Cargando…
Comparison of the clinical and prognosis risk factors between endoscopic resection and radical gastrectomy for early-stage gastric cancer
AIM: This study aimed to explore the efficacy and safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection/endoscopic mucosal resection (ESD/EMR), laparoscopic-assisted radical gastrectomy (LARG), and open radical gastrectomy (ORG) in early-stage gastric cancer. METHODS: A total of 417 patients with early-stage g...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10176697/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37173790 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12957-023-03018-5 |
Sumario: | AIM: This study aimed to explore the efficacy and safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection/endoscopic mucosal resection (ESD/EMR), laparoscopic-assisted radical gastrectomy (LARG), and open radical gastrectomy (ORG) in early-stage gastric cancer. METHODS: A total of 417 patients with early-stage gastric cancer who were admitted in two hospitals from January 1, 2014 to July 31, 2017 were selected; the patients were divided into the ESD/EMR group (139 cases), LARG group (108 cases), and ORG group (170 cases) according to the operation methods used. The baseline data, economic cost of health, oncologic characteristics, postoperative complications, 5-year overall survival and disease-free survival, and risk factors of death were compared and analyzed. RESULTS: No significant difference was observed in the baseline data among the three patient groups (P > 0.05). The total hospitalization days, operation time, postoperative fluid intake time, hospitalization expenses, and proportion of antibiotic use rate in the ESD/EMR group were lesser than those in other groups (P < 0.05). The LARG group has a longer operation time and higher hospitalization expenses compared with the ORG group (P < 0.05), but the total hospitalization days, postoperative fluid intake time, proportion of antibiotic use, and lung infection status were consistent. The ESD/EMR group had a lower incidence of incision site infection and postoperative abdominal distension compared with that of the surgery groups (P < 0.05). Five patients required radical surgery after undergoing ESD/EMR (The patients had residual tissue margin cancer), while none of the patients had switched to ORG during LARG. Surgery had advantages over ESD/EMR in terms of lymph node dissection (P < 0.05). No significant differences were observed in the postoperative complications such as upper gastrointestinal bleeding, perforation, incision hernia, reoperation and recurrence (P > 0.05). The 5-year postoperative survival rates of patients in the three groups were 94.2% (ESD/EMR), 93.5% (LARG), and 94.7% (ORG), respectively, with no significant differences (P > 0.05). The binary logistics multivariate analysis showed that the tumor size, invasion depth, vascular invasion, and differentiated degree were risk factors for death in patients with gastric cancer. CONCLUSIONS: No significant difference was observed between ESD/EMR and radical surgery. However, standardized criteria for excluding metastatic lymph nodes should be established to promote ESD/EMR. |
---|