diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound with artificial intelligence for gastrointestinal stromal tumors: a meta-analysis. J Dig Dis. 2022;23(5–6):253–61.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Minoda Y, Ihara E, Fujimori N, Nagatomo S, Esaki M, Hata Y, et al. Efficacy of ultrasound endoscopy with artificial intelligence for the differential diagnosis of non-gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors. Sci Rep. 2022;12(1):16640.

    Article  ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. • Khalaf K, Terrin M, Jovani M, Rizkala T, Spadaccini M, Pawlak KM, et al. A comprehensive guide to artificial intelligence in endoscopic ultrasound. J Clin Med. 2023;12(11):3757.Review article highlighting the clinical utility of using AI models for interpretation of EUS images for assessment of gastrointestinal SELs.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Koutsoumpas A, Perera R, Melton A, Kuker J, Ghosh T, Braden B. Tunneled biopsy is an underutilised, simple, safe and efficient method for tissue acquisition from subepithelial tumours. World J Clin Cases. 2021;9(21):5822–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Buscaglia JM, Nagula S, Jayaraman V, Robbins DH, Vadada D, Gross SA, et al. Diagnostic yield and safety of jumbo biopsy forceps in patients with subepithelial lesions of the upper and lower GI tract. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012;75(6):1147–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. • Collins K, Yocum BP, Mesa H, Cramer H, Saeed O. Comparison of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration cytology versus endoscopic biopsy for the diagnosis of subepithelial lesions of the upper and lower gastrointestinal tract: a 10-year retrospective single institution analysis. Diagn Cytopathol. 2023;51(7):434–40. Retrospective study with 10 years of data indicating that EUS-FNA is superior to standard forceps biopsy for diagnosis of gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Attila T, Aydin Ö. Lesion size determines diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA with onsite cytopathologic evaluation for upper gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions. Turk J Gastroenterol. 2018;29(4):436–41.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. •• Facciorusso A, Sunny SP, Del Prete V, Antonino M, Muscatiello N. Comparison between fine-needle biopsy and fine-needle aspiration for EUS-guided sampling of subepithelial lesions: a meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2020;91(1):14-22.e2. Meta-analysis including 10 studies comparing EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB. Demonstrated overall superiority of EUS-FNB to EUS-FNA, but non-inferiority of EUS-FNA when ROSE was available.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Takasumi M, Hikichi T, Hashimoto M, Nakamura J, Kato T, Kikuchi H, et al. A pilot randomized crossover trial of wet suction and conventional techniques of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for upper gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions. Pilone V, editor. Gastroenterol Res Pract. 2021;4913107.

  23. Lee JS, Cho CM, Kwon YH, Seo AN, Bae HI, Han MH. Comparison of diagnostic performances of slow-pull suction and standard suction in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy for gastrointestinal subepithelial tumors. Clin Endosc. 2022;55(5):637–44.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Moisini I, Amin K, Mallery S, Stewart J, Mettler T. Efficacy of endoscopic-guided fine-needle aspiration in the diagnosis of gastrointestinal spindle cell tumors. Diagn Cytopathol. 2018;46(8):663–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Lee CK, Chung IK, Lee SH, Lee SH, Lee TH, Park SH, et al. Endoscopic partial resection with the unroofing technique for reliable tissue diagnosis of upper GI subepithelial tumors originating from the muscularis propria on EUS (with video). Gastrointest Endosc. 2010;71(1):188–94.

    Article  ADS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Binmoeller KF, Shah JN, Bhat YM, Kane SD. Suck-ligate-unroof-biopsy by using a detachable 20-mm loop for the diagnosis and therapy of small subepithelial tumors (with video). Gastrointest Endosc. 2014;79(5):750–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Sanaei O, Fernández-Esparrach G, De La Serna-Higuera C, Carrara S, Kumbhari V, El Zein MH, et al. EUS-guided 22-gauge fine needle biopsy versus single-incision with needle knife for the diagnosis of upper gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions: a randomized controlled trial. Endosc Int Open. 2020;08(03):E266–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. •• Giri S, Afzalpurkar S, Angadi S, Sundaram S. Mucosal incision-assisted biopsy versus endoscopic ultrasound-assisted tissue acquisition for subepithelial lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Endosc. 2022;55(5):615–25. Systematic review and meta-analysis including seven studies assessing the use of MIAB for diagnosis of gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions. Indicated that performance of MIAB was comparable to EUS-guided tissue acquisition and performance may be superior for lesions <2 cm.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Iwamuro M, Tanaka T, Kanzaki H, Kawano S, Kawahara Y, Okada H. Esophageal granular cell tumors can be differentiated from leiomyomas using endoscopic ultrasonography. Intern Med. 2018;57(11):1509–15.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Sun LJ, Chen X, Dai YN, Xu CF, Ji F, Chen LH, et al. Endoscopic ultrasonography in the diagnosis and treatment strategy choice of esophageal leiomyoma. Clinics. 2017;72(4):197–201.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Taşkın OÇ, Armutlu A, Adsay V, Aslan F, Kapran Y. Clinicopathologic and immunohistochemical characteristics of upper gastrointestinal leiomyomas harboring interstitial cells of Cajal: a potential mimicker of gastrointestinal stromal tumor. Ann Diagn Pathol. 2020;45:151476.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. • Wu CE, Tzen CY, Wang SY, Yeh CN. Clinical diagnosis of gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST): from the molecular genetic point of view. Cancers. 2019;11(5):679. Summary and suggested algorithm for diagnosis of gastrointestinal stromal tumors using immunohistochemistry and genetic testing.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Novelli M, Rossi S, Rodriguez-Justo M, Taniere P, Seddon B, Toffolatti L, et al. DOG1 and CD117 are the antibodies of choice in the diagnosis of gastrointestinal stromal tumours. Histopathology. 2010;57(2):259–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Jiao J, Fan X, Luo L, Zhao W, Zheng Z, Chen X, et al. Efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound and endoscopic resection for esophageal schwannoma. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2023;58(8):963–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Hou YY, Tan YS, Xu JF, Wang XN, Lu SH, Ji Y, et al. Schwannoma of the gastrointestinal tract: a clinicopathological, immunohistochemical and ultrastructural study of 33 cases. Histopathology. 2006;48(5):536–45.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Cheng Y, Zhou X, Xu K, Huang Q. Esophageal lymphangioma: a case report and review of literature. BMC Gastroenterol. 2019;19(1):107.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Rasalkar DD, Chiu PWY, Teoh AYB, Chu WCW. Oesophageal haemangioma: imaging characteristics of this rare condition. Hong Kong Med J Xianggang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2010;16(3):230–1.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Chen YY, Lin CM, Chen YF. Endoscopic and radiologic appearance of giant esophageal hemangioma. Endoscopy. 2015;47(S01):E45-6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Arizono E, Tajima Y, Yoshimura M, Saito K, Itoi T. Giant esophageal hemangioma diagnosed by 99mTc-HSA-D scintigraphy following equivocal CT, MRI, and endoscopy. Radiol Case Rep. 2021;16(5):1023–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Ryu DG, Kim SJ, Choi CW, Hwang CS, Kim HW, Park SB, et al. Combination conventional endoscopy and endoscopic ultrasound can differentiate between esophageal granular cell tumors and leiomyomas. Medicine (Baltimore). 2022;101(45):e31435.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Shi Y, Chai N, Zhong L, Li L, Zou J, Xiang J, et al. Experience with esophageal granular cell tumors: clinical and endoscopic analysis of 22 cases. Dig Dis Sci. 2021;66(4):1233–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Goenka AH, Sharma S, Ramachandran V, Chattopadhyay TK, Ray R. Giant fibrovascular polyp of the esophagus: report of a case. Surg Today. 2011;41(1):120–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Pinto A, Abastado B, Cattan P. An esophageal tumor unlike others: the fibrovascular polyp. J Visc Surg. 2019;156(3):271–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Kim M, Chae KJ, Kim JH, Han YH. Giant fibrovascular polyp mimicking esophageal malignancy on 18F-FDG PET/CT. Clin Nucl Med. 2023;48(12):1091–2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Graham RP, Yasir S, Fritchie KJ, Reid MD, Greipp PT, Folpe AL. Polypoid fibroadipose tumors of the esophagus: “giant fibrovascular polyp” or liposarcoma? A clinicopathological and molecular cytogenetic study of 13 cases. Mod Pathol. 2018;31(2):337–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Marcella C, Shi R, Yu T, Sarwar S, Wang X, Liu Y. Asymptomatic esophageal glomus tumor: case report. J Gastrointest Oncol. 2019;10(5):1015–20.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Birkness-Gartman JE, Wangsiricharoen S, Lazar AJ, Gross JM. Oesophageal glomus tumours: rare neoplasms with aggressive clinical behaviour. Histopathology. 2023;82(7):1048–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Modi C, Shah A, Depasquale JR, Shah N, Spira RS. A large prolapsed inflammatory fibroid polyp of the esophagus: an unusual presentation. Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2013;9(5):322–5.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Yamamoto M, Nishida T, Nakamatsu D, Adachi S, Inada M. Endoscopic findings of esophageal gland duct adenoma resected by endoscopic submucosal dissection. Gastrointest Endosc. 2020;92(4):961–2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Nie L, Wu HY, Shen YH, Fan XS, Sun Q, Huang Q, et al. Esophageal submucosal gland duct adenoma: a clinicopathological and immunohistochemical study with a review of the literature: esophageal submucosal gland duct adenoma. Dis Esophagus. 2016;29(8):1048–53.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Wong MW, Bair MJ, Shih SC, Chu CH, Wang HY, Wang TE, et al. Using typical endoscopic features to diagnose esophageal squamous papilloma. World J Gastroenterol. 2016;22(7):2349–56.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. Iwamuro M, Okamoto Y, Kawano S, Okada H. Esophageal papilloma detected by positron emission tomography. Intern Med. 2020;59(7):1003–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA

    Alex R. Jones MD

  2. Division of Digestive and Liver Diseases, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, 1801 Inwood Rd Ste 6-102, Dallas, TX, 75235, USA

    Preksha Vankawala MD & Tarek Sawas MD, MPH

Authors
  1. Alex R. Jones MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Preksha Vankawala MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tarek Sawas MD, MPH
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

AJ conducted literature narrative review and created Table 1, PV created Figs. 1–4, and TS conducted critical revision of the manuscript and supervision. All authors drafted and reviewed the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tarek Sawas MD, MPH.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of Interest

Alex Jones, Preksha Vankawala, and Tarek Sawas each declare potential conflicts 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

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jones, A.R., Vankawala, P. & Sawas, T. The Diagnostic Approach of Benign Esophageal Tumors: A Narrative Review. Curr Treat Options Gastro (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11938-024-00443-7

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11938-024-00443-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation