Comparison between interrupted closure technique and traditional closure technique in endoscopic full-thickness resection for treating gastric subepithelial lesions.

Abstract

Background: Gastric subepithelial lesions (SELs) are elevated lesions originating from the muscularis mucosa, submucosa, or muscularis propria, and may also include extraluminal lesions. For small SELs (less than 5 cm), complete endoscopic excision is the preferred treatment. Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) has proven to be an effective approach.

Aim: To evaluate the efficacy of the interrupted closure technique compared to the traditional closure technique in EFTR for gastric SELs.

Methods: This single-center, prospective, randomized controlled trial was conducted at a tertiary hospital from September 2023 to September 2024. A total of 90 patients who underwent EFTR for gastric SELs were randomly allocated to either the interrupted closure group (n = 44) or the traditional closure group (n = 46).

Results: All patients had complete resection and wound closure without any severe postoperative complications. The incidence of intraoperative gas-related complications was significantly lower in the interrupted closure group than in the traditional closure group (2.27% vs 26.09%, P = 0.001), demonstrating interrupted closure technique can reduce the incidence of gas-related issues. Statistical analysis revealed that the incidence of postoperative infection was significantly lower in the experimental group than in the control group (15.91% vs 41.30%, P = 0.008). Additionally, the median duration of antibiotic use was lower in the experimental group (3.5 days vs 5 days, P = 0.013). Abdominal pain levels on postoperative days 1 and 4 were also lower in the experimental group compared to the control group (P < 0.001).

Conclusion: The interrupted closure technique in EFTR for treating gastric SELs is safe and effective, reducing the incidence of intraoperative gas complications and postoperative infections.