Cargando…
The Efficacy of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection of Type I Gastric Carcinoid Tumors Compared with Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal Resection
Background and Aims. Conventional endoscopic submucosal resection (EMR) of carcinoid tumors often involves the resection margin, which necessitates further intervention. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is widely accepted for removing carcinoid tumors. We aimed to evaluate the clinical usefuln...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3947882/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24693280 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/253860 |
_version_ | 1782306725912641536 |
---|---|
author | Kim, Hyung Hun Kim, Gwang Ha Kim, Ji Hyun Choi, Myung-Gyu Song, Geun Am Kim, Sung Eun |
author_facet | Kim, Hyung Hun Kim, Gwang Ha Kim, Ji Hyun Choi, Myung-Gyu Song, Geun Am Kim, Sung Eun |
author_sort | Kim, Hyung Hun |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background and Aims. Conventional endoscopic submucosal resection (EMR) of carcinoid tumors often involves the resection margin, which necessitates further intervention. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is widely accepted for removing carcinoid tumors. We aimed to evaluate the clinical usefulness of ESD with that of EMR for resection of type I gastric carcinoid tumors. Patients and Methods. The study enrolled 62 patients (37 males, 25 females; median age, 50 years; range, 40–68 years) who were treated with EMR or ESD at three hospitals; the study group had 87 type I gastric carcinoid tumors with an estimated size of ≤10 mm. The complete resection rate and the complications associated with these two procedures were analyzed. Results. The overall ESD complete resection rate was higher than that of the EMR rate (94.9% versus 83.3%, P value = 0.174). A statistically lower vertical margin involvement rate was achieved when ESD was performed compared to when EMR was performed (2.6% versus 16.7%, P value = 0.038). The complication rate was not significantly different between the two groups. Conclusions. ESD showed a higher complete resection rate, particularly for the vertical margin, with a similar complication rate. We mildly recommend ESD rather than EMR for removing type I gastric carcinoid tumors. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3947882 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | Hindawi Publishing Corporation |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-39478822014-04-01 The Efficacy of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection of Type I Gastric Carcinoid Tumors Compared with Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal Resection Kim, Hyung Hun Kim, Gwang Ha Kim, Ji Hyun Choi, Myung-Gyu Song, Geun Am Kim, Sung Eun Gastroenterol Res Pract Clinical Study Background and Aims. Conventional endoscopic submucosal resection (EMR) of carcinoid tumors often involves the resection margin, which necessitates further intervention. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is widely accepted for removing carcinoid tumors. We aimed to evaluate the clinical usefulness of ESD with that of EMR for resection of type I gastric carcinoid tumors. Patients and Methods. The study enrolled 62 patients (37 males, 25 females; median age, 50 years; range, 40–68 years) who were treated with EMR or ESD at three hospitals; the study group had 87 type I gastric carcinoid tumors with an estimated size of ≤10 mm. The complete resection rate and the complications associated with these two procedures were analyzed. Results. The overall ESD complete resection rate was higher than that of the EMR rate (94.9% versus 83.3%, P value = 0.174). A statistically lower vertical margin involvement rate was achieved when ESD was performed compared to when EMR was performed (2.6% versus 16.7%, P value = 0.038). The complication rate was not significantly different between the two groups. Conclusions. ESD showed a higher complete resection rate, particularly for the vertical margin, with a similar complication rate. We mildly recommend ESD rather than EMR for removing type I gastric carcinoid tumors. Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2014 2014-02-17 /pmc/articles/PMC3947882/ /pubmed/24693280 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/253860 Text en Copyright © 2014 Hyung Hun Kim et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Clinical Study Kim, Hyung Hun Kim, Gwang Ha Kim, Ji Hyun Choi, Myung-Gyu Song, Geun Am Kim, Sung Eun The Efficacy of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection of Type I Gastric Carcinoid Tumors Compared with Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal Resection |
title | The Efficacy of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection of Type I Gastric Carcinoid Tumors Compared with Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal Resection |
title_full | The Efficacy of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection of Type I Gastric Carcinoid Tumors Compared with Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal Resection |
title_fullStr | The Efficacy of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection of Type I Gastric Carcinoid Tumors Compared with Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal Resection |
title_full_unstemmed | The Efficacy of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection of Type I Gastric Carcinoid Tumors Compared with Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal Resection |
title_short | The Efficacy of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection of Type I Gastric Carcinoid Tumors Compared with Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal Resection |
title_sort | efficacy of endoscopic submucosal dissection of type i gastric carcinoid tumors compared with conventional endoscopic mucosal resection |
topic | Clinical Study |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3947882/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24693280 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/253860 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kimhyunghun theefficacyofendoscopicsubmucosaldissectionoftypeigastriccarcinoidtumorscomparedwithconventionalendoscopicmucosalresection AT kimgwangha theefficacyofendoscopicsubmucosaldissectionoftypeigastriccarcinoidtumorscomparedwithconventionalendoscopicmucosalresection AT kimjihyun theefficacyofendoscopicsubmucosaldissectionoftypeigastriccarcinoidtumorscomparedwithconventionalendoscopicmucosalresection AT choimyunggyu theefficacyofendoscopicsubmucosaldissectionoftypeigastriccarcinoidtumorscomparedwithconventionalendoscopicmucosalresection AT songgeunam theefficacyofendoscopicsubmucosaldissectionoftypeigastriccarcinoidtumorscomparedwithconventionalendoscopicmucosalresection AT kimsungeun theefficacyofendoscopicsubmucosaldissectionoftypeigastriccarcinoidtumorscomparedwithconventionalendoscopicmucosalresection AT kimhyunghun efficacyofendoscopicsubmucosaldissectionoftypeigastriccarcinoidtumorscomparedwithconventionalendoscopicmucosalresection AT kimgwangha efficacyofendoscopicsubmucosaldissectionoftypeigastriccarcinoidtumorscomparedwithconventionalendoscopicmucosalresection AT kimjihyun efficacyofendoscopicsubmucosaldissectionoftypeigastriccarcinoidtumorscomparedwithconventionalendoscopicmucosalresection AT choimyunggyu efficacyofendoscopicsubmucosaldissectionoftypeigastriccarcinoidtumorscomparedwithconventionalendoscopicmucosalresection AT songgeunam efficacyofendoscopicsubmucosaldissectionoftypeigastriccarcinoidtumorscomparedwithconventionalendoscopicmucosalresection AT kimsungeun efficacyofendoscopicsubmucosaldissectionoftypeigastriccarcinoidtumorscomparedwithconventionalendoscopicmucosalresection |