Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Safety and efficacy of surgical and endoscopic resection in the treatment of duodenal subepithelial lesions

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Duodenal subepithelial lesions (D-SELs) are rare and their resection is challenging. Unfortunately, data on surgical and endoscopic resection of D-SELs are scarce. This study aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of surgical resection and endoscopic resection (ER) for D-SELs.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed clinical data of patients with non-ampullary D-SELs who underwent ER or surgery and compared the outcomes between ER and surgery with no/low-risk SELs over 15 mm from March 2010 to August 2020. Clinicopathologic findings, procedure-related parameters, and follow-up data were analyzed.

Results

A total of 107 patients (108 lesions) were enrolled; 52 patients (53 lesions) received ER and 55 patients (55 lesions) received surgery. In ER group, en bloc resection rate and R0 resection rate were 94 and 89%, respectively. Major adverse events rate was 6%. One (2%) patient experienced local recurrence. In surgery group, R0 resection was achieved in all cases. Major adverse events rate was 20%. Recurrence rate and distant metastases rate were 4 and 8%, respectively. One (2%) patient died from septicemia during follow-up. Thirty-three patients in each group were enrolled in the comparison. There were no significant differences in age, sex, lesion size and location (P > 0.05). More histologically GISTs and muscularis propria-originated lesions were treated by surgery (P < 0.05). ER was significantly associated with a shorter operation time, shorter hospital stay, lower cost, less estimated blood loss, and lower major adverse events rate compared to the surgery group (P < 0.05). However, R0 resection rate, mortality, recurrence rate, and metastases rate were not significant different (P > 0.05).

Conclusions

ER is an effective and safe treatment modality for selected patients with non-ampullary D-SELs by expert endoscopists. Surgery is a radical method for D-SELs that should be reserved for D-SELs not amenable to ER.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Cho JW, Korean ESD Study Group (2016) Current guidelines in the management of upper gastrointestinal subepithelial tumors. Clinical endoscopy 49:235–240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Reddymasu SC, Oropeza-Vail M, Pakseresht K et al (2012) Are endoscopic ultrasonography imaging characteristics reliable for the diagnosis of small upper gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions? J Clin Gastroenterol 46:42–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Gaspar JP, Stelow EB, Wang AY (2016) Approach to the endoscopic resection of duodenal lesions. World J Gastroenterol 22:600–617

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Delle Fave G, O’Toole D, Sundin A et al (2016) ENETS consensus guidelines update for gastroduodenal neuroendocrine neoplasms. Neuroendocrinology 103:119–124

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Shamali A, McCrudden R, Bhandari P et al (2016) Pancreaticoduodenectomy for nonampullary duodenal lesions: indications and results. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 28:1388–1393

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Lu C, Jin W, Mou Y et al (2020) Optimal laparoscopic management and oncological outcomes of gastrointestinal stromal tumors in duodenum: pancreaticoduodenectomy or pancreas-sparing duodenectomy? Cancer Manag Res 12:4725–4734

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Dasari BVM, Al-Shakhshir S, Pawlik TM et al (2018) Outcomes of surgical and endoscopic resection of duodenal neuroendocrine tumours (NETs): a systematic review of the literature. J Gastrointest Surg 22:1652–1658

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Zhou Y, Wang X, Si X et al (2020) Surgery for duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumor: a systematic review and meta-analysis of pancreaticoduodenectomy versus local resection. Asian J Surg 43:1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Du H, Ning L, Li S et al (2020) Diagnosis and treatment of duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumors. Clin Transl Gastroenterol 11:e00156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Cameron JL, Riall TS, Coleman J et al (2006) One thousand consecutive pancreaticoduodenectomies. Ann Surg 244:10–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Shen Z, Chen P, Du N et al (2019) Pancreaticoduodenectomy versus limited resection for duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Surg 19:121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Bartel MJ, Puri R, Brahmbhatt B et al (2018) Endoscopic and surgical management of nonampullary duodenal neoplasms. Surg Endosc 32:2859–2869

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Kim TW, Kim GH, Park DY et al (2017) Endoscopic resection for duodenal subepithelial tumors: a single-center experience. Surg Endosc 31:1936–1946

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Ye LP, Mao XL, Zheng HH et al (2017) Safety of endoscopic resection for duodenal subepithelial lesions with wound closure using clips and an endoloop: an analysis of 68 cases. Surg Endosc 31:1070–1077

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Lee SW, Sung JK, Cho YS et al (2019) Comparisons of therapeutic outcomes in patients with nonampullary duodenal neuroendocrine tumors (NADNETs): a multicenter retrospective study. Medicine 98:e16154–e16154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Ren Z, Lin S-L, Zhou P-H et al (2019) Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) without laparoscopic assistance for nonampullary duodenal subepithelial lesions: our clinical experience of 32 cases. Surg Endosc 33:3605–3611

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Gincul R, Ponchon T, Napoleon B et al (2016) Endoscopic treatment of sporadic small duodenal and ampullary neuroendocrine tumors. Endoscopy 48:979–986

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240:205–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Tan Y, Tang X, Guo T et al (2017) Comparison between submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection and endoscopic full-thickness resection for gastric stromal tumors originating from the muscularis propria layer. Surg Endosc 31:3376–3382

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Chok A-Y, Koh Y-X, Ow MYL et al (2014) A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing pancreaticoduodenectomy versus limited resection for duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumors. Ann Surg Oncol 21:3429–3438

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Joensuu H (2008) Risk stratification of patients diagnosed with gastrointestinal stromal tumor. Hum Pathol 39:1411–1419

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Li C, Chu Y, Lv L et al (2021) Safety and efficacy of endoscopic resection for the treatment of duodenal subepithelial lesions. J Gastrointest Oncol 12:856–863

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Zhang H, Liu Q (2020) Prognostic indicators for gastrointestinal stromal tumors: a review. Trans Oncol 13:100812

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Zhong Y, Deng M, Liu B et al (2013) Primary gastrointestinal stromal tumors: current advances in diagnostic biomarkers, prognostic factors and management of its duodenal location. Intractable Rare Dis Res 2:11–17

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Liu Z, Zheng G, Liu J et al (2018) Clinicopathological features, surgical strategy and prognosis of duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumors: a series of 300 patients. BMC Cancer 18:563

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Gastroenterology, The Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, No. 139 Middle Renmin Road, Changsha, Hunan, 410011, P.R. China

    Chen Li, Chengbai Liang, Xuehong Wang, Meixian Le, Deliang Liu & Yuyong Tan

  2. Research Center of Digestive Disease, Central South University, No. 139 Middle Renmin Road, Changsha, Hunan, 410011, P.R. China

    Chen Li, Chengbai Liang, Xuehong Wang, Meixian Le, Deliang Liu & Yuyong Tan

  3. Department of Geriatrics, The Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, 410011, Hunan, China

    Chen Li

  4. Institute of Aging and Age-Related Disease Research, Central South University, Changsha, 410011, Hunan, China

    Chen Li

Authors
  1. Chen Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chengbai Liang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Xuehong Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Meixian Le
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Deliang Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Yuyong Tan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

(I) Conception and design: CL, DL, and YT, (II) Analysis and interpretation of the data: CL, CL, XW, and ML, (III) Drafting of the article: CL and YT, (IV) Critical revision of the article for important intellectual content: CL, DL, and YT, (V) Final approval of manuscript: All authors.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Deliang Liu or Yuyong Tan.

Ethics declarations

Disclosures

Drs. Chen Li, Chengbai Liang, Xuehong Wang, Meixian Le, Deliang Liu, and Yuyong Tan have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

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

Li, C., Liang, C., Wang, X. et al. Safety and efficacy of surgical and endoscopic resection in the treatment of duodenal subepithelial lesions. Surg Endosc 36, 4145–4153 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-021-08740-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-021-08740-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation