Outcomes and validity of risk stratification tools for endoscopic submucosal dissection of early gastric cancer in Western Australia

IF 1.7 Q3 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
JGH Open Pub Date : 2024-11-15 DOI:10.1002/jgh3.70034
Ciaran Judge, Abir Halder, Puraskar Pateria, Tzeng Khor, Niroshan Muwanwella, Marcus Chin, Krish Ragunath
{"title":"Outcomes and validity of risk stratification tools for endoscopic submucosal dissection of early gastric cancer in Western Australia","authors":"Ciaran Judge,&nbsp;Abir Halder,&nbsp;Puraskar Pateria,&nbsp;Tzeng Khor,&nbsp;Niroshan Muwanwella,&nbsp;Marcus Chin,&nbsp;Krish Ragunath","doi":"10.1002/jgh3.70034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background and Aim</h3>\n \n <p>Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has become the treatment of choice for many superficial gastric neoplasms. Clinical outcomes are increasingly comparable between Japanese and Western series; however, data are lacking on the validity of risk stratification tools in Western cohorts. We aimed to evaluate clinical outcomes, explore risk stratification, and compare our data with published Western series.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We conducted a retrospective, observational cohort study in a single tertiary referral center over a 13-year period. Primary outcomes were rates of en bloc, complete (R0) and curative resection. Secondary outcomes included adverse events, recurrence, metachronous lesions, eCura grades, and ESGE criteria. A comparative analysis was performed with existing published series from Western centers.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Totally 112 patients were included in the study cohort. 50.9% were male, 87.5% Caucasian, and median age was 75.5 years (IQR 14.3 years). Lesions were predominantly antral (36.6%) or body (35.7%); median size 20 mm (IQR 15 mm). Rates of en bloc, R0 resection, and curative resection were 96.4%, 89.3%, and 78.6% (identical between eCura and ESGE), respectively. Adverse events occurred in 5.8%, recurrence in 0%, and metachronous lesions in 9.9%. Our data compared favorably with a review existing Western series, which illustrates increasing adoption of ESD and stable outcomes over time.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>ESD represents a safe and effective method of treatment for gastric neoplasia in the Western setting. This study highlights the potential for excellent outcomes in a single center with a heterogeneous patient cohort and supports the use of eCura in guiding post procedural management.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":45861,"journal":{"name":"JGH Open","volume":"8 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jgh3.70034","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JGH Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jgh3.70034","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and Aim

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has become the treatment of choice for many superficial gastric neoplasms. Clinical outcomes are increasingly comparable between Japanese and Western series; however, data are lacking on the validity of risk stratification tools in Western cohorts. We aimed to evaluate clinical outcomes, explore risk stratification, and compare our data with published Western series.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective, observational cohort study in a single tertiary referral center over a 13-year period. Primary outcomes were rates of en bloc, complete (R0) and curative resection. Secondary outcomes included adverse events, recurrence, metachronous lesions, eCura grades, and ESGE criteria. A comparative analysis was performed with existing published series from Western centers.

Results

Totally 112 patients were included in the study cohort. 50.9% were male, 87.5% Caucasian, and median age was 75.5 years (IQR 14.3 years). Lesions were predominantly antral (36.6%) or body (35.7%); median size 20 mm (IQR 15 mm). Rates of en bloc, R0 resection, and curative resection were 96.4%, 89.3%, and 78.6% (identical between eCura and ESGE), respectively. Adverse events occurred in 5.8%, recurrence in 0%, and metachronous lesions in 9.9%. Our data compared favorably with a review existing Western series, which illustrates increasing adoption of ESD and stable outcomes over time.

Conclusion

ESD represents a safe and effective method of treatment for gastric neoplasia in the Western setting. This study highlights the potential for excellent outcomes in a single center with a heterogeneous patient cohort and supports the use of eCura in guiding post procedural management.

Abstract Image

西澳大利亚早期胃癌内镜黏膜下剥离术风险分层工具的效果和有效性
背景和目的 内镜黏膜下剥离术(ESD)已成为许多浅表胃肿瘤的首选治疗方法。日本和西方国家的临床结果越来越具有可比性;然而,在西方国家队列中缺乏有关风险分层工具有效性的数据。我们的目的是评估临床结果,探索风险分层,并将我们的数据与已发表的西方样本进行比较。 方法 我们在一个三级转诊中心进行了一项回顾性观察队列研究,历时 13 年。主要结果是全切率、完全切除率(R0)和治愈率。次要结果包括不良事件、复发、并发病变、eCura分级和ESGE标准。与西方中心已发表的系列研究进行了对比分析。 结果 共有112名患者被纳入研究队列。50.9%为男性,87.5%为白种人,中位年龄为75.5岁(IQR为14.3岁)。病变主要发生在窦前(36.6%)或窦体(35.7%),中位尺寸为20毫米(IQR为15毫米)。全切率、R0切除率和根治性切除率分别为96.4%、89.3%和78.6%(eCura和ESGE相同)。不良事件发生率为 5.8%,复发率为 0%,并发病灶发生率为 9.9%。我们的数据与现有的西方系列研究相比更有优势,后者表明随着时间的推移,ESD 的采用率越来越高,且疗效稳定。 结论 在西方国家,ESD 是治疗胃肿瘤的一种安全有效的方法。这项研究强调了单个中心在异质患者群中取得优异疗效的潜力,并支持使用 eCura 指导术后管理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
JGH Open
JGH Open GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
143
审稿时长
7 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信