Cargando…

Factors associated with incomplete gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection due to misdiagnosis

Background and study aims: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is widely accepted for treating early gastric cancer (EGC); however, there can be cases of incomplete resection due to not only technical problems, but also misdiagnosis. Our aim was to identify factors associated with incomplete gast...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Suzuki, Haruhisa, Oda, Ichiro, Sekiguchi, Masau, Abe, Seiichiro, Nonaka, Satoru, Yoshinaga, Shigetaka, Saito, Yutaka
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: © Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2016
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4993884/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27556097
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-108191
_version_ 1782449214386601984
author Suzuki, Haruhisa
Oda, Ichiro
Sekiguchi, Masau
Abe, Seiichiro
Nonaka, Satoru
Yoshinaga, Shigetaka
Saito, Yutaka
author_facet Suzuki, Haruhisa
Oda, Ichiro
Sekiguchi, Masau
Abe, Seiichiro
Nonaka, Satoru
Yoshinaga, Shigetaka
Saito, Yutaka
author_sort Suzuki, Haruhisa
collection PubMed
description Background and study aims: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is widely accepted for treating early gastric cancer (EGC); however, there can be cases of incomplete resection due to not only technical problems, but also misdiagnosis. Our aim was to identify factors associated with incomplete gastric ESD due to misdiagnosis. Patients and methods: A total of 2,268 patients with solitary EGCs at initial onset underwent ESD with curative intent at our hospital from 1999 to 2008. We retrospectively assessed the clinicopathological factors by comparing the two groups of incomplete ESD cases due to misdiagnosis (cases with a positive lateral margins [LM] [Group A] or those with a positive vertical margins [VM] [Group B]) with complete ESD cases using multivariable analysis. Results: Complete ESD was achieved in 2,097 patients. The 171 patients with incomplete ESDs were divided into 109 with a positive LM and 80 with a positive VM (overlapped). Except 49 cases with a positive LM due to technical problems, a positive LM due to misdiagnosis was identified in 60 cases (Group A). Excluding 32 cases with a positive VM due to technical problems, a positive VM due to misdiagnosis was found in 48 cases (Group B). Significant independent factors (odds ratios [OR]; 95 % confidence intervals [CI]) for each group were as follows: Group A: size > 20 mm (5.4; 3.0 – 9.9), undifferentiated-type (4.1; 1.8 – 9.0), submucosal invasion (2.0; 1.1 – 3.4) and location of upper/middle (1.9; 1.0 – 3.6); Group B: size > 20 mm (3.0; 1.6 – 5.5), undifferentiated-type (3.0; 1.1 – 8.0) and location of upper/middle (2.4; 1.2 – 4.8). Conclusions: Endoscopists must be aware of these factors associated with incomplete gastric ESD due to misdiagnosis to further decrease their incidence.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4993884
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher © Georg Thieme Verlag KG
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49938842016-08-23 Factors associated with incomplete gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection due to misdiagnosis Suzuki, Haruhisa Oda, Ichiro Sekiguchi, Masau Abe, Seiichiro Nonaka, Satoru Yoshinaga, Shigetaka Saito, Yutaka Endosc Int Open Background and study aims: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is widely accepted for treating early gastric cancer (EGC); however, there can be cases of incomplete resection due to not only technical problems, but also misdiagnosis. Our aim was to identify factors associated with incomplete gastric ESD due to misdiagnosis. Patients and methods: A total of 2,268 patients with solitary EGCs at initial onset underwent ESD with curative intent at our hospital from 1999 to 2008. We retrospectively assessed the clinicopathological factors by comparing the two groups of incomplete ESD cases due to misdiagnosis (cases with a positive lateral margins [LM] [Group A] or those with a positive vertical margins [VM] [Group B]) with complete ESD cases using multivariable analysis. Results: Complete ESD was achieved in 2,097 patients. The 171 patients with incomplete ESDs were divided into 109 with a positive LM and 80 with a positive VM (overlapped). Except 49 cases with a positive LM due to technical problems, a positive LM due to misdiagnosis was identified in 60 cases (Group A). Excluding 32 cases with a positive VM due to technical problems, a positive VM due to misdiagnosis was found in 48 cases (Group B). Significant independent factors (odds ratios [OR]; 95 % confidence intervals [CI]) for each group were as follows: Group A: size > 20 mm (5.4; 3.0 – 9.9), undifferentiated-type (4.1; 1.8 – 9.0), submucosal invasion (2.0; 1.1 – 3.4) and location of upper/middle (1.9; 1.0 – 3.6); Group B: size > 20 mm (3.0; 1.6 – 5.5), undifferentiated-type (3.0; 1.1 – 8.0) and location of upper/middle (2.4; 1.2 – 4.8). Conclusions: Endoscopists must be aware of these factors associated with incomplete gastric ESD due to misdiagnosis to further decrease their incidence. © Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2016-07 2016-06-29 /pmc/articles/PMC4993884/ /pubmed/27556097 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-108191 Text en © Thieme Medical Publishers
spellingShingle Suzuki, Haruhisa
Oda, Ichiro
Sekiguchi, Masau
Abe, Seiichiro
Nonaka, Satoru
Yoshinaga, Shigetaka
Saito, Yutaka
Factors associated with incomplete gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection due to misdiagnosis
title Factors associated with incomplete gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection due to misdiagnosis
title_full Factors associated with incomplete gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection due to misdiagnosis
title_fullStr Factors associated with incomplete gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection due to misdiagnosis
title_full_unstemmed Factors associated with incomplete gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection due to misdiagnosis
title_short Factors associated with incomplete gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection due to misdiagnosis
title_sort factors associated with incomplete gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection due to misdiagnosis
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4993884/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27556097
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-108191
work_keys_str_mv AT suzukiharuhisa factorsassociatedwithincompletegastricendoscopicsubmucosaldissectionduetomisdiagnosis
AT odaichiro factorsassociatedwithincompletegastricendoscopicsubmucosaldissectionduetomisdiagnosis
AT sekiguchimasau factorsassociatedwithincompletegastricendoscopicsubmucosaldissectionduetomisdiagnosis
AT abeseiichiro factorsassociatedwithincompletegastricendoscopicsubmucosaldissectionduetomisdiagnosis
AT nonakasatoru factorsassociatedwithincompletegastricendoscopicsubmucosaldissectionduetomisdiagnosis
AT yoshinagashigetaka factorsassociatedwithincompletegastricendoscopicsubmucosaldissectionduetomisdiagnosis
AT saitoyutaka factorsassociatedwithincompletegastricendoscopicsubmucosaldissectionduetomisdiagnosis