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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kim, Hyung Hun, Kim, Gwang Ha, Kim, Ji Hyun, Choi, Myung-Gyu, Song, Geun Am, Kim, Sung Eun
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