Efficacy and safety of endoscopic resection for gastric subepithelial tumors.

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 107-107
Author(s):  
Kyoungwon Jung ◽  
Ji Yong Ahn ◽  
Do Hoon Kim ◽  
Eun Jeong Gong ◽  
Charles J. Cho ◽  
...  

107 Background: Because small gastric subepithelial tumors (SETs) less than 2.0 cm might have malignant potential, ambiguous cases should be removed for optimal diagnosis and treatment. With the recent advances in endoscopic technique, endoscopic resection (ER) has been attempted for pathologic confirmation of gastric SETs. Herein, we aim to investigate the clinical usefulness and safety of ER of gastric SETs. Methods: A total of 115 subjects who underwent ER for gastric SETs from January 2005 to December 2014 were eligible for the study at the Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea. Patient’s demographic status, tumor related factors, procedure related factors, and clinical outcomes were retrospectively reviewed by using electronic medical record. Results: Among the 115 patients, 53 were male (46.1%) and the mean age was 51.59 ± 14.59 years. The mean size of all tumors was 18.58 ± 10.71 mm. Complete endoscopic resection was achieved in 108 of 115 tumors (93.9%). The final histopathologic diagnoses included 38 gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) (33.0%), 21 heterotopic pancreas (18.3%), 18 neuroendocrine tumors (15.7%), 11 leiomyoma (9.6%), 10 inflammatory fibroid polyp (8.7%), and others tumors (n = 17, 14.8%). Perforations occurred in 12 patients (10.4%) and they were successfully managed with endoscopic clipping. Severe bleeding during endoscopic resection occurred in 13 patients (11.3%) and they were treated by endoscopic management. Six patients underwent sequential wedge resection or gastrectomy of stomach because of non-curative resection and the pathologic evaluation revealed residual tumors in 3 patients. There was no recurrence or metastasis during mean follow-up of 44.96 ± 32.62 months (range 3-120.7 months). The rate for complete resection in relation to the final pathology was lower in GISTs (86.8%) than others (97.4%, p = 0.026). The rate of perforation was significantly higher for the fundus (66.7%) than for other locations (0% for the cardia, 16.7% for high body, 8.3% for mid body and 8.3% for antrum) (p < 0.001). Conclusions: ER of gastric SETs may be feasible and safe method for pathologic confirmation and further strategy.

Endoscopy ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 51 (06) ◽  
pp. 560-565 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ming-Ming Zhang ◽  
Ning Zhong ◽  
Xiao Wang ◽  
Chang-Qing Li ◽  
Rui Ji ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The diagnostic yield of current techniques for gastric subepithelial tumors (SETs) is suboptimal. This prospective study aimed to develop diagnostic criteria for needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy (nCLE) of gastric SETs, and to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy, feasibility, and safety of endoscopic ultrasound-guided nCLE (EUS-nCLE). Methods Eligible patients were prospectively recruited to undergo EUS-nCLE. Four unblinded investigators evaluated nCLE videos and corresponding histopathology to develop the nCLE criteria. The recorded nCLE videos were reviewed off-line by one endoscopist 3 months later. Image quality (five-point scale, 1 = poor and 5 = very good) and the interobserver agreements were assessed. Results All 33 patients underwent successful EUS-nCLE procedures. The nCLE criteria for gastric SETs were established. Overall accuracy of off-line nCLE was significantly higher than that of EUS alone (87.9 % vs. 63.6 %; P = 0.02). The mean image quality score was 3.9. The kappa values of the interobserver agreements were 0.66 for gastrointestinal stromal tumor, 0.89 for ectopic pancreas, 0.58 for leiomyoma, and 0.72 for carcinoma. Conclusions EUS-nCLE was feasible and safe to accurately diagnose gastric SETs.


2012 ◽  
Vol 75 (4) ◽  
pp. AB368 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jae-Won Yun ◽  
Joon Young Lee ◽  
Jong-Jae Park ◽  
Minjung Kwon ◽  
Hyejin Noh ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 114 (5) ◽  
pp. 718-725 ◽  
Author(s):  
Huimin Chen ◽  
Baiwen Li ◽  
Lianyong Li ◽  
Cicily T. Vachaparambil ◽  
Vladimir Lamm ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 155 (1) ◽  
pp. 179-183 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica W. Grayson ◽  
Sunny S. Khichi ◽  
Do-Yeon Cho ◽  
Kristen O. Riley ◽  
Bradford A. Woodworth

Objective Inverted papilloma attached to the ventral skull base presents a surgical dilemma because surgical removal of the bony pedicle is critical to decrease risk of recurrence. The objective of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of endoscopic management of skull base inverted papilloma. Study Design Case series with planned data collection. Setting Tertiary medical center. Subjects Patients with skull base inverted papilloma. Methods Over 7 years, 49 patients with skull base inverted papilloma were referred for surgical resection. Demographics, operative technique, pathology, complications, recurrence, and postoperative follow-up were evaluated. Results Average age at presentation was 57 years. Twenty-six patients (53%) had prior attempts at resection elsewhere, and 5 had squamous cell carcinoma (SCCA) arising in an inverted papilloma. Six patients (12%) suffered major complications, including skull base osteomyelitis in 2 previously irradiated patients, cerebrospinal fluid leak with pneumocephalus (n = 1), meningitis (n = 1), invasive fungal sinusitis (n = 1), and cerebrovascular accident (n = 1). The mean disease-free interval was 29 months (range, 10-78 months). One patient with SCCA recurred in the nasopharynx (overall 2% recurrence rate). He is disease-free 3 years following endoscopic nasopharyngectomy. Three patients with SCCA had endoscopic resection of the skull base, while 1 subject with inverted papilloma pedicled on the superior orbital roof had an osteoplastic flap in conjunction with a Draf III procedure. All others received endoscopic resection. Conclusions Removal of the bony pedicle resulted in excellent local control of skull base inverted papillomas. Our experience demonstrates that disease eradication with limited morbidity is attainable with this approach.


2019 ◽  
Vol 89 (6) ◽  
pp. AB369
Author(s):  
Hon Chi Yip ◽  
Philip Wai Yan W. Chiu ◽  
Shannon M. Chan ◽  
Anthony Y. Teoh ◽  
Simon K. Wong ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document