Recurrence following successful eradication of neoplasia with endoscopic mucosal resection compared with endoscopic submucosal dissection in Barrett's esophagus: a retrospective comparison.
Yusuke Fujiyoshi, Kareem Khalaf, Daniel Tham, Mary Raina Angeli Fujiyoshi, Natalia C Calo, Jeffrey D Mosko, Gary R May, Christopher W Teshima
{"title":"Recurrence following successful eradication of neoplasia with endoscopic mucosal resection compared with endoscopic submucosal dissection in Barrett's esophagus: a retrospective comparison.","authors":"Yusuke Fujiyoshi, Kareem Khalaf, Daniel Tham, Mary Raina Angeli Fujiyoshi, Natalia C Calo, Jeffrey D Mosko, Gary R May, Christopher W Teshima","doi":"10.1055/a-2382-5891","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) are effective treatments for Barrett's neoplasia. However, little is known about recurrence rates following these techniques. We compared long-term neoplasia recurrence rates following EMR and ESD.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study included patients with Barrett's neoplasia (high grade dysplasia/adenocarcinoma) treated between July 2019 and December 2023 at a tertiary referral center in Canada. Outcomes were residual neoplasia at first follow-up, complete remission of neoplasia (CRN), and neoplasia recurrence following CRN.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>157 patients were included (87 EMR, 70 ESD). Compared with EMR, the ESD group had larger lesions (median 2 vs. 3 cm, <i>P</i><0.05), more adenocarcinoma (85.1% vs. 94.3%, <i>P</i> = 0.07), and deeper submucosal invasion (T1a: 71.6% vs. 75.8%; T1b-SM1: 25.7% vs. 6.1%; T1b≥SM2: 2.7% vs. 18.2%; <i>P</i><0.05). Among 124 patients with follow-up (71 EMR, 53 ESD), 84.9% of ESD-treated patients had curative resections (i.e. R0 resection with low risk for lymph node metastasis), whereas 94.4% of EMR-treated patients had deep margin R0 resection of low risk lesions. At first follow-up, residual neoplasia (14.1% vs. 11.3%) and CRN (97.2% vs. 100%) were similar in the EMR and ESD groups, but neoplasia recurrence following CRN was significantly higher with EMR (13% vs. 1.9%, <i>P</i><0.05), with cumulative probability of recurrence at 3 years of 18.3% vs. 4.2%, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Neoplasia recurrence following CRN was significantly higher following EMR compared with ESD, suggesting that ESD may be superior to EMR in preventing neoplasia recurrence in Barrett's esophagus.</p>","PeriodicalId":11516,"journal":{"name":"Endoscopy","volume":" ","pages":"5-13"},"PeriodicalIF":11.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Endoscopy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2382-5891","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) are effective treatments for Barrett's neoplasia. However, little is known about recurrence rates following these techniques. We compared long-term neoplasia recurrence rates following EMR and ESD.
Methods: This study included patients with Barrett's neoplasia (high grade dysplasia/adenocarcinoma) treated between July 2019 and December 2023 at a tertiary referral center in Canada. Outcomes were residual neoplasia at first follow-up, complete remission of neoplasia (CRN), and neoplasia recurrence following CRN.
Results: 157 patients were included (87 EMR, 70 ESD). Compared with EMR, the ESD group had larger lesions (median 2 vs. 3 cm, P<0.05), more adenocarcinoma (85.1% vs. 94.3%, P = 0.07), and deeper submucosal invasion (T1a: 71.6% vs. 75.8%; T1b-SM1: 25.7% vs. 6.1%; T1b≥SM2: 2.7% vs. 18.2%; P<0.05). Among 124 patients with follow-up (71 EMR, 53 ESD), 84.9% of ESD-treated patients had curative resections (i.e. R0 resection with low risk for lymph node metastasis), whereas 94.4% of EMR-treated patients had deep margin R0 resection of low risk lesions. At first follow-up, residual neoplasia (14.1% vs. 11.3%) and CRN (97.2% vs. 100%) were similar in the EMR and ESD groups, but neoplasia recurrence following CRN was significantly higher with EMR (13% vs. 1.9%, P<0.05), with cumulative probability of recurrence at 3 years of 18.3% vs. 4.2%, respectively.
Conclusions: Neoplasia recurrence following CRN was significantly higher following EMR compared with ESD, suggesting that ESD may be superior to EMR in preventing neoplasia recurrence in Barrett's esophagus.
背景:内镜粘膜切除术(EMR)和内镜粘膜下剥离术(ESD)是治疗巴雷特瘤的有效方法。然而,人们对这些技术的复发率知之甚少。我们比较了 EMR 和 ESD 术后的长期肿瘤复发率:本研究纳入了2019年7月至2023年12月期间在加拿大一家三级转诊中心接受治疗的巴雷特肿瘤(高级别发育不良/腺癌)患者。结果为首次随访时肿瘤残留、肿瘤完全缓解(CRN)和CRN后肿瘤复发:共纳入 157 例患者(87 例 EMR,70 例 ESD)。与EMR相比,ESD组患者的病灶更大(中位2 cm vs. 3 cm,PP = 0.07),粘膜下浸润更深(T1a:71.6% vs. 75.8%;T1b-SM1:25.7% vs. 6.1%;T1b≥SM2:2.7% vs. 18.2%;PPConclusions:与ESD相比,EMR术后CRN的肿瘤复发率明显更高,这表明ESD在预防巴雷特食管肿瘤复发方面可能优于EMR。
期刊介绍:
Endoscopy is a leading journal covering the latest technologies and global advancements in gastrointestinal endoscopy. With guidance from an international editorial board, it delivers high-quality content catering to the needs of endoscopists, surgeons, clinicians, and researchers worldwide. Publishing 12 issues each year, Endoscopy offers top-quality review articles, original contributions, prospective studies, surveys of diagnostic and therapeutic advances, and comprehensive coverage of key national and international meetings. Additionally, articles often include supplementary online video content.